Cost-effectiveness analyses of natalizumab (Tysabri) compared with other disease-modifying therapies for people with highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in the UK

Cost analysis of glatiramer acetate versus interferon-β for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in patients with spasticity: the Escala study

OBJECTIVE

The Escala Study evidenced that the administration of glatiramer acetate for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis improved the spasticity of patients previously treated with interferon-β. However, whether such an improvement was translated into cost savings remained unclear. We therefore conducted a cost analysis of glatiramer acetate versus interferon-β in these patients with multiple sclerosis and spasticity.

METHODS

This cost analysis encompassed data from the observational Escala Study, which included patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and spasticity whose treatment had been switched from interferon-β to glatiramer acetate. Costs prior to starting glatiramer acetate (interferon-β period) were compared to the subsequent six months on glatiramer acetate (glatiramer acetate period). The analysis was carried out following the recommendations for conducting pharmacoeconomic studies and from the Spanish National Health System perspective. Costs associated with multiple sclerosis treatment, spasticity treatment and relapse management were expressed in 2014 euros (€); a 7.5 % discount was applied-when needed-as stipulated in Spanish law.

RESULTS

The management of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, spasticity and relapses accounted for a 6-month cost per patient of 7,078.02€ when using interferon-β and 4,671.31€ when using glatiramer acetate. Switching from interferon-β to glatiramer acetate therefore represented a cost saving of 2,406.72€ per patient in favour of glatiramer acetate, which resulted from savings in treatment costs, relapse management and spasticity treatment of 1,890.02€, 430.48€ and 86.21€, respectively. The ratio of the costs during interferon-β was 1.5 times the costs during glatiramer acetate; thus, a fixed budget of 5,000,000€ would enable 1,070 patients to be treated with glatiramer acetate and only 706 patients with interferon-β.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with glatiramer acetate entailed cost savings when compared to interferon-β in patients with spasticity, which not only resulted from its lower costs of therapy and relapse management but also from its favourable effect on reducing spasticity. Thus, glatiramer acetate may be regarded as a more efficient alternative than interferon-β from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.

Convergence yet Continued Complexity: A Systematic Review and Critique of Health Economic Models of Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVES

Several disease-modifying therapies have marketing authorizations for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Given their appraisal by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the objective was to systematically identify and critically evaluate the structures and assumptions used in health economic models of disease-modifying therapies for RRMS in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Web site were searched systematically on March 3, 2014, to identify articles relating to health economic models in RRMS with a UK perspective. Data sources, techniques, and assumptions of the included models were extracted, compared, and critically evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 386 results, 26 full texts were evaluated, leading to the inclusion of 18 articles (relating to 12 models). Early models varied considerably in method and structure, but convergence over time toward a Markov model with states based on disability score, a 1-year cycle length, and a lifetime time horizon was apparent. Recent models also allowed for disability improvement within the natural history of the condition. Considerable variety remains, with increasing numbers of comparators, the need for treatment sequencing, and different assumptions around efficacy waning and treatment withdrawal.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite convergence over time to a similar Markov structure, there are still significant discrepancies between health economic models of RRMS in the United Kingdom. Differing methods, assumptions, and data sources render the comparison of model implementation and results problematic. The commonly used Markov structure leads to problems such as incapability to deal with heterogeneous populations and multiplying complexity with the addition of treatment sequences; these would best be solved by using alternative models such as discrete event simulations.

Cost-effectiveness of natalizumab vs fingolimod for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: analyses in Sweden

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of natalizumab vs fingolimod over 2 years in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients and patients with rapidly evolving severe disease in Sweden.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the incremental cost per relapse avoided of natalizumab and fingolimod from the perspective of the Swedish healthcare system. Modeled 2-year costs in Swedish kronor of treating RRMS patients included drug acquisition costs, administration and monitoring costs, and costs of treating MS relapses. Effectiveness was measured in terms of MS relapses avoided using data from the AFFIRM and FREEDOMS trials for all patients with RRMS and from post-hoc sub-group analyses for patients with rapidly evolving severe disease. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that, in all patients with MS, treatment with fingolimod costs less (440,463 Kr vs 444,324 Kr), but treatment with natalizumab results in more relapses avoided (0.74 vs 0.59), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 25,448 Kr per relapse avoided. In patients with rapidly evolving severe disease, natalizumab dominated fingolimod. Results of the sensitivity analysis demonstrate the robustness of the model results. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 500,000 Kr per relapse avoided, natalizumab is cost-effective in >80% of simulations in both patient populations.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include absence of data from direct head-to-head studies comparing natalizumab and fingolimod, use of relapse rate reduction rather than sustained disability progression as the primary model outcome, assumption of 100% adherence to MS treatment, and exclusion of adverse event costs in the model.

