Treatment for life for severe haemophilia A- A cost-utility model for prophylaxis vs. on-demand treatment

Cost-Effectiveness of Recombinant Factor IX Fc Prophylaxis and Recombinant Factor IX On-Demand Treatment in Patients with Haemophilia B Without Inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Recombinant factor IX (rFIX) and recombinant FIX Fc fusion protein (rFIXFc) are standard half-life and extended half-life FIX replacement therapies, respectively, and represent established treatment options indicated for adults and children with haemophilia B. These FIX replacement therapies can be administered as prophylaxis (to prevent bleeding) or 'on-demand' (to stop bleeding). This analysis aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of once-weekly prophylaxis with rFIXFc versus on-demand treatment with rFIX in patients with haemophilia B without inhibitors in the Italian healthcare setting.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to assess a hypothetical cohort of adolescent or adult male patients (≥ 12 years) with haemophilia B (FIX level of ≤ 2 IU/dL) without inhibitors. Model inputs were derived from the pivotal phase 3 clinical studies for rFIXFc and rFIX, published literature and assumptions when published data were unavailable. The model employed a lifelong time horizon with 6-monthly transitions between health states, and it estimated total costs, total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), number of bleeds, number of surgeries and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

rFIXFc prophylaxis was associated with lower total costs per patient (€5,308,625 versus €6,564,510) and greater total QALYs per patient (15.936 versus 11.943) compared with rFIX on-demand; rFIXFc prophylaxis was therefore the dominant treatment strategy. The model also demonstrated that rFIXFc prophylaxis was associated with fewer incremental bleeds (- 682.29) and surgeries (- 0.39) compared with rFIX on-demand.

CONCLUSIONS

rFIXFc prophylaxis provides improved health outcomes and lower costs, and represents a cost-effective treatment option compared with rFIX on-demand for adolescent and adult male patients with haemophilia B. This comparative assessment of cost-effectiveness should help to inform both clinicians and healthcare policy makers when making treatment decisions for patients with haemophilia B.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Etranacogene Dezaparvovec Versus Extended Half-Life Prophylaxis for Moderate-to-Severe Haemophilia B in Germany

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Haemophilia B is a rare genetic disease that is caused by a deficiency of coagulation factor IX (FIX) in the blood and leads to internal and external bleeding. Under the current standard of care, haemophilia is treated either prophylactically or on-demand via intravenous infusions of FIX. These treatment strategies impose a high burden on patients and health care systems as haemophilia B requires lifelong treatment, and FIX is costly. Etranacogene dezaparvovec (ED) is a gene therapy for haemophilia B that has been recently approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration and has received a recommendation for conditional marketing authorization by the European Medicines Agency. We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of ED versus extended half-life FIX (EHL-FIX) prophylaxis for moderate-to-severe haemophilia B from a German health care payer perspective.

METHODS

A microsimulation model was implemented in R. The model used data from the ED phase 3 clinical trial publication and further secondary data sources to simulate and compare patients receiving ED or EHL-FIX prophylaxis over a lifetime horizon, with the potential for ED patients to switch treatment to EHL-FIX prophylaxis when the effectiveness of ED waned. Primary outcomes of this analysis included discounted total costs, discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness, and the incremental net monetary benefit. The annual discount rate for costs and effects was 3%. Uncertainty was examined via probabilistic analysis and additional univariate sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Probabilistic analysis indicated that patients treated with ED instead of EHL-FIX prophylaxis gained 0.50 QALYs and experienced cost savings of EUR 1,179,829 at a price of EUR 1,500,000 per ED treatment. ED was the dominant treatment strategy. At a willingness to pay of EUR 50,000/QALY, the incremental net monetary benefit amounted to EUR 1,204,840.

DISCUSSION

Depending on the price, ED can save costs and improve health outcomes of haemophilia patients compared with EHL-FIX prophylaxis, making it a potentially cost-effective alternative. These results are uncertain due to a lack of evidence regarding the long-term effectiveness of ED.

