Health technology assessment in Japan: a work in progress

A Review of Current Approaches to Evaluating and Reimbursing New Medicines in a Subset of OECD Countries

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to review the current evaluation and funding processes for new drugs in different developed countries, to provide a comparative framework with detailed, homogeneous, and up-to-date information.

METHODS

Scientific publications, reports and websites were reviewed between July and December 2021 using PubMed, Google Scholar, and grey literature sources. The main items searched were actors and processes, including timelines, characteristics of clinical and economic evaluations, participation of stakeholders, elements of price and reimbursement decisions, cost-effectiveness thresholds and specific funds. The analysed 13 countries were Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Portugal, Scotland, South Korea, Spain and Sweden.

RESULTS

Eight countries perform the assessment process separated from the pricing decision. Countries measure each drug's added therapeutic value through multi-attribute value scales, algorithms, non-prescriptive lists of criteria, or quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health technology assessment (HTA) methodologies differ in their outcome measures, elicitation techniques, comparators, and perspectives. The criteria used for pricing and reimbursement include humanistic, clinical, and economic aspects. Only Scotland, England, the Netherlands, Canada and Portugal use explicit efficiency thresholds. Health care professionals participate in all assessment committees, and patients are becoming increasingly involved in most countries. The official time from marketing authorisation to the completion of the evaluation and pricing processes varied from 126 to 540 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Most analysed countries show a trend towards value-based approaches that consider value for money to society, but also other economic, clinical, and humanistic criteria. Good practices included robustness, transparency, independence, and participation.

Cost-effectiveness study of FIB-4 followed by transient elastography screening strategy for advanced hepatic fibrosis in a NAFLD at-risk population

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The cost-effectiveness to screen hepatic fibrosis in at-risk population as recommended by several professional societies has been limited. This study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of this screening strategy in the expanded at-risk population recently proposed by several societies.

METHODS

A combined model of the decision tree and Markov models was developed to compare expected costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between screening and no screening groups. The model included liver disease-related health states and cardiovascular disease (CVD) states as a base-case analysis. Screening strategy consisted of fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) followed by vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) and intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) as a treatment for diagnosed patients.

RESULTS

Cost-effectiveness analysis showed that screening the at-risk population entailed $298 incremental costs and an additional 0.0199 QALY per patient compared to no screening (ICER $14 949/QALY). Screening was cost-effective based on the implicit ICER threshold of $25 000/QALY in Korea. When the effects of ILI on CVD and extrahepatic malignancy were incorporated into the cost-effectiveness model, the ICER decreased by 0.85 times from the base-case analysis (ICER $12 749/QALY). In contrast, when only the effects of liver disease were considered in the model, excluding cardiovascular disease effects, ICER increased from the baseline case analysis to $16 305. Even when replacing with medical costs in Japan and U.S., it remained cost-effective with the estimate below the countries' ICER threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides compelling evidence supporting the cost-effectiveness of FIB-4-based screening the at-risk population for advanced hepatic fibrosis.

Modeling Monthly Migraine-Day Distributions Using Longitudinal Regression Models and Linking Quality of Life to Inform Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Case Study of Fremanezumab in Japanese-Korean Migraine Patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

As regression approaches have been used more recently to model the effectiveness and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of novel migraine treatments, an example is provided for fremanezumab. The objective is to estimate the distribution of mean monthly migraine days (MMD) as a continuous variable and corresponding migraine-specific utility values as a function of the MMD, to inform health states in a cost-effectiveness model (CEM).

METHODS

Three longitudinal regression models (zero-adjusted gamma [ZAGA], zero-inflated beta-binomial [ZIBB], and zero-inflated negative binomial [ZINBI]) were fitted to Japanese-Korean clinical trial data of episodic (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) patients treated with fremanezumab or placebo, to estimate MMD over a period of 12 months. The EQ-5D-5L and the migraine-specific quality-of-life (MSQ), mapped to the EQ-5D-3L, questionnaires were used to measure HRQOL. Migraine-specific utility values were estimated as a function of MMD using a linear mixed effects model.

RESULTS

The ZIBB models fitted the data best in estimating the distribution of mean MMD over time. MSQ-derived values were more sensitive than the EQ-5D-5L values for the effect of the number of MMD on HRQOL, with higher values for less MMD and more time on treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Using longitudinal regression models to estimate MMD distributions and linking utility values as a function is an appropriate method to inform CEMs and capture inter-patient heterogeneity. The observed distribution shifts demonstrated fremanezumab's effect at reducing MMD for both EM and CM patients, while treatment effect on HRQOL was captured by MMD and time on treatment.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of maternal vaccination against Group B streptococcus in Japan

Background

Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is a leading pathogen causing life-threatening bacterial infections in neonates (early- or late-onset) and infants, and is associated with preterm and stillbirth. Japan introduced national guidelines to reduce early-onset neonatal GBS disease, with universal prenatal screening and intrapartum antimicrobial prophylaxis (IAP). However, screening/IAP does not prevent GBS associated late-onset disease, preterm or stillbirth. Maternal GBS vaccines in development are targeted at infant GBS disease but may provide benefit across perinatal outcomes. We aimed to assess cost-effectiveness of a future maternal GBS vaccine, for a base case prevention of infant GBS disease in combination with screening/IAP compared to screening/IAP alone.

Methods

We used a decision tree model to estimate cases of infant GBS disease, deaths, and neuro-developmental impairment (NDI), GBS-related stillbirths, and the associated costs and loss in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). We calculate the threshold price at which a vaccine would be cost-effective assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of ¥5 million/QALY. We explored the potential benefit of a maternal GBS vaccine that also prevents preterm birth in a scenario analysis.

Results

Maternal GBS vaccination in Japan could prevent an additional 142 infant GBS cases annually, including 5 deaths and 21 cases of NDI, and 13 stillbirths compared to screening/IAP alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was ¥3.78 million/QALY with a vaccine cost of ¥5,000/dose. If the QALY lost for stillbirth is included, the ICER is reduced to ¥1.78 million/QALY. Median threshold vaccine price was ¥6,900 per dose (95 % uncertainty interval ¥5,100 to ¥9,200 per dose). If maternal GBS vaccination also prevented half of GBS-associated preterm, the ICER would be reduced to ¥1.88 million/QALY.

Conclusions

An effective maternal GBS vaccine is likely to be considered cost-effective in Japan at a price of ¥5,000/dose. Effectiveness against other adverse perinatal outcomes would increase health benefits and cost-effectiveness.

The value of a QALY towards the end of life and its determinants: Experimental evidence

OBJECTIVES

Individual and societal willingness to pay (WTP) for end-of-life medical interventions continue to be subject to considerable uncertainty. This study aims at deriving both types of WTP estimates for an extension of survival time and an improvement of quality of life amounting to a QALY.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) involving a hypothetical novel drug for the treatment of terminal cancer involving 1529 Swiss residents was performed in 2014. In its individual setting, respondents choose between the status quo and a hypothetical drug with varying characteristics and out-of-pocket payments, adopting the perspective of a terminal cancer patient. In the societal setting, participants are asked to choose between the status quo and a social health insurance contract with and without coverage of the novel drug and a varying insurance contribution.

RESULTS

In the individual setting, respondents put a higher value on their quality of life than on their survival time whereas in the societal setting, they put a higher value on extra survival time. The combination of the two extensions results in a mean individual WTP per QALY of CHF 96,150 (1 CHF = 1 USD as of 2014). Mean societal WTP for a QALY even amounts to CHF 213,500 in favor of an adult patient, CHF 255,600 for a child, and CHF 153,600 for a person aged over 70 years, respectively. While estimated societal values consistently exceed their individual counterparts, they vary considerably with respondents' socioeconomic characteristics in both settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This research finds that individual WTP for an extension of survival time to one year is dominated by WTP for health-related quality of life whereas for societal WTP, it is the other way round. Both individual and societal WTP values exhibit a great deal of heterogeneity, with the latter depending on the type of beneficiary.