CONCLUSIONS

Natalizumab remains a cost-effective treatment option for patients with MS in Sweden. In the RRMS patient population, the incremental cost per relapse avoided is well below a 500,000 Kr WTP threshold per relapse avoided. In the rapidly evolving severe disease patient population, natalizumab dominates fingolimod.

The budget impact of introducing delayed-release dimethyl fumarate for treatment of relapse-remitting multiple sclerosis in Canada

OBJECTIVE

Multiple sclerosis (MS) causes significant disability globally and is especially prevalent in Canada. Delayed-release dimethyl fumarate (DMF; also known as gastro-resistant DMF) is an orally administered disease-modifying treatment (DMT) for patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) that is currently on the market in the US, Australia, Canada, and Europe. A budget impact model (BIM) was developed to assess the financial consequences of introducing DMF for treatment of RRMS in Canada.

METHODS

A BIM calculated the financial consequences of introducing DMF in Canada over 3 years based on RRMS prevalence, treatment market share, and clinical effects. RRMS prevalence in Canada was derived from published literature and natural relapse rates, and disease state distribution from clinical trial data. It was conservatively assumed that 100% of RRMS patients were treated with a DMT. DMF was assumed to absorb market share proportionally from the following current treatments: interferon beta-1a-IM, interferon beta-1a-SC, interferon beta-1b, and glatiramer acetate. Treatment efficacy, in terms of relapse rate reductions and treatment discontinuation rates, was determined from mixed treatment comparison. Treatment costs (including costs of acquisition, monitoring, and administration) and cost of relapse were considered. Deterministic one-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the most sensitive input parameters.

RESULTS

Over 3 years, the introduction of DMF resulted in an average annual increase of CAD417 per treated patient per year, with reductions in costs associated with relapses (CAD192/patient/year) partially offsetting increased drug acquisition costs (CAD602/patient/year). On a population level, the average annual cost increase was CAD24,654,237, a CAD 0.68 increase per population covered by the Canadian healthcare system. The main drivers of budget impact were drop-out rates, proportion of RRMS patients treated, and market share assumptions.

CONCLUSIONS

The acquisition costs of DMF for treatment of RRMS are predicted to be partially offset by reduced costs of relapses in the Canadian healthcare system.

Cost effectiveness analysis of Avonex and CinnoVex in Relapsing Remitting MS

INTRODUCTION

Multiple sclerosis is a chronic and degenerative neurological disease characterized by loss of myelin sheath of some neurons in brain and spinal cord. It is associated with high economic burden due to premature deaths and high occurrence of disabilities. The aim of the current study was to determine cost effectiveness of two major products of interferon 1a in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

METHOD AND MATERIALS

Altogether, 140 patients who have consumed Avonex and CinnoVex in Relapsing Remitting MS for at least two years were randomly selected (70 patients in each group). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed using the adopted MSQoL-54 instrument. Costs were measured and valued from Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MOHME) perspective. Two-way sensitivity analysis was used to check robustness of the results.

RESULTS

Patients in CinnoVex group reported significantly higher scores in both physical (69.5 vs. 50.9, P<0.001) and mental (63.3 vs. 56.6, P=0.03) aspects of HRQoL than Avonex group. On the other hand, annual cost of CinnoVex and Avonex were 2410 US$ and 4515US$ per patient, respectively (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that CinnoVex was dominant option over the study period. It is suggested that results of the current study should be considered in allocating resources to MS treatments in Iran. Of course, our findings should be interpreted with caution duo to short term horizon and lack of HRQoL scores at baseline (before the intervention).

Cost-effectiveness analyses in multiple sclerosis: a review of modelling approaches

The growing number of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and the high acquisition costs of these DMTs are likely to increase the demand for information on their cost effectiveness. To improve the comparability and applicability of the findings from future cost-effectiveness analyses, it would be useful to have a clear understanding of the methodological challenges of modelling the cost effectiveness of DMTs in MS and the different approaches taken by such studies to date. In contrast to previous review studies, this review focuses on long-term time horizon (≥10 years) simulation-based cost-effectiveness analyses with homogeneous contexts of analysis (i.e. those with similar study objectives, comparators, and target populations) published over the past decade. By doing so, it provides a clearer picture of how modelling approaches taken in the existing studies truly differ across studies, and reveals major areas for improvement in conducting future cost-effectiveness analyses of DMTs for patients with MS.