Are We Capturing the Socioeconomic Burden of Rare Genetic Disease? A Scoping Review of Economic Evaluations and Cost-of-Illness Studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Rare diseases have a significant impact on patients, families, the health system, and society. Measuring the socioeconomic burden is crucial to valuing interventions for rare diseases. Healthcare system costs are significant, but so are costs to other government sectors, patients, families, and society. To understand the breadth of costs captured in rare disease studies, we examined the cost categories and elements of socioeconomic burden captured in published studies.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted using five electronic databases to identify English language economic evaluations and cost-of-illness studies of interventions for rare diseases (2011-21). We mapped costs using a previously developed evidence-informed framework of socioeconomic burden costs for rare disease.

RESULTS

Of 4890 studies identified, 48 economic evaluations and 22 cost-of-illness studies were included. While 18/22 cost-of-illness studies utilized a societal perspective, only 7/48 economic evaluations incorporated societal costs. Most reported cost categories related to medical costs, with medication and hospitalizations being the most common elements for both study designs. Costs borne by patients, families, and society were reported less among economic evaluations than cost-of-illness studies. These included: productivity (10% vs 77%), travel/accommodation (6% vs 68%), government benefits (4% vs 18%), and family impacts (0% vs 50%).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to cost-of-illness analyses, most of the included economic evaluations did not account for the hidden burden of rare diseases, that is, costs borne by patients, families, and societies. Including these types of costs in future studies would provide a more comprehensive picture of the burden of disease, providing empirical data to inform how we value and make decisions regarding rare disease interventions, health policy, and resource allocation.

Expectation and loss when gene therapy for haemophilia is not an option: An exigency sub-study

BACKGROUND

Qualitative studies have explored why people with haemophilia (PwH) might consider or forgo gene therapy, the impact it has had on those who have received it, and what support might be needed throughout the process. No studies have yet examined what withdrawal prior to transfection might mean for PwH and their families.

AIMS

To understand the experiences of PwH and their families of withdrawal from gene therapy and to understand what support mechanisms might be required.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were conducted with people with severe haemophilia who consented to take part in a gene therapy study in the UK but either withdrew or were withdrawn before transfection.

RESULTS

Nine PwH and a family member were invited to this sub-study. Eight participants were recruited: six PwH (five haemophilia A and one haemophilia B) and two family members. Four participants were excluded from a study after consenting but before transfection, having failed to meet all the inclusion criteria; two withdrew after consenting but before transfection due to concerns including duration of factor expression and the time commitment involved in follow-up. The mean age of participants was 40.5 years (range 25-63 years). Two major themes emerged during the interviews: Expectation and loss.

CONCLUSIONS

PwH have many expectations about the difference gene therapy can make to their lives. Studies show that these expectations may not be fully realised. For those who have either withdrawn or been withdrawn from gene therapy, any expectations they had may now be unachievable. The nature of these expectations and the loss expressed by the participants indicate that support needs to be provided to help them and their families manage it.

The experiences of people with haemophilia and their families of gene therapy in a clinical trial setting: regaining control, the Exigency study

BACKGROUND

Gene therapy has the potential to change the life experience of people with haemophilia and family members. Few studies have sought to explore the impact of gene therapy on both individuals and families. The aim of this study was to capture real-life experiences of gene therapy in People with haemophilia and their families.

RESULTS

Sixteen participants with severe haemophilia (11 haemophilia A, five haemophilia B), mean age 41.4 years (range 23-75 years), took part in a single qualitative interview; ten were accompanied by a family member. Mean time since transfection was 3.56 years (range 1-10 years). Participants saw their involvement in gene therapy as a positive experience, freeing them from the personal burden of haemophilia and furthering treatment options for the wider haemophilia community. However, participants reported being unprepared for the side effects of immunosuppression. Some also reported feeling unsupported and having little control over what was happening as their factor levels became the focus of the process.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that strategies need to be put into place to enable PwH fully to understand the process of gene therapy, and thereby make an informed choice as to whether it is a treatment they might wish for themselves. These include early and ongoing education, increased provision of psychosocial support and ongoing qualitative research.

