Back to Search
Start Over
A budget impact analysis for making treatment decisions based on anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) testing in rheumatoid arthritis.
- Source :
-
Journal of medical economics [J Med Econ] 2020 Jun; Vol. 23 (6), pp. 624-630. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 May 19. - Publication Year :
- 2020
-
Abstract
- Aim: Given that rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with high anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) titer values respond well to abatacept, the aim of this study was to estimate the annual budget impact of anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) testing and treatment selection based on anti-CCP test results. Materials and methods: Budget impact analysis was conducted for patients with moderate-to-severe RA on biologic or Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) treatment from a hypothetical US commercial payer perspective. The following market scenarios were compared: (1) 90% of target patients receive anti-CCP testing and the results of anti-CCP testing do not impact the treatment selection; (2) 100% of target patients receive anti-CCP testing and the results of anti-CCP testing have an impact on treatment selection such that an increased proportion of patients with high titer of ACPA receive abatacept. A hypothetical assumption was made that the use of abatacept would be increased by 2% in Scenario 2 versus 1. Scenario analyses were conducted by varying the target population and rebate rates. Results: In a hypothetical health plan with one million insured adults, 2,181 patients would be on a biologic or JAKi treatment for moderate-to-severe RA. In Scenario 1, the anti-CCP test cost was $186,155 and annual treatment cost was $101,854,295, totaling to $102,040,450. In Scenario 2, the anti-CCP test cost increased by $20,684 and treatment cost increased by $160,467, totaling an overall budget increase of $181,151. This was equivalent to a per member per month (PMPM) increase of $0.015. The budget impact results were consistently negligible across the scenario analyses. Limitations: The analysis only considered testing and medication costs. Some parameters used in the analysis, such as the rebate rates, are not generalizable and health plan-specific. Conclusions: Testing RA patients to learn their ACPA status and increasing use of abatacept among high-titer ACPA patients result in a small increase in the total budget (<2 cents PMPM).
- Subjects :
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid immunology
Biomarkers
Body Weight
Budgets statistics & numerical data
Costs and Cost Analysis
Female
Health Expenditures statistics & numerical data
Humans
Insurance Carriers economics
Insurance Carriers statistics & numerical data
Insurance, Health economics
Insurance, Health statistics & numerical data
Male
Models, Econometric
Severity of Illness Index
Sex Factors
Abatacept economics
Abatacept therapeutic use
Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibodies analysis
Antirheumatic Agents economics
Antirheumatic Agents therapeutic use
Arthritis, Rheumatoid drug therapy
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1941-837X
- Volume :
- 23
- Issue :
- 6
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Journal of medical economics
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 32075453
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2020.1732991