Natalizumab: a review of its use in the management of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Natalizumab (Tysabri®) is a humanized monoclonal antibody against the α4 chain of integrins and was the first targeted therapy to be approved for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Natalizumab acts as a selective adhesion molecule antagonist, which binds very late antigen (VLA)-4 and inhibits the translocation of activated VLA-4-expressing leukocytes across the blood-brain barrier into the CNS. In a pivotal phase III clinical trial, natalizumab 300 mg intravenously every 4 weeks for 2 years in adults with RRMS significantly reduced the annualized relapse rate and the risk of sustained progression of disability compared with placebo, as well as significantly increasing the proportion of relapse-free patients at 1 and 2 years. Natalizumab also significantly reduced the number of T2-hyperintense, gadolinium-enhancing and T1-hypointense lesions on magnetic resonance imaging, and significantly reduced the volume of T2-hyperintense and T1-hypointense lesions compared with placebo. Natalizumab recipients generally experienced improved health-related quality of life at 1-2 years. Natalizumab was generally well tolerated in pivotal trials. The only adverse events that were more frequent with natalizumab monotherapy than with placebo were fatigue and allergic reactions. The main safety and tolerability issue with natalizumab is the incidence of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). As long as the risk of PML is managed effectively, natalizumab is a valuable therapeutic option for adults with highly active relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis.

A comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis of treatments for multiple sclerosis

The purpose of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of four disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) used to treat multiple sclerosis (MS): glatiramer acetate (GA; Copaxone), interferon beta-1a (IFNβ-1a) intramuscular (IM) injection (Avonex), IFNβ-1a subcutaneous (SC) injection (Rebif), and interferon beta-1b (IFNβ-1b) SC injection (Betaseron). Cost-effectiveness analyses are useful in countering the financial uncertainties and treatment efficacy concerns faced by people with MS. We conducted simulation analyses of the principal findings of a 2009 study by Goldberg et al. (Goldberg LD, Edwards NC, Fincher C, et al: Comparing the cost-effectiveness of disease-modifying drugs for the first-line treatment of relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. J Manag Care Pharm. 2009;15:543-555) to frame the researchers' findings from the perspectives of cost-conscious and cost-neutral MS patients. We found that for the cost-conscious consumer, the ranking of most (1) to least (4) preferred DMDs was 1) IFNβ -1a IM (Avonex), 2) GA (Copaxone), 3) IFNβ-1a SC (Rebif), and 4) IFNβ-1b SC (Beta-seron). For the cost-neutral consumer who places priority on effectiveness over costs, the ranking was 1) IFNβ-1a SC (Rebif), 2) IFNβ-1b SC (Betaseron), 3) GA (Copaxone), and 4) IFNβ-1a IM (Avonex). Future studies could examine cost-effectiveness over extended periods of time (eg, 15-20 years) and more closely examine the cost-effectiveness of natalizumab (Tysabri) relative to the four primary DMDs.

Health care-resource utilization before and after natalizumab initiation in multiple sclerosis patients in the US

Objectives

To evaluate multiple sclerosis (MS)-related health care-resource utilization and costs prior to and after initiating natalizumab in the US.

Materials and methods

A retrospective administrative claims analysis was conducted using the Truven Health MarketScan Databases to identify adults diagnosed with MS who initiated natalizumab (index date) between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2010. Patients had ≥24 months of continuous enrollment (12 months before [preperiod] and 12 months after [postperiod] the index date) and remained on natalizumab for the 12-month postperiod. Patients with and without other disease-modifying treatment (DMT) during the preperiod were examined. Patient characteristics, MS-related inpatient stays, and corticosteroid use were compared in the pre- and postperiods using paired statistical tests, where appropriate.

Results

The study comprised 1,458 patients, mean age 45.2 years (standard deviation 10.5), 74.2% female. The majority (70.3%) used a DMT during the preperiod. After initiating natalizumab, there was a significant reduction in the percentage of patients with MS-related inpatient stays (7.6% versus 2.4%, P<0.001), MS-related inpatient costs (median US $12,078 versus US $9,784, P<0.001), and length of stay (7.12 days versus 6.26 days, P=0.005). Both cohorts showed a reduction in the percentage of patients with MS-related inpatient stays and costs with greater reductions for patients without DMTs in the preperiod (−6.2% [P<0.001] and −US $1,496 [P=0.056], respectively) compared to those with a DMT in the preperiod (−4.8% and −US $1,262, respectively, P<0.001 for both). Compared to the preperiod, there were significant reductions in intravenous and oral corticosteroid use for natalizumab initiators (−60.1% and −52.9%, respectively, P<0.001 for both). These utilization reductions correspond to mean corticosteroid cost-per-patient reductions of −US $101 across all natalizumab users (P<0.001).

Conclusion

The initiation of natalizumab was associated with significant decreases in MS-related inpatient stays, and corticosteroid use with corresponding decreases in length of stay and costs among natalizumab users with and without DMTs in the prior year.

Cost-effectiveness of natalizumab in multiple sclerosis: an updated systematic review

As natalizumab (Tysabri; Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Dublin, Ireland) and other disease-modifying drugs are entering the market for multiple sclerosis, the treatment repertoire is expanding beyond the established first-line treatments. This is creating new opportunities but also increasing the uncertainty in the appropriate management of this condition with its considerable societal burden. As a result, economic evaluations are increasingly influential in healthcare decision making. Seven evaluations that included natalizumab have been published to date. They largely report favorable results for this treatment compared with other drugs. However, the models used to reach these conclusions have been subjected to significant debate, owing to limited data availability as well as the methodological complexities and uncertainties in the pharmacoeconomics of multiple sclerosis. This review critically discusses the available evidence based on the cost-effectiveness of natalizumab and uses the data to explain more general issues in the evaluation of similar drugs. The review also suggests how shortcomings in current studies may potentially be addressed in the future.

Squinting through layers of fog: assessing the cost effectiveness of treatments for multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic neurological disorder, which can lead to a wide range of disabling symptoms. The condition has a significant negative impact on health-related quality of life, and the economic cost of the disease is substantial. Decision-making regarding treatments for MS, and particularly disease-modifying interventions, has been hampered by limitations in the data and evaluative framework for assessing their cost effectiveness. Whilst attention has been drawn to these weaknesses, the scope and extent of the challenges in this area have not been fully set out to date.

AIMS

The aims of this review were to identify all published economic evaluations of MS treatments in order to provide a statement on the scope and characteristics of the cost-effectiveness literature in the area of MS and to provide a basis on which to suggest practical recommendations for future research to aid decision-making.

METHOD

A systematic search was undertaken to identify economic evaluations of treatments for people with MS published in English up to December 2011. Included studies were reviewed to provide a comprehensive description of the characteristics of the currently applied framework for cost effectiveness in MS, with the following key methodological components considered: methods for estimating disease progression, the impact of treatment and health outcomes and costs associated with MS.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven papers were identified. Most studies (n = 32) were model-based evaluations of disease-modifying drugs. All models used disability stages defined by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) to characterise disease progression, and the impact of treatment was based on data from clinical trials and epidemiological cohorts. Outcomes were primarily based on quality-adjusted life-years (n = 22) and/or related to relapse (n = 14). Estimates for health state utility values (HSUVs), costs and the impact of treatment on the course of MS varied considerably between studies, depending on the data sources used and the methods used to incorporate data into models. The scope of the studies was narrow, with a sparsity of economic evaluations of symptomatic and/or non-pharmacological interventions; exclusion of direct non-medical, indirect and informal care costs from analyses; and a narrow view of the potential impact of treatment, concentrating on disability, according to the EDSS, and relapses. In addition, there were issues concerning how to capture losses in HSUVs due to relapses in a way that reflects their salience to people with MS, the wide variation in costs and outcomes from different sources and from potentially unrepresentative samples and modelling disease progression from natural history data from over 30 years ago.

CONCLUSION

There are many complexities for those designing and reporting cost-effectiveness studies of treatments for MS. Analysts, and ultimately decision makers, face multiple data and methodological challenges. Policy makers, technology developers, clinicians, patients and researchers need to acknowledge and address these challenges and to consider recommendations that will improve the current scenario. There is a need for further research that can constructively inform decision-making regarding the funding of treatments for MS.

Cost-effectiveness of different interferon beta products for relapsing-remitting and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: Decision analysis based on long-term clinical data and switchable treatments

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a highly debilitating immune mediated disorder and the second most common cause of neurological disability in young and middle-aged adults. Iran is amongst high MS prevalence countries (50/100,000). Economic burden of MS is a topic of important deliberation in economic evaluations study. Therefore determining of cost-effectiveness interferon beta (INF β) and their copied biopharmaceuticals (CBPs) and biosimilars products is significant issue for assessment of affordability in Lower-middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

A literature-based Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of three INF βs products compared with placebo for managing a hypothetical cohort of patients diagnosed with relapsing remitting MS (RRMS) in Iran from a societal perspective. Health states were based on the Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Disease progression transition probabilities for symptom management and INF β therapies were obtained from natural history studies and multicenter randomized controlled trials and their long term follow up for RRMS and secondary progressive MS (SPMS). A cross sectional study has been developed to evaluate cost and utility. Transitions among health states occurred in 2-years cycles for fifteen cycles and switching to other therapies was allowed. Calculations of costs and utilities were established by attachment of decision trees to the overall model. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of cost/quality adjusted life year (QALY) for all available INF β products (brands, biosimilars and CBPs) were considered. Both costs and utilities were discounted. Sensitivity analyses were done to assess robustness of model.

RESULTS

ICER for Avonex, Rebif and Betaferon was 18712, 11832, 15768 US Dollars ($) respectively when utility attained from literature review has been considered. ICER for available CBPs and biosimilars in Iran was $847, $6964 and $11913.

CONCLUSIONS

The Markov pharmacoeconomics model determined that according to suggested threshold for developing countries by world health organization, all brand INF β products are cost effective in Iran except Avonex. The best strategy among INF β therapies is CBP intramuscular INF β-1a (Cinnovex). Results showed that a policy of encouraging accessibility to CBPs and biosimilars could make even high technology products cost-effective in LMICs.

Tobacco smoking and disability progression in multiple sclerosis: United Kingdom cohort study

Tobacco smoking has been linked to an increased risk of multiple sclerosis. However, to date, results from the few studies on the impact of smoking on the progression of disability are conflicting. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of smoking on disability progression and disease severity in a cohort of patients with clinically definite multiple sclerosis. We analysed data from 895 patients (270 male, 625 female), mean age 49 years with mean disease duration 17 years. Forty-nine per cent of the patients were regular smokers at the time of disease onset or at diagnosis (ever-smokers). Average disease severity as measured by multiple sclerosis severity score was greater in ever-smokers, by 0.68 (95% confidence interval: 0.36-1.01). The risk of reaching Expanded Disability Status Scale score milestones of 4 and 6 in ever-smokers compared to never-smokers was 1.34 (95% confidence interval: 1.12-1.60) and 1.25 (95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.51) respectively. Current smokers showed 1.64 (95% confidence interval: 1.33-2.02) and 1.49 (95% confidence interval: 1.18-1.86) times higher risk of reaching Expanded Disability Status Scale scores 4 and 6 compared with non-smokers. Ex-smokers who stopped smoking either before or after the onset of the disease had a significantly lower risk of reaching Expanded Disability Status Scale scores 4 (hazard ratio: 0.65, confidence interval: 0.50-0.83) and 6 (hazard ratio: 0.69, confidence interval: 0.53-0.90) than current smokers, and there was no significant difference between ex-smokers and non-smokers in terms of time to Expanded Disability Status Scale scores 4 or 6. Our data suggest that regular smoking is associated with more severe disease and faster disability progression. In addition, smoking cessation, whether before or after onset of the disease, is associated with a slower progression of disability.

Modelling the cost effectiveness of disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis: issues to consider

Several cost-effectiveness models of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) have been developed for different populations and different countries. Vast differences in the approaches and discrepancies in the results give rise to heated discussions and limit the use of these models. Our main objective is to discuss the methodological challenges in modelling the cost effectiveness of treatments for MS. We conducted a review of published models to describe the approaches taken to date, to identify the key parameters that influence the cost effectiveness of DMTs, and to point out major areas of weakness and uncertainty. Thirty-six published models and analyses were identified. The greatest source of uncertainty is the absence of head-to-head randomized clinical trials. Modellers have used various techniques to compensate, including utilizing extension trials. The use of large observational cohorts in recent studies aids in identifying population-based, 'real-world' treatment effects. Major drivers of results include the time horizon modelled and DMT acquisition costs. Model endpoints must target either policy makers (using cost-utility analysis) or clinicians (conducting cost-effectiveness analyses). Lastly, the cost effectiveness of DMTs outside North America and Europe is currently unknown, with the lack of country-specific data as the major limiting factor. We suggest that limited data should not preclude analyses, as models may be built and updated in the future as data become available. Disclosure of modelling methods and assumptions could improve the transferability and applicability of models designed to reflect different healthcare systems.

Cost-effectiveness of disease-modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a leading cause of disability among young adults and has a significant economic impact on society. Although MS is not currently a curable disease, costly treatments known as disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are available to reduce the disease impact in certain types of MS. In the current economic downturn, cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of therapies in MS has become an important part of the decision-making process in order to use resources efficiently in the face of the rapidly escalating costs of MS. While some studies have reported costs of DMTs at the level of cost-effectiveness thresholds, some have estimated their costs beyond the tolerance level of health care systems. On the basis of the current literature and given the difficulties in accurately assessing cost-effectiveness in diseases like MS, it is challenging to determine whether DMTs are cost-effective. Further population-based studies are required regarding the cost-effectiveness of therapies in MS.

Cost-minimization analysis of fingolimod compared with natalizumab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Fingolimod and natalizumab have the same European Union licence for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis, and are considered by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) to have broadly similar efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

A cost-minimization analysis was performed to compare differences in treatment costs between fingolimod and natalizumab from a societal perspective in Sweden.

METHODS

This analysis included costs associated with initiating and following treatment (physician visits and monitoring), continuing therapy (drugs and administration), and lost patient productivity and leisure time. Unit costs (in Swedish krona [SEK]) were based on regional data (median prices for physician visits and monitoring sessions). Natalizumab infusion costs were obtained from the national cost-per-patient database. Drug costs for both therapies were 15,651 SEK/28 days.

RESULTS

After 3 years, fingolimod use was associated with savings of 124,823 SEK/patient compared with natalizumab (total cost/patient: 566,718 SEK vs 691,542 SEK). Cost savings with fingolimod were 40,402 SEK/patient after 1 year and 301,730 SEK/patient after 10 years. Treatment with natalizumab was 18% more expensive than fingolimod therapy after 1 year and 23% more expensive after 10 years.

LIMITATIONS

Based on the CHMP assessment, it was assumed that fingolimod and natalizumab have similar efficacy. The analysis was conducted for Sweden, and caution is needed in extrapolating the results to other countries.

CONCLUSION

Fingolimod is cost-saving compared with natalizumab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Sweden.

Cost-effectiveness of multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapies: a systematic review of the literature

Objective. To provide a current and comprehensive understanding of the cost-effectiveness of DMTs for the treatment of MS by quantitatively evaluating the quality of recent cost-effectiveness studies and exploring how the field has progressed from past recommendations. Methods. We assessed the quality of studies that met our systematic literature search criteria using the Quality of Health Economic Studies validated instrument. Results. Of the 82 studies that met our initial search criteria, we included 22 in this review. Four studies (18%) achieved quality category 2, three studies (14%) achieved quality category 3, and 15 studies (68%) achieved the highest quality category 4. 91% of studies were simulation models. 13 studies (59%) had quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as the primary outcome measure, included a societal perspective in the analysis, and utilized time horizons of 10 years to lifetime. Conclusions. To continue to improve the cost-effectiveness evidence of DMTs, we recommend: lifetime horizons, societal perspectives, and QALYs; supplemental evidence with shorter horizons, payer perspectives, and clinical outcomes to inform multiple decision makers; development of modeling and input standards for comparability; head-to-head RCTs between DMTs and long-term prospective studies; and comprehensive cost-effectiveness studies that compare all appropriate DMTs.

Interferon-β-1b: a review of its use in multiple sclerosis

Interferon-β-1b has been used as a disease-modifying therapy in multiple sclerosis (MS) for many years. Although its mechanism of action in MS has not been fully elucidated, it appears to involve immunomodulatory effects mediated by interactions with specific receptors. Large, randomized, multicentre, clinical trials of 2-3.5 years' duration have demonstrated the efficacy of interferon-β-1b 250 μg subcutaneously every other day in patients with a first clinical event suggestive of MS (i.e. those with clinically isolated syndrome [CIS]) and in those with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). In terms of its efficacy on primary (or co-primary) endpoints, interferon-β-1b significantly reduced the risk of developing clinically definite MS compared with placebo in patients with CIS in the BENEFIT study. In patients with RRMS, interferon-β-1b was associated with a significantly lower annualized relapse rate and a significantly higher proportion of relapse-free patients compared with placebo in a registration trial conducted by the Interferon-β MS Study Group. The INCOMIN trial in patients with RRMS showed a significant advantage of interferon-β-1b over intramuscular interferon-β-1a in terms of the percentage of relapse- and progression-free patients and the proportion of patients without new MRI-documented lesions. Other active-comparator trials in RRMS used a variety of primary (or co-primary) endpoints and showed no significant differences between interferon-β-1b and either subcutaneous glatiramer acetate (BECOME and BEYOND trials) or subcutaneous interferon-β-1a (Danish MS Group trial) for these outcomes. In patients with secondary progressive MS (SPMS), the European Study Group showed that interferon-β-1b significantly increased the time to confirmed disease progression compared with placebo, although there was no significant between-group difference for this primary endpoint in a similar trial conducted by the North American Study Group. The studies allowed inclusion of patients with superimposed relapse, and both trials showed a significant reduction in annualized relapse rate with interferon-β-1b. The most frequently reported adverse events with interferon-β-1b are flu-like symptoms and injection-site reactions, which can usually be managed. The incidence of these adverse events generally declines markedly after the first year of treatment. Lymphopenia is the most frequently reported laboratory abnormality and occurs in the majority of patients. Depression, suicidal ideation and injection-site necrosis were the most serious adverse events reported with interferon-β-1b in clinical trials. Long-term safety data over a 16-year follow-up period showed no unexpected adverse events among patients treated with interferon-β-1b. Thus, interferon-β-1b is a well established, first-line, disease-modifying therapy that has demonstrated efficacy in newly emerging MS, RRMS and SPMS with superimposed relapse in well designed clinical trials, and has a generally manageable tolerability profile, with no unexpected adverse events after many years of follow-up.

Cost-effectiveness of natalizumab versus fingolimod for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

With the addition of new agents for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) (e.g., fingolimod), there is a need to evaluate the relative value of newer therapies in terms of cost and effectiveness, given healthcare resource constraints in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of natalizumab vs fingolimod in patients with relapsing MS.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the incremental cost per relapse avoided of natalizumab and fingolimod from a US managed care payer perspective. Two-year costs of treating patients with MS included drug acquisition costs, administration and monitoring costs, and costs of treating MS relapses. Effectiveness was measured in terms of MS relapses avoided (data from AFFIRM and FREEDOMS trials). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty.