Analysis of the Chagas disease situation in Japan: a cross sectional study and cost-effectiveness analysis of a Chagas disease screening program

BACKGROUND

Japan is estimated to host 3000 cases of Chagas disease (CD). However, there are no epidemiological data and policies for prevention and care. We aimed to analyze the current situation of CD in Japan and identify possible barriers to seeking care.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included Latin American (LA) migrants living in Japan from March 2019 to October 2020. We obtained blood samples to identify participants infected with Trypanosoma cruzi, and data about sociodemographic information, CD risk factors, and barriers to access to the Japanese national health care system (JNHS). We used the observed prevalence to calculate the cost-effectiveness analysis of the screening of CD in the JNHS.

FINDINGS

The study included 428 participants, most of them were from Brazil, Bolivia and Peru. The observed prevalence was 1.6% (expected prevalence= 0.75%) and 5.3% among Bolivians. Factors associated with seropositivity were being born in Bolivia, having previously taken a CD test, witnessing the triatome bug at home, and having a relative with CD. The screening model was more cost-effective than the non-screening model from a health care perspective (ICER=200,320 JPY). Factors associated with access to JNHS were being female, length of stay in Japan, Japanese communication skills, source of information, and satisfaction about the JNHS.

INTERPRETATION

Screening of asymptomatic adults at risk of CD may be a cost-effective strategy in Japan. However, its implementation should consider the barriers that affect LA migrants in access to the JNHS.

FUNDING

Nagasaki University and Infectious Diseases Japanese Association.

How is the Societal Perspective Defined in Health Technology Assessment? Guidelines from Around the Globe

Some researchers have argued that the aim of an economic evaluation should be to offer guidance on resource allocation based on public interest from a societal perspective. The application of a societal perspective in health technology assessment (HTA), while common in many published studies, is not mandated in most countries, and there is limited discussion on what the societal perspective should encompass. This study aimed to systematically compare and contrast the HTA guidelines in different countries. HTA methods guidelines were identified through international HTA networks, such as the Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and Guide to Economic Analysis Research (GEAR). The respective HTA agencies were grouped into two categories: well-established and newly developed, based on the establishment date. Data extracted from the guidelines summarised the methodological details in the reference cases, including specifics on the societal perspective. The database search yielded 46 guidelines, and 65% explicitly considered the societal perspective. The maturity of these agencies is reflected in their attitudes towards the societal perspective; the societal perspective is defined in 73% of the guidelines of well-established agencies and only 56% of those of newly developed agencies. The guidelines from multipayer healthcare systems are more likely to consider the societal perspective. Although most guidelines from the well-established agencies recommend the inclusion of a societal perspective, the types of costs and consequences that should be included and the recommended approaches to valuing them are variable. The direct costs to family and carers were included in 73% of the societal perspective definitions, while non-health outcomes were considered in only 40%. Most HTA guidelines lack clear guidance on what to include under specific perspectives. Considering the recent advancements in economic evaluation methods, it is timely to rethink the role of the societal perspective in HTA guidelines and adopt a more comprehensive perspective to include all costs and consequences of healthcare services.

Informing a cost-effectiveness threshold for Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 aims to reform health care across the Kingdom, with health technology assessment being adopted as one tool promising to improve the efficiency with which resources are used. An understanding of the opportunity costs of reimbursement decisions is key to fulfilling this promise and can be used to inform a cost-effectiveness threshold. This paper is the first to provide a range of estimates of this using existing evidence extrapolated to the context of Saudi Arabia.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We use four approaches to estimate the marginal cost per unit of health produced by the healthcare system; drawing from existing evidence provided by a cross-country analysis, two alternative estimates from the UK context, and based on extrapolating a UK estimate using evidence on the income elasticity of the value of health. Consequences of estimation error are explored.

RESULTS

Based on the four approaches, we find a range of SAR 42,046 per QALY gained (48% of GDP per capita) to SAR 215,120 per QALY gained (246% of GDP per capita). Calculated potential central estimates from the average of estimated health gains based on each source gives a range of SAR 50,000-75,000. The results are in line with estimates from the emerging literature from across the world.

CONCLUSION

A cost-effectiveness threshold reflecting health opportunity costs can aid decision-making. Applying a cost-effectiveness threshold based on the range SAR 50,000 to 75,000 per QALY gained would ensure that resource allocation decisions in healthcare can in be informed in a way that accounts for health opportunity costs.

