Carlson Josh J, Ogale Sarika, Dejonckheere Fred, Sullivan Sean D
School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Value Health. 2015 Mar;18(2):173-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.10.013. Epub 2015 Jan 9.
To estimate the cost-effectiveness of tocilizumab (TCZ) monotherapy (Mono) versus adalimumab (ADA) Mono from the US payer perspective in patients with rheumatoid arthritis for whom methotrexate is inappropriate.
We compared TCZ Mono (8 mg/kg monthly) with ADA Mono (40 mg every other week), using efficacy results from a head-to-head study, ADalimumab ACTemrA (ADACTA). We calculated the incremental cost per responder (achievement of American College of Rheumatology [ACR] 20% improvement criteria, ACR 50% improvement criteria, ACR 70% improvement criteria, or low disease activity score) for TCZ versus ADA at 6 months. A patient-level simulation was used to estimate the lifetime incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of initiating treatment with TCZ Mono versus ADA Mono. Both drugs are followed by an etanercept-certolizumab-palliative care sequence. Nonresponders discontinue at 6 months; responders experience a constant probability of discontinuation. Discontinuers move to the next treatment. ACR responses produce changes in the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score. We mapped the HAQ score to utility to estimate QALYs. Costs include those related to hospitalization and those related to treatment (drug acquisition, administration, and monitoring). Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were conducted, along with several scenario analyses.
Compared with ADA, TCZ was more effective, with an estimated 6-month incremental cost ranging from $6,570 per additional low disease activity score achiever to $14,265 per additional ACR 70% improvement criteria responder. The lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $36,944/QALY.
TCZ Mono is projected to be cost-effective compared with ADA Mono in patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis for whom methotrexate is not appropriate, from a US payer perspective.
从美国医保支付方的角度,评估托珠单抗(TCZ)单药治疗与阿达木单抗(ADA)单药治疗在甲氨蝶呤治疗不适用的类风湿关节炎患者中的成本效益。
我们使用头对头研究ADalimumab ACTemrA(ADACTA)的疗效结果,将TCZ单药治疗(每月8 mg/kg)与ADA单药治疗(每两周40 mg)进行比较。我们计算了6个月时TCZ与ADA相比,达到不同疗效标准(美国风湿病学会[ACR]改善20%标准、ACR改善50%标准、ACR改善70%标准或低疾病活动度评分)的每个应答者的增量成本。采用患者水平模拟来估计起始TCZ单药治疗与ADA单药治疗的每质量调整生命年(QALY)的终身增量成本。两种药物之后均采用依那西普-赛妥珠单抗-姑息治疗序列。无应答者在6个月时停药;应答者有持续的停药概率。停药者进入下一种治疗。ACR应答会导致健康评估问卷(HAQ)评分发生变化。我们将HAQ评分映射到效用值以估计QALY。成本包括与住院相关的成本以及与治疗相关的成本(药物采购、给药和监测)。进行了概率分析和单因素敏感性分析以及几种情景分析。
与ADA相比,TCZ更有效,估计6个月的增量成本范围为每增加一名达到低疾病活动度评分者6570美元至每增加一名达到ACR改善70%标准的应答者14265美元。终身增量成本效益比为36944美元/QALY。
从美国医保支付方的角度来看,在甲氨蝶呤不适用的重度类风湿关节炎患者中,预计TCZ单药治疗与ADA单药治疗相比具有成本效益。