RESULTS

Mean 2-year estimated treatment costs were $86,461 (natalizumab) and $98,748 (fingolimod). Patients receiving natalizumab had a mean of 0.74 relapses avoided per 2 years vs 0.59 for fingolimod. Natalizumab dominated fingolimod in the incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, as it was less costly and more effective in reducing relapses. One-way sensitivity analysis showed the results of the model were robust to changes in drug acquisition costs, administration costs, and costs of treating MS relapses. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed natalizumab was cost-effective 95.1% of the time, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $0 per relapse avoided, increasing to 96.3% of the time at a WTP threshold of $50,000 per relapse avoided.

LIMITATIONS

Absence of data from direct head-to-head studies comparing natalizumab and fingolimod, use of relapse rate reduction rather than sustained disability progression as primary model outcome, assumption of 100% adherence to MS treatment, and not capturing adverse event costs in the model.

CONCLUSIONS

Natalizumab dominates fingolimod in terms of incremental cost per relapse avoided, as it is less costly and more effective.

Pharmacoeconomic considerations in the treatment of multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a disorder that incurs high costs to individuals, health systems and society as a whole. A growing number of studies have measured the costs of MS and assessed the cost effectiveness of different treatments. This review summarizes the evidence from these studies. Electronic databases were searched and a total of 51 studies were included, 32 of which were cost-of-illness studies. The cost-of-illness studies took different perspectives (health service or societal) and the annual costs per person with MS ranged between $US6511 and $US77,938 (year of cost 2008). Economic evaluations of interferon (IFN)-beta-1a, IFNbeta-1b, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone and cyclophosphamide were identified. The results of the cost effectiveness of drug interventions were mixed. Most results comparing a drug with placebo related to IFNbeta-1b and the results usually revealed cost-effectiveness ratios that were above usual willingness-to-pay thresholds of public decision makers. The limited evidence on glatiramer acetate suggests that this may be cost effective. Head-to-head drug comparisons produced varying results, although the findings for natalizumab appear favourable compared with other drugs. Further trial-based comparisons are required to increase the evidence base regarding drug treatments for MS.

Assessing cost-effectiveness in the management of multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is one of the most common causes of neurological disability in young and middle-aged adults, with current prevalence rates estimated to be 30 per 100,000 populations. Women are approximately twice as susceptible as males, but males are more likely to have progressive disease. The onset of the disease normally occurs between 20 and 40 years of age, with a peak incidence during the late twenties and early thirties, resulting in many years of disability for a large proportion of patients, many of whom require wheelchairs and some nursing home or hospital care. The aim of this study is to update a previous review which considered the cost-effectiveness of disease-modifying drugs (DMDs), such as interferons and glatiramer acetate, with more up to date therapies, such as mitaxantrone hydrochloride and natalizumab in the treatment of MS. The development and availability of new agents has been accompanied by an increased optimism that treatment regimens for MS would be more effective; that the number, severity and duration of relapses would diminish; that disease progression would be delayed; and that disability accumulation would be reduced. However, doubts have been expressed about the effectiveness of these treatments, which has only served to compound the problems associated with endeavors to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of such interventions.

Clinical efficacy issues in the treatment of multiple sclerosis: update of natalizumab

Multiple sclerosis is a frequent neurologic disease, which causes sensory impairment, fatigue, cognitive deficits, imbalance, loss of mobility, spasticity, and bladder and bowel dysfunction. Several new therapies have been introduced in the past decade, but additional drugs are needed to slow disease progression and reduce disability. Natalizumab (NA) is an α4 integrin antagonist, effective in decreasing the development of brain lesions in experimental models and in several studies of patients with MS. Six randomized controlled trials of NA in MS have been published in the last 10 years. Overall, 2,688 relapsing-remitting MS subjects have been enrolled in these studies. Hence, there are already sufficient data to draw some conclusions about the effectiveness of NA in the treatment of MS, although for definitive considerations it would be reasonable to wait for the observational phase IV studies of clinical practice to complete. Moreover, the medical community is concerned with the safety of NA, particularly with the risk of developing progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy while on NA therapy. From the analyses of the six cases, it seems that the overall risk is around 1/1,000 and could increase with the number of NA infusions.

Cost effectiveness and budget impact of natalizumab in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Disease-modifying therapy (DMT) is the largest single-cost item that contributes to the total per-patient cost of multiple sclerosis (MS), a disabling disorder of the central nervous system. Natalizumab is the most recent DMT to be approved for the treatment of relapsing MS and may be an attractive alternative to interferon beta and glatiramer acetate (GA).

OBJECTIVES

To determine from the perspective of a United States payer (1) the incremental cost effectiveness of natalizumab compared with other DMTs and (2) the budgetary impact of utilization of natalizumab for the treatment of relapsing MS.

