Indirect cost-effectiveness analyses of abatacept and rituximab in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in the United States
- PMID: 20001596
- DOI: 10.3111/13696990903508021
Indirect cost-effectiveness analyses of abatacept and rituximab in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in the United States
Abstract
Objective: To estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for abatacept and rituximab, in combination with methotrexate, relative to methotrexate alone in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Methods: A patient-level simulation model was used to depict the progression of functional disability over the lifetimes of women aged 55-64 years with active RA and inadequate response to a tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha antagonist therapy. Future health-state utilities and medical care costs were based on projected values of the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Patients were assumed to receive abatacept or rituximab in combination with methotrexate until death or therapy discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or adverse events. HAQ-DI improvement at month 6, after adjustments for control drug (methotrexate) response, was derived from two clinical trials. Costs of medical care and biologic drugs, discounted at 3% annually, were from the perspective of a US third-party payer and expressed in 2007 US dollars.
Results: Relative to methotrexate alone, abatacept/methotrexate and rituximab/methotrexate therapies were estimated to yield an average of 1.25 and 1.10 additional QALYs per patient, at mean incremental costs of $58,989 and $60,380, respectively. The incremental cost-utility ratio relative to methotrexate was $47,191 (95% CI $44,810-49,920) per QALY gained for abatacept/methotrexate and $54,891 (95% CI $52,274-58,073) per QALY gained for rituximab/methotrexate. At an acceptability threshold of $50,000 per QALY, the probability of cost effectiveness was 90% for abatacept and 0.0% for rituximab.
Conclusion: Abatacept was estimated to be more cost effective than rituximab for use in RA from a US third-party payer perspective. However, head-to-head clinical trials and long-term observational data are needed to confirm these findings.
Similar articles
-
Cost-effectiveness of abatacept in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor-alpha antagonists.J Rheumatol. 2008 Sep;35(9):1745-53. Epub 2008 Jul 15. J Rheumatol. 2008. PMID: 18634164
-
Cost-effectiveness of abatacept in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis and inadequate response to methotrexate.Rheumatology (Oxford). 2008 Apr;47(4):535-41. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/ken007. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2008. PMID: 18356179 Clinical Trial.
-
Cost-effectiveness simulation model of biologic strategies for treating to target rheumatoid arthritis in Germany.Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2013 May-Jun;31(3):400-8. Epub 2013 Mar 4. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2013. PMID: 23464803
-
Rituximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.Health Technol Assess. 2009 Sep;13 Suppl 2:23-9. doi: 10.3310/hta13suppl2/04. Health Technol Assess. 2009. PMID: 19804686 Review.
-
Indirect treatment comparison of abatacept with methotrexate versus other biologic agents for active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy in the United kingdom.J Rheumatol. 2012 Jun;39(6):1198-206. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.111345. Epub 2012 Apr 15. J Rheumatol. 2012. PMID: 22505698 Review.
Cited by
-
Abatacept: from a budget impact model to cost-effectiveness analysis - data from RCT and real life.Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2019 Jun 7;11:405-409. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S192910. eCollection 2019. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2019. PMID: 31239737 Free PMC article.
-
Administration costs of intravenous biologic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis.Springerplus. 2013 Oct 17;2:531. doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-531. eCollection 2013. Springerplus. 2013. PMID: 24255834 Free PMC article.
-
The cost-effectiveness of biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review.PLoS One. 2015 Mar 17;10(3):e0119683. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119683. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 25781999 Free PMC article.
-
How to select the right cost-effectiveness model? : A systematic review and stepwise approach for selecting a transferable health economic evaluation model for rheumatoid arthritis.Pharmacoeconomics. 2014 May;32(5):429-42. doi: 10.1007/s40273-014-0139-9. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014. PMID: 24504853
-
Conceptual model for the health technology assessment of current and novel interventions in rheumatoid arthritis.PLoS One. 2018 Oct 5;13(10):e0205013. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205013. eCollection 2018. PLoS One. 2018. PMID: 30289926 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources