Search

BackgroundAtopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that can negatively impact work productivity and daily activities. Ruxolitinib cream, a Janus kinase inhibitor, demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with atopic dermatitis in two phase III studies (TRuE-AD1 and TRuE-AD2).ObjectiveThis post hoc analysis sought to describe the effects of ruxolitinib cream on work productivity and activity impairment from pooled data from the phase III studies, to estimate indirect costs due to atopic dermatitis, and to estimate the incremental cost savings with ruxolitinib cream versus vehicle cream.MethodsPatients in both studies were ≥ 12 years old with atopic dermatitis for ≥ 2 years, an Investigator's Global Assessment score of 2 or 3, and a 3-20% affected body surface area at baseline. Patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive ruxolitinib cream (0.75% or 1.5%) or vehicle cream for 8 weeks. Patient self-reported productivity in the efficacy-evaluable population was assessed at weeks 2, 4, and 8 using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Specific Health Problem version 2.0. Statistical significance for the two doses versus vehicle was calculated using an analysis of covariance. Work Productivity and Activity Impairment overall work impairment scores were converted to a model of costs per employed patient due to lost productivity and incremental cost savings from ruxolitinib cream treatment using a human capital approach.ResultsOf 1249 patients enrolled (median age, 32 years; female sex, 61.7%), 1208 were included in the efficacy-evaluable population. Patients applying 0.75% or 1.5% ruxolitinib cream had significant changes in overall work impairment (- 17.9% [0.75% strength] and - 15.0% [1.5% strength] vs - 5.7% for vehicle; p < 0.0001 for both) and daily activity impairment (- 20.6% [0.75% strength] and - 21.5% [1.5% strength] vs - 10.6% for vehicle; p < 0.0001 for both). These corresponded to estimated lost productivity costs in 2021 US dollars of $1313 (0.75% strength) and $1242 (1.5% strength) versus $2008 (vehicle) over the 8-week trial period. Compared with a patient receiving vehicle, incremental annual indirect cost savings were estimated to be $5302 with 0.75% ruxolitinib cream and $4228 with 1.5% ruxolitinib cream.ConclusionsRuxolitinib cream therapy is associated with improved work productivity and daily activity compared with vehicle and is estimated to reduce the indirect cost burden on the patient.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03745638 (registered 19 November, 2018) and NCT03745651 (registered 19 November, 2018).

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer death globally. Recent clinical trials suggest an emerging role for HER2 as a potential clinically relevant biomarker in CRC. Testing for HER2 in CRC is not standard practice; consequently, the prevalence of HER2 positivity (HER2+) in patients with CRC remains uncertain. Methods A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted to generate estimates of proportions of patients with CRC with HER2 overexpression or HER2 amplification and HER2+ (either overexpression or amplification), overall and in patients with rat sarcoma virus (RAS) wild-type cancer. HER2+ was defined as 1) immunohistochemistry with a score of 3+, 2) immunohistochemistry with a score of 2+ and in situ hybridization+, or 3) next-generation sequencing positive. Results Of 224 studies identified with information on HER2 in CRC, 52 studies used a US Food and Drug Administration–approved assay and were selected for further analysis. Estimated HER2+ rate was 4.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.4% to 5.0%) overall (n = 17 589). HER2+ rates were statistically higher in RAS wild-type (6.1%, 95% CI = 5.4% to 6.9%) vs RAS mutant CRC (1.1%, 95% CI = 0.3% to 4.4%; P  <.0001). Despite limited clinical information, we confirmed enrichment of HER2+ CRC in patients with microsatellite stable and left-sided CRC. Conclusion This meta-analysis provides an estimate of HER2+ CRC and confirms enrichment of HER2 in microsatellite stable, left-sided, RAS wild-type CRC tumors. Our work is important given the recently described clinical efficacy of HER2-targeted therapies in HER2+ CRC and informs strategies for incorporation of HER2 testing into standard of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment of acute urticaria with an intravenous (IV) antihistamine in emergency departments had previously been limited to first-generation diphenhydramine, which can cause sedation and anticholinergic effects. IV cetirizine, a second-generation antihistamine, was approved in October 2019 by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of acute urticaria. In a phase 3 clinical trial, IV cetirizine demonstrated comparable efficacy in treating acute urticaria based on reduction in 2-hour patient-reported pruritus scores, with shorter duration of emergency department visits and fewer return visits, compared with IV diphenhydramine. OBJECTIVE: To assess the budget impact of treating patients with acute urticaria with IV cetirizine compared with IV diphenhydramine from an emergency department perspective