METHODS

A combined cost effectiveness and budget impact model was developed. Model inputs were drug acquisition costs (wholesale acquisition cost), costs of drug administration and monitoring, costs of treating relapses, anticipated reduction in relapse rates after 2 years of therapy, and estimated market utilization of natalizumab. Outcomes included total 2-year costs of therapy per patient, costs per relapse avoided for each treatment, and overall 2-year costs to the health plan and per member per month (PMPM) costs. Drug acquisition costs are in 2008 US dollars, and all other costs were inflated to 2008 US dollars when necessary. Univariate sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the model inputs with the greatest influence on the cost per relapse avoided for natalizumab.

RESULTS

The overall 2-year cost of therapy per patient was $72,120 for natalizumab, $56,790 for intramuscular (IM) interferon beta-1a (IFNbeta-1a), $56,773 for IFNbeta-1b, $57,180 for GA, and $58,538 for subcutaneous (SC) IFNbeta-1a. The cost per relapse avoided was lowest for natalizumab at $56,594, followed by $87,791 for IFNbeta-1b, $93,306 for IM IFNbeta-1a, $96,178 for SC IFNbeta-1a, and $103,665 for GA. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of natalizumab relative to IM IFNbeta-1a, IFNbeta-1b, GA, and SC IFNbeta-1a were $23,029, $24,452, $20,671, and $20,403 per additional relapse avoided, respectively. An increase in natalizumab utilization to 9% resulted in an increase of approximately $61 760 in total 2-year costs to a hypothetical health plan of 1 million members, or a $0.003 PMPM incremental cost. Univariate sensitivity analyses indicated that the model inputs with the most influence on cost per relapse avoided for natalizumab were the weighted average number of relapses before treatment and the anticipated relative relapse rate reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Natalizumab was the most cost-effective therapy as measured by total cost per relapse avoided, not withstanding a higher drug acquisition cost versus other DMTs. Entry of natalizumab to the market is likely to result in a minimal increase in health-plan costs on a PMPM basis. Limitations of the study include the use of a surrogate measure, relapse avoided, as an outcome measure; also, adverse events were not included in the model.

Natalizumab in the treatment of multiple sclerosis

Natalizumab reduced the rate of clinical relapse at one year by 68% and the risk of sustained progression of disability by 42-54% over 2 years in its pivotal phase III trial (AFFIRM) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Natalizumab is generally well tolerated, but due to rare and potentially fatal side-effects, it was approved with a restricted-distribution format in 2006. Expert statements and the European Medical Agency recommend the use of natalizumab after failure of first-line disease-modifying therapies in patients with relapsing forms of MS. As part of the risk management plan, worldwide extensive safety programmes aim to provide more data on natalizumab safety in clinical practice. At the end of September 2008, 48 000 patients have received natalizumab and 18000 patients are on treatment for at least 1 year. The assessment of risk and benefit is still ongoing.

Cost effectiveness of glatiramer acetate and natalizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Disease-modifying drugs are a significant expenditure for treating multiple sclerosis. Natalizumab (NZ) has been shown to be effective in reducing relapses and disease progression. However, assessment of the cost effectiveness of NZ compared with other disease-modifying drugs in the presence of long-term data has been limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the lifetime cost effectiveness from the US healthcare and societal perspectives of glatiramer acetate (GA) and NZ (both given with symptom management) relative to symptom management alone in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) using evidence from long-term published studies.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed with patients transitioning through health states based on Kurtzke's expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Patients were >/=18 years of age with RRMS, EDSS <6.0 and receiving treatment. Treatment effects were obtained from clinical trials for years 1 and 2 of therapy and long-term clinical assessments thereafter. Transitions were adjusted for discontinuation and persistent NZ antibodies. Patients incurred drug, other medical and lost worker productivity costs. Patient quality of life was considered in the form of utilities, which were taken from assessments of patients with MS. Costs were valued in 2007 $US, and costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% per annum. Various parameters and assumptions were tested in one-way sensitivity analyses, and scenario-based analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Remaining lifetime, direct medical costs for patients receiving GA or NZ versus symptom management were $US408 000, $US422 208 and $US341 436, respectively. Patients receiving GA or NZ benefited from increased years in EDSS 0.0-5.5 (1.18 and 1.09, respectively), years relapse-free (1.30 and 1.18) and QALYs (0.1341 and 0.1332). The incremental cost per QALY for GA or NZ compared with symptom management was $US496 222 and $US606 228, respectively, excluding lost worker productivity costs. GA was associated with a cost saving compared with NZ. The incremental cost per QALY results were sensitive to changes in time horizon, disease progression and drug costs. Improved QALYs for NZ were sensitive to changes in the clinical effect of NZ on disease progression and discontinuation over time.

CONCLUSIONS

GA or NZ in RRMS patients is associated with increased benefits compared with symptom management, albeit at higher costs. Although year 1 and 2 disease progression and relapse rates were better for NZ than GA, long-term evidence may show GA to have similar, if not improved, clinical benefit.