A comparison between on-demand usage of rFVIIa vs prophylaxis use of emicizumab in high titer inhibitory hemophilia A patients in Iran: A cost-utility analysis

BACKGROUND

Hemophilia A (HA) is an inherited X-linked bleeding disease with costly treatment, especially for high titer inhibitory patients. Emicizumab, a new humanized bispecific antibody, has been approved for use to prevent or reduce the frequency of bleeding episodes in HA patients with inhibitors. This study evaluated the cost-utility of emicizumab prophylaxis (EP) in comparison with recombinant factor VII activated on-demand treatment in HA patients with inhibitors.

METHODS

A life-time Markov model with payer and societal perspectives was developed in different age groups with different annual bleeding rates (ABR). Efficacy of treatments were extracted from HAVEN trials. Utilities were retrieved from published evidence. Costs were calculated based on Iran food and drug administration official website, national tariff book for medical services and hospital data. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed.

RESULTS

EP was dominant choice in comparison with on-demand administration of recombinant factor VII activated in all age groups with ABR 20 and 25, and it remained dominant in patients with age 2 and age 12 at start point with ABR 16 and 17. The reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the group with ABR 18 at the age 20, was 12,936 United States Dollars which is lower than the acceptable threshold of cost-effectiveness in Iran (1-3 gross domestic product per capita) and EP can be considered as cost-effective choice in this scenario.

CONCLUSION

EP was found to be a dominant and cost-effective choice for Iranian HA patients with factor VIII inhibitors with ABR 18 and above with considerable cost saving.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of the prophylaxis versus on-demand regimens in severe hemophilia A patients under 12 years old in southern Iran

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of these two regimens in hemophilia A patients, under-12-years-old in southern Iran.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness study comparing prophylaxis versus on-demand was conducted on 34 hemophilia patients (24 and 10 patients were on the prophylaxis and on-demand regimens respectively) in 2017. The Markov model was used to estimate the economic and clinical outcomes. The costs were collected from the societal perspective, and the utility criterion was the 'quality adjusted life year (QALY)' indicator. The required data were collected using a researcher-made cost checklist, the EQ5D standard questionnaire and Hemophilia Joint Health Score. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed to determine the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

The means of costs, joint health score and QALY in the prophylaxis regimen were $478,963.1 purchasing power parity (PPP), 96.67, and 11.98 respectively, and in the on-demand regimen were $521,797.2 PPP, 93.46 and 10.99 respectively. The PSA confirmed the robustness of the model's results. The results of the scatter plots and acceptability curves showed that the prophylaxis regimen in 97% of the simulations for the thresholds below $20950 PPP was more cost-effective than on-demand regimen.

CONCLUSION

Prophylaxis regimen showed the lower costs and higher effectiveness and utility in comparison with the on-demand regimen. It is recommended that prophylaxis should be considered as the standard care for treatment of hemophilic patients.

The Cost-effectiveness of Gene Therapy for Severe Hemophilia B: Microsimulation Study from the United States Perspective

Adeno-associated virus (AAV)-mediated gene therapy is a novel treatment promising to reduce morbidity associated with hemophilia. While multiple clinical trials continue to evaluate efficacy and safety, limited cost-effectiveness data have been published. This study compared the potential cost-effectiveness of AAV-mediated factor IX(FIX)-Padua gene therapy for severe hemophilia B patients in the United States (US) to on-demand FIX replacement and primary FIX prophylaxis, using either standard or extended half-life FIX products. A microsimulation Markov model was constructed and transition probabilities between health states and utilities were informed by published data. Costs were aggregated using a micro-costing approach. An 18-years-old till death time-horizon from the perspective of a third-party payer in the US was conducted. Gene therapy was more cost-effective than both alternatives considering a $150,000/QALY threshold. The price for gene therapy was assumed $2,000,000 in the base-case scenario, yet one of the one-way sensitivity analyses was conducted using observed manufacturing, administration and five-year follow-up cost of $87,198 for AAV-mediated gene therapy vector as derived from the manufacturing facility and clinical practice at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. One-way sensitivity analyses showed 10/102 scenarios in which gene therapy was not cost-effective compared to alternative treatments. Notably, gene therapy remained cost-effective in a hypothetical scenario in which we estimated that the discounted factor concentrate price was 20% of the wholesale acquisition cost in the US. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis estimated gene therapy cost-effective at 92% of simulations considering $150,000/QALY threshold. In conclusion, based on detailed simulation inputs and assumptions, gene therapy was more cost-effective than on-demand treatment and prophylaxis for patients with severe hemophilia B.

