Cost Effectiveness of Sequencing Vedolizumab as First-Line Biologic in Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease in Canada: An Analysis Using Real-World Evidence from the EVOLVE Study.

IF 2 Q2 ECONOMICS
Aren Fischer, Stephen Mac, Erica Stivelman Freiman, John K Marshall, Kim Rand, Juan M Ramos-Goñi
{"title":"Cost Effectiveness of Sequencing Vedolizumab as First-Line Biologic in Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease in Canada: An Analysis Using Real-World Evidence from the EVOLVE Study.","authors":"Aren Fischer, Stephen Mac, Erica Stivelman Freiman, John K Marshall, Kim Rand, Juan M Ramos-Goñi","doi":"10.1007/s41669-024-00523-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Vedolizumab is a gut-selective anti-lymphocyte trafficking biologic indicated for the treatment of adult patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) in Canada.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of treatment sequencing for UC and CD from a public healthcare payer perspective, leveraging new real-world evidence from the literature and the EVOLVE study, a retrospective chart review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using separate decision tree/Markov models to assess cost effectiveness for UC and CD, two sequencing approaches were estimated for adult patients (≥ 18 years) diagnosed with UC or CD who were biologic-naïve: vedolizumab as first-line biologic followed by anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α versus first-line anti-TNFα followed by vedolizumab. Treatment effectiveness (response and remission), surgery rates, dose escalation and regain of response and safety inputs were estimated from EVOLVE, a retrospective chart review of real-world data, and evidence synthesis from the literature, whereas costs and utilities were estimated from health technology assessment reports, clinical trials, and the literature. Biosimilar costs were used for anti-TNFα. Both models simulated a 5-year time horizon and discounted costs and outcomes at 1.5%. Probabilistic base-case analyses (n = 10,000) reported total costs (2023 Canadian dollars) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Several scenario analyses were conducted to explore robustness of results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In UC, vedolizumab as a first-line biologic followed by anti-TNFα resulted in an incremental gain of 0.09 QALYs (2.46 vs. 2.55) and saved $7179 ($134,028 vs. $126,848), making this a dominant strategy compared with first-line anti-TNFα followed by vedolizumab. In CD, use of vedolizumab as a first-line biologic resulted in an incremental gain of 0.04 QALYs (3.35 vs. 3.39) at an incremental cost of $50,631 ($89,850 vs. $140,381) versus first-line anti-TNFα followed by vedolizumab (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,265,775 per QALY).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on this analysis, sequencing vedolizumab as a first-line biologic prior to anti-TNFα in UC and CD provided additional clinical benefit to patients. In UC, vedolizumab as a first-line biologic also saved healthcare system costs compared with anti-TNFα, whereas in CD, vedolizumab provided incremental benefit at an incremental cost, which was not considered cost effective at a threshold of $50,000/QALY.</p>","PeriodicalId":19770,"journal":{"name":"PharmacoEconomics Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PharmacoEconomics Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-024-00523-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Vedolizumab is a gut-selective anti-lymphocyte trafficking biologic indicated for the treatment of adult patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) in Canada.

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of treatment sequencing for UC and CD from a public healthcare payer perspective, leveraging new real-world evidence from the literature and the EVOLVE study, a retrospective chart review.

Methods: Using separate decision tree/Markov models to assess cost effectiveness for UC and CD, two sequencing approaches were estimated for adult patients (≥ 18 years) diagnosed with UC or CD who were biologic-naïve: vedolizumab as first-line biologic followed by anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α versus first-line anti-TNFα followed by vedolizumab. Treatment effectiveness (response and remission), surgery rates, dose escalation and regain of response and safety inputs were estimated from EVOLVE, a retrospective chart review of real-world data, and evidence synthesis from the literature, whereas costs and utilities were estimated from health technology assessment reports, clinical trials, and the literature. Biosimilar costs were used for anti-TNFα. Both models simulated a 5-year time horizon and discounted costs and outcomes at 1.5%. Probabilistic base-case analyses (n = 10,000) reported total costs (2023 Canadian dollars) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Several scenario analyses were conducted to explore robustness of results.