by modeling clinical, facility, and cost parameters for hospital formulary considerations. METHODS: Using data from the pivotal phase 3 clinical trial, federal health agencies, and peerreviewed literature, our model evaluated a hypothetical emergency department with 50,000 (Case 1) and 100,000 (Case 2) all-cause visits per year with a nationally representative payer mix and age distribution. RESULTS: In Case 1, an estimated 204 visits per year were attributed to acute urticaria. With IV diphenhydramine as the treatment, the estimated annual net revenue to the emergency department was $56,768 (emergency department revenue of $131,056 minus a cost of $74,289). In the scenario with IV cetirizine, the estimated net revenue was $84,644 (emergency department revenue of $196,295 minus a cost of $113,080). Altogether, the adoption of IV cetirizine had a positive net impact on annual budget of $27,876. In Case 2, we found a larger net positive budget impact of $55,752. CONCLUSION: Adoption of IV cetirizine for acute urticaria treatment in the emergency department setting resulted in a positive budget impact. This outcome was driven by the shorter duration of visits, fewer 24-hour return visits, and higher drug revenue associated with IV cetirizine, compared with IV diphenhydramine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health technology assessment (HTA) agencies are considering adopting a lifecycle approach to assessments to address uncertainties in the evidence base at launch and to revisit the clinical and economic value of therapies in a dynamic clinical landscape. For reassessments of therapies post launch, HTA agencies are looking to real-world evidence (RWE) to enhance the clinical and economic evidence base, though challenges and concerns in using RWE in decision-making exists. Stakeholders are embarking on demonstration projects to address the challenges and concerns and to further define when and how RWE can be used in HTA decision making. The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review piloted a 24-month observational RWE reassessment. Key learnings from this pilot include identifying the benefits and challenges with using RWE in reassessments and considerations on prioritizing and selecting topics relevant for RWE updates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health technology assessment (HTA) agencies are considering adopting a lifecycle approach to assessments to address uncertainties in the evidence base at launch and to revisit the clinical and economic value of therapies in a dynamic clinical landscape. For reassessments of therapies post launch, HTA agencies are looking to real-world evidence (RWE) to enhance the clinical and economic evidence base, though challenges and concerns in using RWE in decision-making exists. Stakeholders are embarking on demonstration projects to address the challenges and concerns and to further define when and how RWE can be used in HTA decision making. The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review piloted a 24-month observational RWE reassessment. Key learnings from this pilot include identifying the benefits and challenges with using RWE in reassessments and considerations on prioritizing and selecting topics relevant for RWE updates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Primary axillary hyperhidrosis (PAHH) is a condition characterized by excessive sweating that negatively impacts health-related quality of life, with significant psychological and social impacts. Glycopyrronium tosylate (GT) is a topical anticholinergic approved in the United States for treatment of PAHH in patients 9 years of age and older. Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of GT as first-line topical therapy compared to topical aluminum chloride from a United States commercial perspective. Materials and methods: A Markov model was developed consisting of four health states based on the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale (HDSS) over a time horizon of 5 years with discount rates of 3% for both costs and outcomes. Transitions between health states were driven by HDSS response, defined as an improvement of ≥2 points. Non-responders and those who discontinue could switch to later line treatments or no treatment. Health utility scores were based on HDSS scores, supported by published literature. Results: Over 5 years, GT yielded 0.12 greater QALYs and 0.93 greater LYs with response compared to treatment with prescription aluminum chloride at an incremental cost of $10,584. Relative to prescription aluminum chloride, GT resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $87,238 per QALY gained, $11,349 per LY with response. The ICER fell below $100,000 for 66% of probabilistic sensitivity analysis simulations and below $150,000 for 82% of simulations. Limitations: This analysis represents a simplified scenario of a hypothetical PAHH patient. Due to sparse data, assumptions were required for treatment patterns, efficacy, and persistence. Conclusion: Based on the analysis of incremental cost per QALY gained, GT may be cost-effective relative to prescription aluminum chloride at commonly accepted willingness to pay thresholds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Imatinib, a first-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and the newer second-generation TKIs have dramatically improved outcomes for patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). A previous model estimated the potential cost-savings over the next 2 years after the loss of patent exclusivity for imatinib in the United States in 2016 and its availability in a generic form. Payers have indeed realized meaningful savings, but it took 2 years for the prices of generic imatinib to decline substantially. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the cost-savings for a US health plan from the passive substitution of generic imatinib and the impact of step-edit therapy with the use of generic imatinib before coverage of a second-generation TKI. METHODS: We updated the previously published model utilizing hypothetical 1-million-member commercial and Medicare plans to include current TKI use and pricing combined with recent epidemiologic data. Regression models were used to project utilization to 5 years after the loss of imatinib's patent exclusivity. We compared generic imatinib costs with a scenario in which generic imatinib was not available. The impact of a step-edit therapy restriction was explored for patients with incident CML. The analyses were repeated for the entire US population based on national census data. RESULTS: The 1-million-member commercial plan saved $0.5 million (3%) from pharmacy spending on TKIs in year 1 and $3.9 million (19%) in year 2 after the loss of patent exclusivity. The projected savings significantly increased to $7.8 million (37%), $8.3 million (39%), and $8.6 million (40%) in years 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Step-edits strategies were projected to result in small incremental savings of $0.3 million (1.5%) annually in years 3 to 5. The 1-million-member Medicare plan saved $1.7 million (3%) in year 1 and $14.1 million (19%) in year 2. The projected savings were $27.8 million (37%), $29.5 million (39%), and $30.8 million (40%), with step-edit estimated to add only $0.9 million (1.2%) annually in years 3 to 5. Generic imatinib saved US payers $2.5 billion (13% of the total spending on TKIs) in years 1 and 2. In years 3 to 5, the cumulative projected savings totaled $12.2 billion, and the savings were expected to grow to 39% as a result of passive generic imatinib substitution, with only 1.7% additional savings from step-edit restriction. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of a lower price for generic imatinib relative to the brand-name version of the drug, substantial cost-savings to US payers over the next 3 years are expected without step-edit formulary management restrictions. Cost-saving strategies, including formulary management restrictions, should adhere to evidence-based guidelines to ensure the appropriate use of generic imatinib and all available TKIs, with the objective to maintain positive outcomes and, in turn, increase the value of patient care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To quantify the annual budget impact if all US commercially insured type 1 diabetes mellitus patients on basal-bolus therapy (T1DMBBT), type 2 diabetes mellitus patients on basal-oral therapy (T2DMBOT), and type 2 diabetes mellitus patients on basal-bolus therapy (T2DMBBT) switched from insulin glargine (IGlar) to insulin degludec (IDeg).Methods: A short-term (1 year) budget impact model was developed to evaluate the costs of IDeg vs. IGlar in three treatment groups (T1DMBBT, insulin-naïve T2DMBOT, and T2DMBBT) through a simulation for a potential US health plan population of 35 million. The analysis captured direct medical costs associated with insulin treatment (insulin, needles, and self-monitored glucose testing) and costs related to managing hypoglycemic episodes. There were a total of 59,780 T1DMBBT patients, 383,145 T2DMBOT patients, and 171,325 T2DMBBT patients expected to be using long-acting insulin. A sensitivity analysis on the entire US population was also conducted.Results: Among T1DMBBT patients, IDeg was associated with an annual cost savings of -$357.13 per patient per year (PPPY), driven primarily by reduced insulin utilization. IDeg was also found to be cost saving among T2DMBOT patients (-$1206.61 PPPY), driven primarily by reductions in the cost of treating severe hypoglycemic episodes. Among T2DMBBT patients, IDeg was associated with an additional cost to the plan of $1420.04 PPPY; however, this result was driven by a higher insulin dose for IDeg compared to IGlar. Overall, IDeg demonstrated cost savings of $240 million per year, which accounted for total cost savings of 3.5% vs. IGlar.Conclusions: The results of this analysis suggest that the reduced insulin utilization and fewer hypoglycemic episodes associated with IDeg may translate into reduced costs for payers. The model is limited by simplification of a complex disease state and assumptions surrounding disease state, treatment patterns, and costs. Therefore, results may not accurately reflect actual health plans or real-world practice patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]