Adult lifetime cost of hemophilia B management in the US: payer and societal perspectives from a decision analytic model

AIMS

Hemophilia B (HB) is a rare congenital disorder characterized by bleeding-related complications which are managed by prophylactic or post-bleeding event ("on-demand") replacement of clotting factor IX (FIX). The standard of care for severe HB is life-long prophylaxis with standard half-life (SHL) or extended half-life (EHL) products given every 2-3 or 7-14 days, respectively. FIX treatment costs in the US have been investigated, but the lifetime costs of HB treatment have not been well characterized, particularly related to the impact of joint health deterioration and associated health resource utilization. We developed a decision-analytic model to explore outcomes, costs and underlying cost drivers associated with FIX treatment options over the lifetime of an adult with severe or moderately severe HB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

With participation from clinicians, health technology assessment specialists and patient advocates, a Markov model was constructed to estimate bleeding events and costs associated with health states including "bleed into joint", "bleed not into joint", "no bleed" and "death". Sub-models of joint health were based on 0, 1, or ≥2 areas of chronic joint damage. US third-party payer and societal perspectives were considered with a lifetime horizon; sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of primary findings.

RESULTS

Total adult lifetime costs per patient with severe and moderately severe HB were $21,086,607 for SHL FIX prophylaxis, $22,987,483 for EHL FIX prophylaxis, and $20,971,826 for on-demand FIX treatment. For FIX prophylaxis, the cost of FIX treatment accounts for >90% of the total HB treatment costs.

CONCLUSIONS

This decision analytic model demonstrated significant economic burden associated with the current HB treatment paradigm.

Pharmacoeconomic Analysis of Hemophilia Care in Romania

Hemophilia, a congenital X linked disease, has the serious burden of bleeding, requiring life-long replacement with coagulation factors (CF). In the present day, there is a continuously improving treatment for this condition. Objective: Our observational, cross-sectional study aims at finding out whether a prophylactic replacement with CF is affordable from the point of view of its cost-effectiveness in our country. Material and methods: A cohort of 122 persons with hemophilia were included in this patient-reported outcome survey, and they answered a questionnaire consisting of 56 items, focused on 4 domains—socio-demographic, medical, quality of health/life and cost/cost-effectiveness. Results and discussion: The markers for quality of health/life were correlated with the direct and indirect costs of care, comparing subgroup 1 of patients with prophylactic vs. subgroup 2 with on-demand replacement. Based on the incremental quality adjusted life years and the incremental costs, we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) proving that prophylaxis is more cost-effective than on-demand replacement on a long time basis. Conclusions: The ICER is a threshold recommending the reimbursement of costs for a life-long prophylactic replacement in our country.

Model of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Emicizumab Prophylaxis Treatment for Persons with Hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Hemophilia A (HA) can result in bleeding events because of low or absent clotting factor VIII (FVIII). Prophylactic treatment for severe HA includes replacement FVIII infusions and emicizumab, a bispecific factor IXa- and factor X-directed antibody.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an economic model to predict the short- and long-term clinical and economic outcomes of prophylaxis with emicizumab versus short-acting recombinant FVIII among persons with HA in the United States.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to compare clinical outcomes and costs of emicizumab versus FVIII prophylaxis among persons with severe HA from U.S. payer and societal perspectives. Patients started prophylaxis at age 1 year in the base case. Mutually exclusive health states considered were "no arthropathy," "arthropathy," "surgery," and "death." Serious adverse events, breakthrough bleeds, and inhibitor development were simulated throughout the modeled time horizon. In addition to the prophylaxis drug costs, patients could incur other direct costs related to breakthrough bleeds treatment, serious adverse events, development of inhibitors, arthropathy, and orthopedic surgery. Indirect costs associated with productivity loss (i.e., missed work or disabilities) were applied for adults. Model inputs were obtained from the HAVEN 3 trial, published literature, and expert opinion. The model used a lifetime horizon, and results for 1 year and 5 years were also reported. Deterministic sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were conducted to assess robustness of the model.

