The Value and Sustainability of Ocrelizumab in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: A Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis

IF 0.4 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
P. Cortesi, D. Paolicelli, M. Capobianco, P. Cozzolino, L. Mantovani
{"title":"The Value and Sustainability of Ocrelizumab in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: A Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis","authors":"P. Cortesi, D. Paolicelli, M. Capobianco, P. Cozzolino, L. Mantovani","doi":"10.7175/FE.V20I1.1435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION: The availability of ocrelizumab for the relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS) in the Italian markets raised some questions about its economic impact and value compared to the alternative treatment options available.AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of ocrelizumab compared to the most used second line disease modifying therapies (DMTs) in Italy.METHODS: The study was divided in two phases: Phase 1 – based on the development of a decision analytical Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of ocrelizumab compared to natalizumab and fingolimod, and Phase 2 – based on the development of a budget impact model to assess the economic impact of ocrelizumab in Italy. Both models used the National Health System perspective; a lifetime horizon was applied in the cost-effectiveness analysis and a 3-year time horizon in the budget impact. The cost-effectiveness analysis results were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as € per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained, the budget impact analysis results were reported as difference in the overall budget (€) between a scenario with and without ocrelizumab.RESULTS: The two analyses reported ocrelizumab as a cost-effective option compared to natalizumab and fingolimod with a positive impact on the overall NHS budget. In the base-case analysis, the ICER was € 2,023 for ocrelizumab compared to fingolimod; while ocrelizumab resulted cost-saving compared to natalizumab. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the base-case analysis results. Further, the use of ocrelizumab was associated to a budget decrease of € 21 million (-2.6%) in a 3-year time horizon.CONCLUSION: The results of our cost-effectiveness and budget impact models reported ocrelizumab as an effective and efficient treatment in patients with relapsing forms of MS who failed a first line DMTs from the Italian NHS perspective.","PeriodicalId":41585,"journal":{"name":"Farmeconomia-Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Farmeconomia-Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7175/FE.V20I1.1435","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The availability of ocrelizumab for the relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS) in the Italian markets raised some questions about its economic impact and value compared to the alternative treatment options available.AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of ocrelizumab compared to the most used second line disease modifying therapies (DMTs) in Italy.METHODS: The study was divided in two phases: Phase 1 – based on the development of a decision analytical Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of ocrelizumab compared to natalizumab and fingolimod, and Phase 2 – based on the development of a budget impact model to assess the economic impact of ocrelizumab in Italy. Both models used the National Health System perspective; a lifetime horizon was applied in the cost-effectiveness analysis and a 3-year time horizon in the budget impact. The cost-effectiveness analysis results were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as € per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained, the budget impact analysis results were reported as difference in the overall budget (€) between a scenario with and without ocrelizumab.RESULTS: The two analyses reported ocrelizumab as a cost-effective option compared to natalizumab and fingolimod with a positive impact on the overall NHS budget. In the base-case analysis, the ICER was € 2,023 for ocrelizumab compared to fingolimod; while ocrelizumab resulted cost-saving compared to natalizumab. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the base-case analysis results. Further, the use of ocrelizumab was associated to a budget decrease of € 21 million (-2.6%) in a 3-year time horizon.CONCLUSION: The results of our cost-effectiveness and budget impact models reported ocrelizumab as an effective and efficient treatment in patients with relapsing forms of MS who failed a first line DMTs from the Italian NHS perspective.
Ocrelizumab在复发性多发性硬化症中的价值和可持续性:成本-效果和预算影响分析
ocrelizumab治疗复发型多发性硬化症(MS)在意大利市场的可用性引发了一些关于其经济影响和价值的问题,与现有的替代治疗方案相比。目的:与意大利最常用的二线疾病修饰疗法(dmt)相比,评估ocrelizumab的成本效益和预算影响。方法:该研究分为两个阶段:第一阶段-基于决策分析马尔可夫模型的发展,以评估ocrelizumab与natalizumab和fingolimod相比的成本效益;第二阶段-基于预算影响模型的发展,以评估ocrelizumab在意大利的经济影响。两个模型都使用了国家卫生系统视角;成本效益分析采用了终身期限,预算影响分析采用了3年期限。成本-效果分析结果报告为增量成本-效果比(ICER),表示为获得的每个质量调整生命年(QALY)的欧元,预算影响分析结果报告为使用和不使用ocrelizumab方案之间的总预算差异(欧元)。结果:与那他珠单抗和fingolimod相比,这两项分析报告了ocrelizumab是一种具有成本效益的选择,对NHS总体预算产生了积极影响。在基本案例分析中,与芬戈莫德相比,奥克雷单抗的ICER为2023欧元;而ocrelizumab与natalizumab相比可节省成本。敏感性分析证实了基本情况分析的结果。此外,ocrelizumab的使用与3年内预算减少2100万欧元(-2.6%)相关。结论:我们的成本效益和预算影响模型的结果显示,从意大利NHS的角度来看,ocrelizumab是一种有效且高效的治疗复发型MS患者的方法,这些患者未能接受一线dmt治疗。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
×
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