Sarker Jyotirmoy, Tice Jeffrey A, Rind David M, Walton Surrey M
Department of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes, and Policy, Retzky College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2025 May;23(3):467-478. doi: 10.1007/s40258-024-00932-x. Epub 2024 Dec 2.
Hemophilia B, a severe genetic disorder, involves substantial treatment costs and frequent interventions. Etranacogene dezaparvovec (EDZ) is a recently approved gene therapy for hemophilia B.
This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of EDZ compared with conventional factor IX (FIX) prophylaxis.
A semi-Markov model simulated a cohort of adult males with severe hemophilia B to assess the economic impact of EDZ versus FIX prophylaxis over a lifetime horizon from a health system perspective in the USA. Inputs derived from clinical trials included therapy durability and transition probabilities based on Pettersson Scores. Scenario analyses incorporated frameworks suggested by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review for single or short-term transformative therapies.
Base-case analysis showed that at a cost of US$3.5 million, EDZ led to lifetime cost savings of US$11 million and an additional 0.64 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with FIX. However, FIX has extremely high annual costs. When annual cost offsets attributed to EDZ were capped at US$150,000, EDZ was found to have a threshold price of US$3.1 million at a willingness-to-pay of US$150,000 per QALY.
EDZ proved to be a dominant strategy over FIX prophylaxis in the base-case scenario, providing large cost savings and slightly better outcomes. The substantial costs associated with FIX are a primary driver behind these results. The introduction of cost-offset caps significantly affects the value-based price of EDZ. Using caps on cost offsets in considering price can help to balance affordability and value in the health system.
乙型血友病是一种严重的遗传性疾病,治疗成本高昂且需要频繁干预。依特那考基因德扎帕维(EDZ)是最近获批用于治疗乙型血友病的基因疗法。
本研究评估了EDZ与传统的凝血因子IX(FIX)预防疗法相比的成本效益。
一个半马尔可夫模型模拟了一组患有严重乙型血友病的成年男性,从美国卫生系统的角度评估了EDZ与FIX预防疗法在终身范围内的经济影响。来自临床试验的输入数据包括基于彼得松评分的治疗持久性和转移概率。情景分析纳入了临床和经济审查研究所针对单一或短期变革性疗法提出的框架。
基础案例分析表明,EDZ的成本为350万美元,与FIX相比,终身成本节省了1100万美元,质量调整生命年(QALY)增加了0.64。然而,FIX的年度成本极高。当归因于EDZ的年度成本抵消上限设定为15万美元时,发现EDZ在每QALY支付意愿为15万美元的情况下,阈值价格为310万美元。
在基础案例情景中,EDZ被证明是优于FIX预防疗法的主导策略,可大幅节省成本且结果略优。与FIX相关的高昂成本是这些结果的主要驱动因素。引入成本抵消上限会显著影响EDZ基于价值的价格。在考虑价格时使用成本抵消上限有助于平衡卫生系统中的可承受性和价值。