RESULTS

Over a lifetime horizon, the cumulative number of all treated bleeds and joint bleeds avoided on emicizumab versus FVIII prophylaxis were 278.2 and 151.7, respectively. Correspondingly, arthropathy (mean age at onset: 12.9 vs. 5.4 years) and FVIII inhibitor development (mean age at development: 13.9 vs. 1.1 years) were delayed. Total direct and indirect costs were lower for emicizumab versus FVIII prophylaxis for all modeled time horizons ($97,159 vs. $331,610 at 1 year; $603,146 vs. $1,459,496 at 5 years; and $15,238,072 vs. $22,820,281 over a lifetime horizon). The sensitivity analyses indicated that clinical outcomes were sensitive to efficacy inputs, while economic outcomes were driven by the discount rate, dosing schedules, and treatments after inhibitor development. Results for moderate to severe patients were consistent with findings in the severe HA population.

CONCLUSIONS

The model suggests that emicizumab prophylaxis confers additional clinical benefits, resulting in a lower number of bleeding events and delayed onset of arthropathy and inhibitor development across all time assessment horizons. Compared with short-acting recombinant FVIII, emicizumab prophylaxis leads to superior patient outcomes and cost savings from U.S. payer and societal perspectives.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this study was provided by Genentech. Raimundo and Patel are employees of Genentech and own stock or stock options. Zhou, Han, Ji, Fang, Zhong, and Betts are employees of Analysis Group, which received consultancy fees from Genentech for conducting this study. Mahajerin received consultancy fees from Genentech for work on this study. Portions of this research were presented as a poster at the 2018 American Society of Hematology Conference; December 1-4, 2018; San Diego, CA.

Cost-utility analysis of factor VIII diet therapies prepared using blood plasma vs. recombinant technique for patients with hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Hemophilia is known as one of the most common coagulation disorders whose treatment costs are particularly high in developing countries, and about 90% of them are related to factor VIII (FVIII) and direct medical costs (DMCs). Thus, the present study aimed to analyze cost-utility of two FVIII diet therapies prepared using blood plasma and recombinant technique.

METHODS

This study was an economic evaluation fulfilled through a cost-utility approach. To this end, a total number of 120 patients were randomly selected using Krejcie & Morgan's Table and then received blood plasma and recombinant FVIII. The decision tree structure was also utilized to estimate economic and clinical outcomes. Moreover, costs were reviewed from societal perspective. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was subsequently determined as the measure of effectiveness (MOE). Besides, one-way (univariate) sensitivity analysis was performed to quantify uncertainty effects of the study parameters. The information was ultimately analyzed using the TreeAge Pro 2011 and the Microsoft Office Excel 2010 software.

RESULTS

The results revealed that the recombinant diet therapy had higher costs and effectiveness compared with blood-plasma-derived FVIII, so that the mean costs of these two diet therapies were equal to 37,624 and 20,349 purchasing power parity (PPP) $ with utility scores of 0.78 and 0.62; respectively. Since the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the recombinant medications was over three times of the threshold level, it was considered as overwhelming because of its high cost in spite of its better effectiveness. Moreover, the results of one-way (univariate) sensitivity analysis demonstrated the highest sensitivity to the utility in patients who had been injected with blood-plasma-derived FVIII and had been successfully treated.

CONCLUSION

The study results revealed that FVIII prepared using blood plasma for hemophilia A patients had higher cost-effectiveness compared with that made using recombinant technique. Graphical abstract.

