Beresniak Ariel, Ariza-Ariza Rafael, Garcia-Llorente Jose Francisco, Ramirez-Arellano Antonio, Dupont Danielle
R&D, Data Mining International, 1215 Geneva, Switzerland.
Int J Inflam. 2011;2011:727634. doi: 10.4061/2011/727634. Epub 2011 Jun 28.
Background. The objective of this simulation model was to assess the cost-effectiveness of different biological treatment strategies based on levels of disease activity in Spain, in patients with moderate to severe active RA and an insufficient response to at least one anti-TNF agent. Methods. Clinically meaningful effectiveness criteria were defined using DAS28 scores: remission and Low Disease Activity State (LDAS) thresholds. Monte-Carlo simulations were conducted to assess cost-effectiveness over 2 years of four biological sequential strategies composed of anti-TNF agents (adalimumab, infliximab), abatacept or rituximab, in patients with moderate to severe active RA and an insufficient response to etanercept as first biological agent. Results. The sequential strategy including etanercept, abatacept and adalimumab appeared more efficacious over 2 years (102 days in LDAS) compared to the same sequence including rituximab as second biological option (82 days in LDAS). Cost-effectiveness ratios showed lower costs per day in LDAS with abatacept (427 €) compared to rituximab as second biological option (508 €). All comparisons were confirmed when using remission criteria. Conclusion. Model results suggest that in patients with an insufficient response to anti-TNF agents, the biological sequences including abatacept appear more efficacious and cost-effective than similar sequences including rituximab or cycled anti-TNF agents.
背景。本模拟模型的目的是评估基于西班牙疾病活动水平的不同生物治疗策略对中度至重度活动性类风湿关节炎(RA)且对至少一种抗TNF药物反应不足患者的成本效益。方法。使用DAS28评分定义具有临床意义的有效性标准:缓解和低疾病活动状态(LDAS)阈值。进行蒙特卡洛模拟以评估由抗TNF药物(阿达木单抗、英夫利昔单抗)、阿巴西普或利妥昔单抗组成的四种生物序贯策略在中度至重度活动性RA且对依那西普作为第一种生物制剂反应不足的患者中2年的成本效益。结果。与包括利妥昔单抗作为第二种生物制剂选项的相同序列(LDAS为82天)相比,包括依那西普、阿巴西普和阿达木单抗的序贯策略在2年中似乎更有效(LDAS为102天)。成本效益比显示,与利妥昔单抗作为第二种生物制剂选项(508欧元)相比,阿巴西普在LDAS中的每日成本更低(427欧元)。使用缓解标准时,所有比较均得到证实。结论。模型结果表明,对于对抗TNF药物反应不足的患者,包括阿巴西普的生物序列比包括利妥昔单抗或循环使用抗TNF药物的类似序列更有效且更具成本效益。