mepolizumab与抗白细胞介素-5/5r生物疗法治疗嗜酸性粒细胞表型成人严重哮喘的成本效益:智利医疗保健系统的观点

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Medical Economics Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-06-20 DOI:10.1080/13696998.2025.2520701
Felipe Moraes Dos Santos, Consuelo Rodríguez Martínez, Vanina Giovini, Manuel Antonio Espinoza, Carlos Balmaceda, Jose Romero
{"title":"mepolizumab与抗白细胞介素-5/5r生物疗法治疗嗜酸性粒细胞表型成人严重哮喘的成本效益:智利医疗保健系统的观点","authors":"Felipe Moraes Dos Santos, Consuelo Rodríguez Martínez, Vanina Giovini, Manuel Antonio Espinoza, Carlos Balmaceda, Jose Romero","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2520701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Asthma is a heterogeneous respiratory condition often classified into distinct phenotypes. Severe asthma, characterized by uncontrolled symptoms despite optimal treatment, imposes a significant burden on healthcare systems, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab compared with other interleukin (IL)-5 pathway inhibitors, benralizumab and reslizumab, in treating severe asthma with an eosinophilic phenotype in Chile.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A Markov cohort model was developed to compare mepolizumab (100 mg subcutaneously every four weeks) with benralizumab (30 mg subcutaneously every four weeks for the first three doses, every eight weeks subsequently) and reslizumab (3 mg/kg intravenously every four weeks), both as add-on therapies to standard care. Data from the Mepolizumab as Adjunctive Therapy in Patients with Severe Asthma (MENSA) clinical trial and a network meta-analysis were used. Utility values were extracted using the EuroQoL 5-Dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses assessed model robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mepolizumab demonstrated dominance with probability over 95% when compared with benralizumab and reslizumab. Cost savings ranged from 37,000 United States dollars (USD) to 104,000 USD, with an increase of 0.52 to 0.55 quality-adjusted life years. Mepolizumab was also associated with a lower incidence of exacerbations and asthma-related deaths. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of the model outcomes across key parameters.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Limitations of the economic model are related to the lack of direct comparisons between mepolizumab and other biologics. Additionally, the absence of data on continuation criteria required estimating relative risks for the overall population.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mepolizumab offers greater efficacy and cost savings compared to benralizumab and reslizumab for eosinophilic asthma, providing essential insights for improving asthma management and informing healthcare policies in Chile.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"964-973"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab vs anti-interleukin-5/5r biologic therapies for the treatment of adults with severe asthma with an eosinophilic phenotype: a Chilean healthcare system perspective.\",\"authors\":\"Felipe Moraes Dos Santos, Consuelo Rodríguez Martínez, Vanina Giovini, Manuel Antonio Espinoza, Carlos Balmaceda, Jose Romero\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13696998.2025.2520701\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Asthma is a heterogeneous respiratory condition often classified into distinct phenotypes. Severe asthma, characterized by uncontrolled symptoms despite optimal treatment, imposes a significant burden on healthcare systems, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab compared with other interleukin (IL)-5 pathway inhibitors, benralizumab and reslizumab, in treating severe asthma with an eosinophilic phenotype in Chile.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A Markov cohort model was developed to compare mepolizumab (100 mg subcutaneously every four weeks) with benralizumab (30 mg subcutaneously every four weeks for the first three doses, every eight weeks subsequently) and reslizumab (3 mg/kg intravenously every four weeks), both as add-on therapies to standard care. Data from the Mepolizumab as Adjunctive Therapy in Patients with Severe Asthma (MENSA) clinical trial and a network meta-analysis were used. Utility values were extracted using the EuroQoL 5-Dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses assessed model robustness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mepolizumab demonstrated dominance with probability over 95% when compared with benralizumab and reslizumab. Cost savings ranged from 37,000 United States dollars (USD) to 104,000 USD, with an increase of 0.52 to 0.55 quality-adjusted life years. Mepolizumab was also associated with a lower incidence of exacerbations and asthma-related deaths. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of the model outcomes across key parameters.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Limitations of the economic model are related to the lack of direct comparisons between mepolizumab and other biologics. Additionally, the absence of data on continuation criteria required estimating relative risks for the overall population.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mepolizumab offers greater efficacy and cost savings compared to benralizumab and reslizumab for eosinophilic asthma, providing essential insights for improving asthma management and informing healthcare policies in Chile.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16229,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"964-973\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2025.2520701\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2025.2520701","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:哮喘是一种异质性的呼吸系统疾病,通常分为不同的表型。严重哮喘的特点是,尽管得到了最佳治疗,但症状仍无法控制,这给卫生保健系统带来了沉重负担,特别是在低收入和中等收入国家。本研究评估了mepolizumab与其他白细胞介素(IL)-5途径抑制剂(benralizumab和reslizumab)在智利治疗嗜酸粒细胞表型严重哮喘中的成本效益。材料和方法:建立Markov队列模型,比较mepolizumab(每四周皮下注射100 mg)与benralizumab(前三次剂量每四周皮下注射30 mg,随后每八周静脉注射一次)和reslizumab(每四周静脉注射3mg /kg),均作为标准治疗的附加治疗。数据来自Mepolizumab作为严重哮喘患者辅助治疗(MENSA)临床试验和网络荟萃分析。使用EuroQoL 5维问卷(EQ-5D-5L)提取效用值。概率和单向敏感性分析评估了模型的稳健性。结果:与benralizumab和reslizumab相比,Mepolizumab显示出超过95%的优势。成本节约从37,000美元到104,000美元不等,质量调整寿命年增加0.52至0.55年。Mepolizumab还与较低的急性发作和哮喘相关死亡发生率相关。敏感性分析证实了模型结果在关键参数上的稳定性。局限性:经济模型的局限性与缺乏mepolizumab和其他生物制剂之间的直接比较有关。此外,由于缺乏关于继续治疗标准的数据,需要估计总体人群的相对风险。结论:与benralizumab和reslizumab相比,Mepolizumab在治疗嗜酸粒细胞哮喘方面具有更高的疗效和成本节约,为智利改善哮喘管理和告知医疗保健政策提供了重要见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab vs anti-interleukin-5/5r biologic therapies for the treatment of adults with severe asthma with an eosinophilic phenotype: a Chilean healthcare system perspective.