Results: In UC, vedolizumab as a first-line biologic followed by anti-TNFα resulted in an incremental gain of 0.09 QALYs (2.46 vs. 2.55) and saved $7179 ($134,028 vs. $126,848), making this a dominant strategy compared with first-line anti-TNFα followed by vedolizumab. In CD, use of vedolizumab as a first-line biologic resulted in an incremental gain of 0.04 QALYs (3.35 vs. 3.39) at an incremental cost of $50,631 ($89,850 vs. $140,381) versus first-line anti-TNFα followed by vedolizumab (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,265,775 per QALY).

Conclusions: Based on this analysis, sequencing vedolizumab as a first-line biologic prior to anti-TNFα in UC and CD provided additional clinical benefit to patients. In UC, vedolizumab as a first-line biologic also saved healthcare system costs compared with anti-TNFα, whereas in CD, vedolizumab provided incremental benefit at an incremental cost, which was not considered cost effective at a threshold of $50,000/QALY.

加拿大将韦多珠单抗作为溃疡性结肠炎和克罗恩病一线生物制剂的成本效益:利用 EVOLVE 研究的实际证据进行分析。
简介维多珠单抗是一种肠道选择性抗淋巴细胞贩运生物制剂,在加拿大适用于治疗中度至重度活动性溃疡性结肠炎(UC)和克罗恩病(CD)的成年患者:本研究的目的是从公共医疗支付方的角度评估 UC 和 CD 治疗排序的成本效益,充分利用文献和 EVOLVE 研究(一项回顾性病历审查)提供的新的实际证据:方法:使用单独的决策树/马尔科夫模型评估UC和CD的成本效益,对诊断为UC或CD的生物制剂无效的成年患者(≥18岁)估算了两种排序方法:将维多利珠单抗作为一线生物制剂,然后使用抗肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α与一线使用抗肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α,然后使用维多利珠单抗。治疗效果(应答和缓解)、手术率、剂量升级和应答再获得以及安全性投入是通过EVOLVE、对真实世界数据的回顾性病历审查以及文献中的证据综合进行估算的,而成本和效用则是通过卫生技术评估报告、临床试验和文献进行估算的。抗肿瘤坏死因子α使用的是生物仿制药成本。两种模型都模拟了 5 年的时间跨度,并按 1.5% 对成本和结果进行贴现。概率基础案例分析(n = 10,000)报告了总成本(2023 年加元)和质量调整生命年(QALYs)。为探讨结果的稳健性,还进行了多项情景分析:在UC中,作为一线生物制剂使用维多珠单抗,然后再使用抗肿瘤坏死因子α,可带来0.09 QALYs的增量收益(2.46比2.55),节省7179美元(134028比126848美元),与一线使用抗肿瘤坏死因子α,然后再使用维多珠单抗相比,这是一种占主导地位的策略。在CD病例中,使用维多珠单抗作为一线生物制剂与一线抗TNFα后使用维多珠单抗相比,增量收益为0.04 QALYs(3.35 vs. 3.39),增量成本为50,631美元(89,850美元 vs. 140,381美元)(每QALY增量成本效益比为1,265,775美元):根据这项分析,在UC和CD患者中,将维多珠单抗作为一线生物制剂排序在抗TNFα之前,可为患者带来额外的临床获益。在 UC 中,与抗肿瘤坏死因子α相比,将维多珠单抗作为一线生物制剂还能节省医疗系统成本,而在 CD 中,维多珠单抗以增量成本提供增量获益,在 50,000 美元/QALY 的阈值下不被认为具有成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: PharmacoEconomics - Open focuses on applied research on the economic implications and health outcomes associated with drugs, devices and other healthcare interventions. The journal includes, but is not limited to, the following research areas:Economic analysis of healthcare interventionsHealth outcomes researchCost-of-illness studiesQuality-of-life studiesAdditional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in PharmacoEconomics -Open may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts. Letters to the Editor are welcomed and will be considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信