Inpatient Health Care Utilization in Children With Hemophilia Before and After the Joint Outcome Study Publication

The "Joint Outcomes Study" (JOS) demonstrated improved joint outcomes for patients receiving primary prophylaxis versus on-demand therapy. The impact of primary prophylaxis on inpatient health care utilization is not well-defined. To evaluate changes in hospitalization care of children with hemophilia before and after the 2007 JOS publication, this study utilized the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) to evaluate admissions for patients with hemophilia A or B (age, 2 to 7) admitted between January 2002 and 2006 (pre-JOS) and January 2010 and 2014 (post-JOS). Discharge diagnosis codes and clinical transaction classifications were used to differentiate bleeding episodes, infections, bypass agent use, length of stay, and intensive care unit (ICU) management. Overall, admissions for bleeding episodes did not change (26.5% of admissions pre-JOS vs. 23.6% post-JOS, P=0.10). However, admissions for suspected infections increased (3.0% of admissions pre-JOS vs. 7.2% post-JOS, P<0.01) while confirmed infections remained stable. Meanwhile, ICU utilization decreased (7.8% of admissions pre-JOS vs. 4.9% post-JOS, P<0.01). The necessity for ICU care in children with hemophilia has decreased since publication of the JOS. However, expanded adoption of primary prophylaxis is associated with more hospitalizations for suspected systemic infections, likely due to utilization of central venous catheters to deliver clotting factor concentrates.

Gene therapy in hemophilia A: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Gene therapy provides a potential phenotypic cure for hemophilia, yet the cost of this novel treatment is high, tempering enthusiasm and raising questions regarding cost vs benefit. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of gene therapy treatment of severe hemophilia A compared with prophylaxis with factor VIII (FVIII), we developed a Markov state-transition model to estimate the costs and effectiveness of severe hemophilia A treatment strategies from a United States health care system perspective. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were the effectiveness measure. In the base case, hypothetical cohorts of 30-year-old patients received gene therapy or FVIII prophylaxis. We obtained model probabilities and utilities from the literature and costs from Medicare reimbursement data. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of results. Over a 10-year time horizon, total per-person gene therapy strategy costs were $1.0M and resulted in 8.33 QALYs, whereas prophylaxis cost $1.7M and resulted in 6.62 QALYs. Thus, gene therapy dominated prophylaxis (costs less and was more effective). Gene therapy remained dominant unless initial costs exceeded $1.6M and were <$100 000 per 1 QALY gained compared with prophylaxis if initial costs were <$1.7M. Results were not sensitive to variation of all other parameters over clinically plausible ranges. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis simultaneously varying all parameters 3000 times over parameter distributions, gene therapy was dominant in 92% of model iterations. Treatment of severe hemophilia A with gene therapy is likely to be cost-saving or cost-effective compared with FVIII prophylaxis.

Adenovirus-associated antibodies in UK cohort of hemophilia patients: A seroprevalence study of the presence of adenovirus-associated virus vector-serotypes AAV5 and AAV8 neutralizing activity and antibodies in patients with hemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Current treatment for severe hemophilia A is replacement of deficient factor. Although replacement therapy has improved life expectancy and quality, limitations include frequent infusions and high costs. Gene therapy is a potential alternative that utilizes an adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector containing the human genetic code for factor 8 (FVIII) that transduces the liver, enabling endogenous production of FVIII. Individuals with preexisting immunity to AAV serotypes may be less likely to benefit from this treatment.

OBJECTIVES

This study measured seroprevalence of antibodies to AAV5 and 8 in an UK adult hemophilia A cohort.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Patients were recruited from seven hemophilia centres in the UK. Citrated plasma samples from 100 patients were tested for preexisting activities against AAV5 and 8 using AAV transduction inhibition and total antibodies assays.

RESULTS

Twent-one percent of patients had antibodies against AAV5 and 23% had antibodies against AAV8. Twenty-five percent and 38% of patients exhibited inhibitors of AAV5 or AAV8 cellular transduction respectively. Overall seroprevalence using either assay against AAV5 was 30% and against AAV8 was 40% in this cohort of hemophilia A patients. Seropositivity for both AAV5 and AAV8 was seen in 24% of participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for preexisting immunity may be important in identifying patients most likely to benefit from gene therapy. Clinical studies may be needed to evaluate the impact of preexisting immunity on the safety and efficacy of AAV mediated gene therapy.