LIMITATIONS

A limitation is that it is not based on a within-country study for Saudi Arabia, which represents a promising line of future work.

Implementation of Health Technology Assessment and Management Course in Undergraduate Program in Biomedical Engineering ITB

The Undergraduate Program in Biomedical Engineering ITB, Indonesia, introduce the Health Technology Assessment and Management as an elective course in 2021. This course is implemented to support the World Health Assembly that urges the member states to establish national strategies in health technology assessment and management, particularly medical devices. Furthermore, it is designed to give biomedical engineering students a broader insight into their career opportunities. Therefore, this course is delivered by the practitioner and guided by the main lecturer. The course syllabus is developed from the WHO Medical Devices Technical Series and European Network for Health Technology Assessment. It tries to implement HTA Core Model for Rapid Relative Effectiveness Assessments. A questionnaire is used to measure the students' perception of the course implementation. Moreover, it is used to obtain the students' comments and feedback. The course that is delivered by the practitioner not only gives the course content but also the context. After attending the course, students have a broader insight into the career opportunities as biomedical engineers in Indonesia.

Is Value Portable? An Examination of Contextual and Practical Considerations that Affect the Transferability of Value Assessments between Settings

Objectives

The extent to which value assessments are uniquely deployed in any given geographic setting is variable. Increasingly, markets are seeking insights from external health technology assessments (HTAs) to assist with decisions surrounding the adoption of new technologies. We reviewed the environment, infrastructure, and practice of value assessment in six countries, with a focus on how these elements influence the transferability of value assessments between settings.

Methods

We reviewed the diverse settings in which six organizations conducting HTA operate, and explored how differences might affect the transferability of value assessment. We focused attention on Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, China’s National Center for Medicine and HTA, Germany’s Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen, Japan’s Center for Outcomes Research and Economic Evaluation for Health (Core 2 Health), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England and Wales, and the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review in the United States.

Results

HTA is adopted to address unique objectives for a given health system and is tailored to support local standards and preferences. Some elements of a value assessment, such as evidence on clinical effectiveness, may be more transferable than others. It is challenging to appropriately adjust external assessments to the local context.

Conclusions

Contextual differences influence both the role and application of HTA. These differences limit the transferability of value assessments from one setting to another. De novo appraisals, customized to the local decision context, are the ideal approach to determinations about value.

How innovation can be defined, evaluated and rewarded in health technology assessment

BACKGROUND

What constitutes innovation in health technologies can be defined and measured in a number of ways and it has been widely researched and published about. However, while many countries mention it as a criterion for pricing or reimbursement of health technologies, countries differ widely in how they define and operationalise it.

METHODS

We performed a literature review, using a snowballing search. In this paper, we explore how innovation has been defined in the literature in relation to health technology assessment. We also describe how a selection of countries (England, France, Italy, Spain and Japan) take account of innovation in their health technology assessment frameworks and explore the key methodologies that can capture it as a dimension of value in a new health technology. We propose a way of coming to, and incorporating into health technology assessment systems, a definition of innovation for health technologies that is independent of other dimensions of value that they already account for in their systems, such as clinical benefit. We use Spain as an illustrative example of how innovation might be operationalised as a criterion for decision making in health technology assessment.

RESULTS

The countries analysed here can be divided into 2 groups with respect to how they define innovation. France, Japan and Italy use features such as severity, unmet need and therapeutic added value as indicators of the degree of innovation of a health technology, while England, Spain consider the degree of innovation as a separate and additional criterion from others. In the case of Spain, a notion of innovation might be constructed around concepts of `step-change', `convenience', `strength of evidence base' and `impact on future research & development'.

CONCLUSIONS

If innovation is to be used as operational criteria for adoption, pricing and reimbursement of health technologies, the concept must be clearly defined, and it ought to be independent from other value dimensions already captured in their health technology assessment systems.

Impact of reimbursement restriction on drug market sales under the National Health Insurance in Japan

AIM

National health care expenditures have been increasing each year, although the Japanese government has annually revised official drug prices. Managing the health care system to pay for expensive drugs is a major concern. The reimbursement restriction, which is the only way that a drug can be implemented before market entry in Japan, is crucial for managing expenditures. Therefore, this study identifies the impact of the reimbursement restriction on drug market sales in Japan, particularly in the situation where health technology assessment or other market access regulations are not applicable before market entry.