Aim: Asthma is a heterogeneous respiratory condition often classified into distinct phenotypes. Severe asthma, characterized by uncontrolled symptoms despite optimal treatment, imposes a significant burden on healthcare systems, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of mepolizumab compared with other interleukin (IL)-5 pathway inhibitors, benralizumab and reslizumab, in treating severe asthma with an eosinophilic phenotype in Chile.

Materials and methods: A Markov cohort model was developed to compare mepolizumab (100 mg subcutaneously every four weeks) with benralizumab (30 mg subcutaneously every four weeks for the first three doses, every eight weeks subsequently) and reslizumab (3 mg/kg intravenously every four weeks), both as add-on therapies to standard care. Data from the Mepolizumab as Adjunctive Therapy in Patients with Severe Asthma (MENSA) clinical trial and a network meta-analysis were used. Utility values were extracted using the EuroQoL 5-Dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses assessed model robustness.

Results: Mepolizumab demonstrated dominance with probability over 95% when compared with benralizumab and reslizumab. Cost savings ranged from 37,000 United States dollars (USD) to 104,000 USD, with an increase of 0.52 to 0.55 quality-adjusted life years. Mepolizumab was also associated with a lower incidence of exacerbations and asthma-related deaths. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of the model outcomes across key parameters.

Limitations: Limitations of the economic model are related to the lack of direct comparisons between mepolizumab and other biologics. Additionally, the absence of data on continuation criteria required estimating relative risks for the overall population.

Conclusions: Mepolizumab offers greater efficacy and cost savings compared to benralizumab and reslizumab for eosinophilic asthma, providing essential insights for improving asthma management and informing healthcare policies in Chile.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Economics
Journal of Medical Economics HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
122
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Economics'' mission is to provide ethical, unbiased and rapid publication of quality content that is validated by rigorous peer review. The aim of Journal of Medical Economics is to serve the information needs of the pharmacoeconomics and healthcare research community, to help translate research advances into patient care and be a leader in transparency/disclosure by facilitating a collaborative and honest approach to publication. Journal of Medical Economics publishes high-quality economic assessments of novel therapeutic and device interventions for an international audience
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信