Hemophilia Burden of Disease: A Systematic Review of the Cost-Utility Literature for Hemophilia

BACKGROUND

Prophylaxis with clotting factor replacement products is recommended by the Medical and Scientific Advisory Council of the National Hemophilia Foundation as the optimal therapy for the prevention of bleeding episodes in individuals with severe hemophilia A or B (< 1 IU per dL endogenous factor VIII or factor IX activity, respectively). Prophylaxis is associated with an improved health-related quality of life and has been shown to be cost-effective compared with on-demand therapy. However, the overall cost of treatment remains high, particularly among patients with a greater propensity to bleed. The overall value of hemophilia treatments and their associated benefits, measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and dollar costs compared with other interventions can be evaluated through the use of cost-utility analyses (CUAs). Previous CUA studies in hemophilia have focused primarily on patients with more severe forms of hemophilia and on prophylaxis compared with on-demand treatment. However, to our knowledge, no studies to date have utilized QALYs as a standardized outcome measure to systematically evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of current hemophilia treatment options.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the CUA literature of hemophilia treatments and demonstrate the challenges in producing cost-utility evidence compared with other rare diseases.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review using the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database for English-language CUAs published from 2000 through 2015 with the search terms hemophilia, haemophilia, factor VIII, or factor IX. Two trained reviewers independently reviewed every study to extract relevant data. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were converted to 2014 U.S. dollars using exchange rates for currency conversion and the Consumer Price Index to adjust for inflation.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 52 studies, 11 of which met our inclusion criteria. The cost-effectiveness of hemophilia treatments varied widely based on variations in the study designs, including differences in time horizon, discount rates, and medical interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

We found the cost-effectiveness of hemophilia treatments to be broadly comparable to that of other orphan drugs. Improved standardization of future CUA studies will be important for further evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of hemophilia treatments.

DISCLOSURES

This research was funded by Biogen, which provided an unrestricted research grant to the Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health at Tufts Medical Center. Biogen and Sobi reviewed and provided feedback on the manuscript. The authors had full editorial control of the manuscript and provided final approval of all content. The authors report no conflict of interest regarding the material discussed in this article. Neumann and Chambers are employed at the Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health at Tufts Medical Center. Thorat was an employee of Center for Evaluation Value and Risk in Health, Tufts Medical Center when the analyses were carried out. Chambers has participated on advisory boards for Sanofi and Astellas Pharma.

Cost-utility of a six-month programmed sports therapy (PST) in patients with haemophilia

INTRODUCTION

Recurrent musculoskeletal haemorrhages in people with haemophilia (PwH) lead to restrictions in the locomotor system and, as a result, in physical performance, too. Due to its physical and psychological benefits, sport is increasingly re-commended for haemophilic patients. Evidence on the cost-effectiveness of sports therapy is still lacking.

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of a 6-month programmed sports therapy (PST).

METHODS

The cost-effectiveness of the 6-month PST was assessed from a societal perspective alongside a RCT using cost-utility analysis. The analysis included 50 PwH with moderate-to-severe haemophilia A and B and a training period over 6 months. The health-related quality of life was measured with the EuroQoL-domain questionnaire. Resource utilization was assessed by questionnaire before and after the intervention. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve was constructed, and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

During the 6-month study period, mean adjusted total healthcare costs were lower (mean difference: -22 805 EUR; 95%-CI: -73 944-48 463; P = .59) and the number of QALYs was higher in the intervention group (mean difference: 0.3733; 95%-CI: 0.0014-0.0573; P = .04). The probability of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <50 000 EUR per QALY was 71%. The performed sensitivity analysis confirmed these results.

CONCLUSION

Results showed that the PST is effective in terms of a significant gain of QALYs. Furthermore, results weakly indicate the potential of the PST to reduce healthcare costs. Future studies should expand the observation period to have a closer look at the influence of PST on lifetime costs.

Modern Treatments of Haemophilia: Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses and Future Directions

BACKGROUND

Cost is currently one of the most important aspects in haemophilia care. Factor concentrates absorb more than 90% of healthcare direct costs of haemophilia care, and the debate regarding the high cost of haemophilia treatments and their different use across different countries is increasing.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to review cost-effectiveness analyses conducted on treatment options in haemophilia, focusing on their results and their strengths and limitations; to highlight the possible issues associated with economic evaluations of new treatment options.

METHODS

Electronic searches in PubMed and EMBASE were performed to retrieve papers published between November 2015 and September 2017 to update the previous review of economic evaluations of haemophilia treatments by Drummond et al. Reference lists of included articles and reviews were examined for relevant studies, which were assessed for their quality and their empirical results.