METHOD

All new drugs listed in fiscal years 2011-2019, along with their market size forecast, were identified using the materials from the Central Social Insurance Medical Council. We then calculated the percentage rate of reimbursement amounts based on the National Database of Health Insurance Claims relative to the predicted market size as a dependent variable. Using the reimbursement restriction for each drug as an independent variable, we performed descriptive and univariate analyses on each variable, followed by generalized linear mixed-effects model regression analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 211 drugs. The mean rates of drugs that required physicians, facilities, and patients to meet criteria for use were 30.85% (n = 2), 31.42% (n = 2), and 72.11% (n = 6), respectively. The mean rate of drugs that required diagnostic testing was 22.99% (n = 7), which was 3.7 times lower than the rate of drugs that did not require such testing (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the reimbursement restriction requiring diagnostic testing has a substantial impact on decreasing market sales. As the number of cases for each requirement is small, further study is needed to measure the impact of the other reimbursement restrictions.

Health Economics in the Field of Prosthetics and Orthotics: A Global Perspective

The rapid advancement of prosthetic and orthotic (P&O) technology raises the question how the industry can ensure that patients have access to the benefits and providers get paid properly and fairly by healthcare payers. This is a challenge that not only P&O but all areas of health technology face. In many areas of medicine and health products, such as drugs and medical devices, health-technology assessments (HTA) have become a standard procedure in the coverage and reimbursement process. In most countries, P&O is lagging behind that development, although some countries have already formalized HTA for prosthetic and orthotic products and may even use cost-effectiveness analyses to determine pricing and payment amounts. This article gives an overview on the coverage and reimbursement processes in the United States, Canada, Germany, France, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Poland, Japan, and China. This selection reflects the variety and diversity of coverage and reimbursement processes that the P&O industry faces globally. The paper continues with an overview on the necessary research and investment efforts that manufacturers will have to make in the future, and contemplates the likely consequences for the manufacturer community in the market place. Health economics may help support the transition from price-based to value-based coverage and reimbursement but will come at considerable costs to the industry.

Health technology assessment and economic evaluation: Is it applicable for the traditional medicine?

Gaps between limited health resources and expanding health service demands are emerging to be more and more prominent, which extremely generate the cost-effective strategies for scientific policy-making in the context of healthcare. As a systematic approach and solid tool to promote healthcare system more efficient and sustainable, health technology assessment (HTA) could provide multi-dimensional evidences comprising effectiveness, safety, economic implications, ethical, social, cultural and legal issues, in which economic evaluation is an important and unique part for optimizing decision-making. After decades of development, HTA has formulated a set of systematic theories, methods and procedures based on modern medicine. Meanwhile, as an important component of medicine system across the world, traditional medicine (TM) originates from knowledge, skill, and practices based on the theories, beliefs, and experiences indigenous to different traditional cultures. Yet whether current theory and method system of HTA is applicable for TM is necessary to be explored and investigated. In principle, the general steps and methods of HTA could be basically applicable to TM, except for the PICO structuring, cost measurement, and supportive clinical evidence and information collection in economic evaluation. Therefore, these three challenging problems need to be focused and addressed in future HTA for TM.

Current trends in diabetes mellitus database research in Japan

With the widespread use of electronic medical records and administrative claims databases, analytic results from so-called real-world data have become increasingly important in healthcare decision-making. Diabetes mellitus is a heterogeneous condition that involves a broad spectrum of patients. Real-world database studies have been recognised as a powerful tool to understand the impact of current practices on clinical courses and outcomes, such as long-term glucose control, development of microvascular or macro-vascular diseases, and mortality. Diabetes is also a major global health issue and poses a significant social and economic burden worldwide. Therefore, it is critical to understand the epidemiology, clinical course, treatment reality, and long-term outcomes of diabetes to determine realistic solutions to a variety of disease-related issues that we are facing. In the present review, we summarise the healthcare system and large-scale databases currently available in Japan, introduce the results from recent database studies involving Japanese patients with diabetes, and discuss future opportunities and challenges for the use of databases in the management of diabetes.

Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Tisagenlecleucel for the Treatment of Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma in Japan

There are limited treatment options and substantial unmet needs for adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (r/r DLBCL) in Japan. In 2019, tisagenlecleucel, a CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy, was approved for r/r DLBCL in Japan. The efficacy and safety of tisagenlecleucel were demonstrated in the pivotal phase II single-arm JULIET trial. The objective of the current study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel treatment strategy versus current standard of care (salvage chemotherapy treatment strategy) for the treatment of patients with r/r DLBCL in Japan. A three-state partitioned survival model was constructed from a Japanese public healthcare payer's perspective, with the following three health states: progression-free survival, progressive/relapsed disease, and death. Because the tisagenlecleucel arm included patients who did or did not receive the infusion, a decision-tree structure was used to partition patients based on their infusion status. Treatment efficacy and costs were based on tisagenlecleucel-infused patients for those who received the infusion; for non-infused patients, they were based on standard salvage chemotherapy. The efficacy inputs for tisagenlecleucel-infused patients and salvage chemotherapy were based on observed data in the JULIET trial and the international SCHOLAR-1 meta-analysis, respectively, before year 3. Afterward, all patients were assumed to have no further progression and to incur the mortality risk of long-term DLBCL survivors. The base case analysis explored a lifetime horizon (44 years), with costs and effectiveness discounted 2.0% annually, and it used a monthly model cycle. Direct costs were considered in the base case, composed of pretreatment costs, treatment costs, adverse events management costs, follow-up costs before progression, subsequent SCT costs, post-progression costs, and terminal care costs. Total incremental costs, life years (LYs), and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were compared for tisagenlecleucel versus salvage chemotherapy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated as the costs per QALY gained, and a threshold of ¥7.5 million was used to assess whether tisagenlecleucel is cost effective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The total LYs (discounted) for tisagenlecleucel and salvage chemotherapy were 7.24 and 4.35 years, respectively; the corresponding QALYs were 5.42 and 2.57 years, respectively. The discounted incremental LYs and QALYs comparing tisagenlecleucel to salvage chemotherapy were estimated as 2.89 and 2.85 years, respectively. Over a lifetime horizon, the model estimated that tisagenlecleucel had a total incremental cost of ¥15,590,335 (discounted) versus salvage chemotherapy. Tisagenlecleucel was associated with an ICER of ¥5,476,496 per QALY gained compared to salvage chemotherapy. Extensive sensitivity analyses supported the base-case findings. Tisagenlecleucel is a cost-effective treatment strategy for r/r DLBCL compared to salvage chemotherapy treatment strategy from a Japanese public healthcare payer's perspective.

Cost-effectiveness of sequential daily teriparatide/weekly alendronate compared with alendronate monotherapy for older osteoporotic women with prior vertebral fracture in Japan

Using a Markov microsimulation model among hypothetical cohorts of community-dwelling older osteoporotic Japanese women with prior vertebral fracture over a lifetime horizon, we found that daily subcutaneous teriparatide for 2 years followed by weekly oral alendronate for 8 years was not cost-effective compared with alendronate monotherapy for 10 years.

PURPOSE

Teriparatide has proven efficacy in reducing osteoporotic fractures, but with substantial cost. We examined the cost-effectiveness of sequential teriparatide/alendronate (i.e., daily subcutaneous teriparatide for 2 years followed by weekly oral alendronate for 8 years) compared with alendronate monotherapy for 10 years among community-dwelling older osteoporotic women with prior clinical or morphometric vertebral fracture in Japan.

METHODS

Using a previously validated and updated Markov microsimulation model, we obtained incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (Japanese yen [¥] (or US dollars [$]) per quality-adjusted life year [QALY]) from the perspective of a single payer responsible for both public healthcare and long-term care. We assumed a lifetime horizon with a willingness-to-pay of ¥5million (or $47,500) per QALY in the base case. We modeled the cost of biosimilar teriparatide, which has been available since November 2019 in Japan, assuming the efficacy was the same as that of the brand version.

