Faculty of Medicine, Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2021 Dec;11(12):1626-1636. doi: 10.1002/alr.22865. Epub 2021 Jul 26.
Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) in the setting of aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) is a disease that is difficult to treat and prone to recurrence. Dupilumab is a promising treatment for these patients, but its cost-effectiveness has not yet been compared with aspirin (acetylsalicyclic acid, or ASA) desensitization, a known and effective treatment. We aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of ASA desensitization with dupilumab therapy for the treatment of CRSwNP in AERD.
Analyses of cost-effectiveness, as measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and cost-utility, as measured in number of required revision endoscopic sinus surgeries (ESSs), were conducted.
ASA desensitization after ESS was cost-effective and dominated appropriate medical management. Adding salvage dupilumab was also cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] $135,517.33), and upfront dupilumab therapy was not cost-effective in any scenario (ICER $273,181.32). The cost-utility analysis demonstrated that, over a 10-year period per patient, appropriate medical management after ESS cost $54,125.31 and resulted in 2.25 revision ESSs, ASA desensitization after ESS cost $53,775.15 and resulted in 2.02 revision ESSs, ASA desensitization with salvage dupilumab cost $121,176.25 and resulted in 1.68 revision ESSs, and upfront dupilumab cost $185,950.34 and resulted in 1.51 revision ESSs.
Dupilumab for the treatment of severe CRSwNP was found to be cost-effective as salvage therapy under the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000. Further analysis highlighted that the cost-effectiveness of dupilumab was most sensitive to drug price and expected gains in quality of life. This suggests that additional investigation into improving patient population selection and tailoring treatment algorithms may improve the cost-effectiveness of dupilumab in specific scenarios.
阿司匹林加重性呼吸道疾病(AERD)背景下的慢性鼻-鼻窦炎伴鼻息肉(CRSwNP)是一种难以治疗且易于复发的疾病。度普利尤单抗是这些患者的一种有前途的治疗方法,但它的成本效益尚未与阿司匹林(乙酰水杨酸,或 ASA)脱敏进行比较,后者是一种已知且有效的治疗方法。我们旨在比较 ASA 脱敏与度普利尤单抗治疗 AERD 中 CRSwNP 的成本效益。
进行了成本效益分析,以质量调整生命年(QALYs)衡量,以及成本效用分析,以需要进行的内镜鼻窦手术(ESS)修订次数衡量。
ESS 后进行 ASA 脱敏具有成本效益,并优于适当的药物治疗。添加补救性度普利尤单抗也是具有成本效益的(增量成本效益比 [ICER]为$135517.33),并且在任何情况下,早期使用度普利尤单抗治疗都不具有成本效益(ICER 为$273181.32)。成本效用分析表明,在 10 年内,每位患者在 ESS 后的适当药物治疗费用为$54125.31,需要进行 2.25 次 ESS 修订,ESS 后的 ASA 脱敏费用为$53775.15,需要进行 2.02 次 ESS 修订,ASA 脱敏联合补救性度普利尤单抗费用为$121176.25,需要进行 1.68 次 ESS 修订,早期使用度普利尤单抗费用为$185950.34,需要进行 1.51 次 ESS 修订。
在愿意支付的$150000 阈值下,度普利尤单抗被发现是治疗严重 CRSwNP 的一种具有成本效益的补救疗法。进一步的分析强调,度普利尤单抗的成本效益对药物价格和预期生活质量收益最为敏感。这表明,进一步研究改善患者人群选择和定制治疗算法可能会提高度普利尤单抗在特定情况下的成本效益。