Beaujon Hospital, Department of Gastroenterology, Paris University, Clichy, France.
Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2023 Jun 1;29(6):898-913. doi: 10.1093/ibd/izac160.
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) guidelines recommend tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (TNFis) for patients who have not responded to conventional therapy, and vedolizumab in case of inadequate response to conventional therapy and/or TNFis. Recent studies have shown that vedolizumab may also be effective in the earlier treatment lines. Therefore, we conducted cost-effectiveness analyses to determine the optimal treatment sequence in patients with IBD.
A Markov model with a 10-year time horizon compared the cost-effectiveness of different biologic treatment sequences in patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) from the UK and French perspectives. Subcutaneous formulations of infliximab, vedolizumab, and adalimumab were evaluated. Comparative effectiveness was based on a network meta-analysis of clinical trials and real-world evidence. Costs included pharmacotherapy, surgery, adverse events, and disease management.
The results indicated that treatment sequences starting with infliximab were less costly and more effective than those starting with vedolizumab for patients with UC in the United Kingdom and France, and patients with just CD in France. For patients with CD in the United Kingdom, treatment sequences starting with infliximab resulted in better health outcomes with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) near the threshold.
Based on the ICERs, treatment sequences starting with infliximab are the dominant option for patients with UC in the United Kingdom, and patients with UC and CD in France. In UK patients with CD, ICERs were near the assumed "willingness to pay" threshold. These results reinforce the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations for using infliximab prior to using vedolizumab in biologics-naïve patients.
炎症性肠病(IBD)指南建议对未对常规治疗有反应的患者使用肿瘤坏死因子-α抑制剂(TNFis),对常规治疗和/或 TNFis 反应不足的患者使用维得利珠单抗。最近的研究表明,维得利珠单抗在更早的治疗线中也可能有效。因此,我们进行了成本效益分析,以确定 IBD 患者的最佳治疗顺序。
一个具有 10 年时间范围的 Markov 模型,从英国和法国的角度比较了中度至重度溃疡性结肠炎(UC)和克罗恩病(CD)患者不同生物治疗顺序的成本效益。评估了皮下制剂英夫利昔单抗、维得利珠单抗和阿达木单抗。基于临床试验和真实世界证据的网络荟萃分析来比较疗效。成本包括药物治疗、手术、不良事件和疾病管理。
结果表明,对于英国和法国的 UC 患者,以及法国的仅 CD 患者,起始治疗用英夫利昔单抗的治疗顺序比起始用维得利珠单抗的治疗顺序成本更低,效果更好。对于英国的 CD 患者,起始治疗用英夫利昔单抗的治疗顺序可带来更好的健康结果,增量成本效益比(ICER)接近阈值。
根据 ICER,起始治疗用英夫利昔单抗的治疗顺序是英国 UC 患者的首选,也是法国 UC 和 CD 患者的首选。在英国的 CD 患者中,ICER 接近假设的“支付意愿”阈值。这些结果强化了英国国家卫生与保健优化研究所的建议,即在生物治疗初治患者中,先用英夫利昔单抗,后用维得利珠单抗。