RESULTS

In the base case, sequential teriparatide/alendronate was not cost-effective compared with alendronate monotherapy. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, sequential teriparatide/alendronate would become cost-effective with 85%, 50%, and 15% price discounts to teriparatide at ages 70, 75, and 80, respectively, compared to the current biosimilar cost. Otherwise, results were especially sensitive to changes that affected efficacy of teriparatide or alendronate. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probabilities of sequential teriparatide/alendronate being cost-effective were 0%, 1%, and 37% at ages 70, 75, and 80, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Among high-risk osteoporotic women in Japan, sequential teriparatide/alendronate was not cost-effective compared with alendronate monotherapy, even with the availability of biosimilar teriparatide.

Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate for older osteoporotic women in Japan

Among hypothetical cohorts of older osteoporotic women without prior fragility fracture in Japan, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of two treatment strategies using a simulation model. Annual intravenous zoledronic acid for 3 years was cost-saving compared with biannual subcutaneous denosumab for 3 years followed by weekly oral alendronate for 3 years.

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis constitutes a major medical and health economic burden to society worldwide. Injectable treatments for osteoporosis require less frequent administration than oral treatments and therefore have higher persistence and adherence with treatment, which could explain better efficacy for fracture prevention. Although annual intravenous zoledronic acid and biannual subcutaneous denosumab are available, it remains unclear which treatment strategy represents a better value from a health economic perspective. Accordingly, we examined the cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid for 3 years compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate (i.e., denosumab for 3 years followed by oral weekly alendronate for 3 years, making the total treatment duration 6 years) among hypothetical cohorts of community-dwelling osteoporotic women without prior fragility fracture in Japan at ages 65, 70, 75, or 80 years.

METHODS

Using a previously validated and updated Markov microsimulation model, we obtained incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (Japanese yen [¥] (or US dollars [$]) per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) from the public healthcare and long-term care payer's perspective over a lifetime horizon with a willingness-to-pay of ¥5 million (or $47,500) per QALY.

RESULTS

In the base case, zoledronic acid was cost-saving (i.e., more effective and less expensive) compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, results were sensitive to changes in the efficacy of zoledronic acid or the cumulative persistence rate with zoledronic acid or denosumab. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the probabilities of zoledronic acid being cost-effective were 98-100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older osteoporotic women without prior fragility fracture in Japan, zoledronic acid was cost-saving compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate.

Lower Drug Cost of Successfully Treating Patients with Type 2 Diabetes to Targets with Once-Weekly Semaglutide versus Once-weekly Dulaglutide in Japan: A Short-Term Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

INTRODUCTION

In the head-to-head trial (SUSTAIN 7), the novel, injectable, once-weekly GLP-1 analogue semaglutide showed superiority in both glycemic outcomes and body weight reduction, compared with once-weekly dulaglutide in the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, no economic evaluation using these data has yet been conducted in the Japanese setting. The objective of this analysis was to assess the short-term cost-effectiveness in Japan of once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg (the approved maintenance dose in Japan) compared with once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg (the only licensed dose in Japan) over a 1-year period using Japanese cost data.

METHODS

Responder endpoints were obtained from the SUSTAIN 7 trial to assess the cost of successfully treating patients to these targets ("cost of control"). Responder endpoint definitions consisted of single, dual, and triple composite endpoints related to glycemic control, body weight, and hypoglycemia outcomes. The cost of treatment was accounted from a healthcare payer perspective, capturing drug costs only.

RESULTS

Treatment with once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg was associated with a lower cost and a lower cost per patient treated to target for all endpoints, compared with once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg. For each JPY 1 spent on bringing patients to target with once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg, JPY 1.58, JPY 1.44, JPY 1.60, JPY 2.10, and JPY 2.33 would need to be spent on once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg to achieve an equivalent outcome for endpoints of HbA1c ≤ 6.5%, HbA1c < 7.0%, HbA1c < 7.0% without hypoglycemia, and no weight gain, weight loss ≥ 5%, and ≥ 1.0% HbA1c reduction and ≥ 3.0% weight loss, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that once-weekly semaglutide is a cost-effective treatment option compared with once-weekly dulaglutide for patients with T2D in Japan. In the future, this finding should be extrapolated to traditional long-term cost-effectiveness analysis, using common outcomes such as quality-adjusted life years.