Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide Suppression Testing as an Adherence Screening Tool Among Patients With Difficult-to-Control Asthma.

BACKGROUND

Approximately 50% of adults on long-term asthma medication are nonadherent. Current methods to detect nonadherence have had limited effect. Fractional exhaled nitric oxide suppression testing (FeNOSuppT) has demonstrated clinical effectiveness as an adherence screening tool to detect poor adherence to inhaled corticosteroids in difficult-to-control asthma prior to initiation of expensive biologic therapy.

OBJECTIVE

Estimate the cost effectiveness and budget impact of FeNOSuppT as a screen prior to the initiation of biologic therapy among U.S. adults with difficult-to-control asthma and high fractional exhaled nitric oxide (≥45 ppb).

METHODS

A decision tree simulated the progression of a cohort of patients over a 1-year time horizon into 1 of 3 states ([1] discharged from or [2] remain in specialist care; or [3] progress to biologics). Two strategies, with and without FeNOSuppT, were examined and the incremental net monetary benefit estimated using a discount rate of 3% and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Sensitivity analysis and a budget impact analysis were also undertaken.

RESULTS

In the baseline scenario, FeNOSuppT prior to the initiation of biologic therapy was associated with lower costs ($4,435/patient) and fewer QALYs (0.0023 QALY/patient) compared with no FeNOSuppT over 1 year and was considered cost effective (incremental net monetary benefit = $4,207). The FeNOSuppT was consistently found to be cost effective across a range of scenarios and in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Assuming differential levels of FeNOSuppT uptake (20%-100%), this was associated with budget savings ranging from USD $5 million to $27 million.

CONCLUSIONS

The FeNOSuppT is likely to be cost effective as a protocol-driven, objective, biomarker-based tool for identifying nonadherence in difficult-to-control asthma. This cost effectiveness is driven by cost savings from patients not progressing to expensive biologic therapy.