Assessing the Cost-effectiveness of a Hypothetical Disease-modifying Therapy With Limited Duration for the Treatment of Early Symptomatic Alzheimer Disease.

Purpose: Clinical trials have produced promising results for disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for Alzheimer's disease (AD); however, the evidence on their potential cost-effectiveness is limited. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical DMT with a limited treatment duration in AD.
Methods: We developed a Markov state-transition model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical DMT plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone among Americans living with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to AD or mild AD. AD states included MCI due to AD, mild AD, moderate AD, severe AD, and death. A hypothetical DMT was assumed to confer a 30% reduction in progression from MCI and mild AD. The base case annual drug acquisition cost was assumed to be $56,000. Other medical and indirect costs were obtained from published literature or list prices. Utilities for patients and caregivers were obtained from the published literature and varied by AD state and care setting (community care or long-term care). We considered 3 DMT treatment strategies: (1) treatment administered until patients reached severe AD (continuous strategy), (2) treatment administered for a maximum duration of 18 months or when patients reached severe AD (fixed-duration strategy), and (3) 40% of patients discontinuing treatment at 6 months because of amyloid plaque clearance and the remaining patients continuing treatment until 18 months or until they reached severe AD (test-and-discontinue strategy). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
Findings: From the health care sector perspective, continuous treatment with a hypothetical DMT versus BSC resulted in an ICER of $612,354 per QALY gained. The ICER decreased to $157,288 per QALY gained in the fixed-duration strategy, driven by large reductions in treatment costs. With 40% of patients discontinuing treatment at 6 months (test-and-discontinue strategy), the ICER was $125,631 per QALY gained. In sensitivity and scenario analyses, the ICER was the most sensitive to changes in treatment efficacy, treatment cost, and the initial population AD state distribution. From the modified societal perspective, ICERs were 6.3%, 20.4%, and 25.1% lower than those from the health care sector perspective for the continuous, fixed-duration, and test-and-discontinue strategies, respectively.
Implications: Under a set of assumptions for annual treatment costs and the magnitude and duration of treatment efficacy, DMTs used for a limited duration may deliver value consistent with accepted US cost-effectiveness thresholds.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Interest M. Boustani and L.P. Garrison report fees from Eli Lilly and Company during conduct of this study. E.G. Doty, M. Belger, R. Burge, J.K. Wall, and J.A. Johnston are employees and minor shareholders of Eli Lilly and Company. L.J. Smolen, T.M. Klein, D.R. Murphy are employees of Medical Decision Modeling Inc, which received compensation from Eli Lilly for the research that contributed to this article. The authors have indicated that they have no other conflicts of interest regarding the content of this article.
(Copyright © 2022 Eli Lilly and Company. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)