RESULTS

Twenty-six relevant economic analyses were identified; 15 (57.7%) were conducted in patients with haemophilia with inhibitors while 11 (42.3%) involved patients without inhibitors. There were methodological variations among the included studies, and differences in the treatment schemes make a comparative assessment of interventions for patients with haemophilia difficult. Only immune tolerance induction showed consistent results in its cost-saving profile compared with the treatment with bypassing agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations of haemophilia treatments are increasing, but the identification of general cost-effectiveness trends is still difficult in these studies. We are now facing a new era in haemophilia management with a soaring need for high-quality economic evaluations, performed through proactive collaboration between clinical experts, budget holders and health economists.

Treatment adherence in hemophilia

Prophylactic clotting-factor regimens reduce the occurrence of bleeding episodes and maintain joint health in individuals with moderate and severe hemophilia. However, these outcomes are only achieved with adherence to prescribed prophylaxis regimens. There are several types of barriers to adherence related to key patient, condition, treatment, health-care system, and/or socioeconomic variables. Notably, health-care professionals may not prescribe prophylaxis if they perceive that a patient will be nonadherent. Prophylactic treatment strategies should be developed with the patient and family, focused on individualized treatment goals. Personalized strategies are needed to reinforce the importance of and encourage confidence in administering the regular infusions required for prophylactic therapy. These strategies may include verbal and written information delivered by health-care professionals, peers, and inter-active media. The advent of extended half-life clotting factors requiring less frequent infusion may improve adherence.

COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY PROPHYLAXIS, COMPARED WITH ON-DEMAND TREATMENT, FOR PATIENTS WITH SEVERE HEMOPHILIA TYPE A IN COLOMBIA

Objectives: This article presents a cost-utility analysis from the Colombian health system perspective comparing primary prophylaxis to on-demand treatment using exogenous clotting factor VIII (FVIII) for patients with severe hemophilia type A.

Methods: We developed a Markov model to estimate expected costs and outcomes (measured as quality-adjusted life-years, QALYs) for each strategy. Transition probabilities were estimated using published studies; utility weights were obtained from a sample of Colombian patients with hemophilia and costs were gathered using local data. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the robustness of results.

Results: The additional cost per QALY gained of primary prophylaxis compared with on-demand treatment was 105,081,022 Colombian pesos (COP) (55,204 USD), and thus not considered cost-effective according to a threshold of up to three times the current Colombian gross domestic product (GDP) per-capita. When primary prophylaxis was provided throughout life using recombinant FVIII (rFVIII), which is much costlier than FVIII, the additional cost per QALY gained reached 174,159,553 COP (91,494 USD).

Conclusions: using a decision rule of up to three times the Colombian GDP per capita, primary prophylaxis (with either FVIII or rFVIII) would not be considered as cost-effective in this country. However, a final decision on providing or preventing patients from primary prophylaxis as a gold standard of care for severe hemophilia type A should also consider broader criteria than the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio results itself. Only a price reduction of exogenous FVIII of 50 percent or more would make primary prophylaxis cost-effective in this context.

The burden of inhibitors in haemophilia patients

The burden of disease in haemophilia patients has wide ranging implications for the family and to society. There is evidence that having a current inhibitor increases the risk of morbidity and mortality. Morbidity is increased by the inability to treat adequately and its consequent disabilities, which then equates to a poor quality of life compared with non-inhibitor patients. The societal cost of care, or `burden of inhibitors', increases with the ongoing presence of an inhibitor. Therefore, it is clear that successful eradication of inhibitors by immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the single most important milestone one can achieve in an inhibitor patient. The type of factor VIII (FVIII) product used in ITI regimens varies worldwide. Despite ongoing debate, there is in vitro and retrospective clinical evidence to support the use of plasma-derived VWF-containing FVIII concentrates in ITI regimens in order to achieve early and high inhibitor eradication success rates.

Modelling lifelong effects of different prophylactic treatment strategies for severe haemophilia A

BACKGROUND

Lifelong prophylactic replacement therapy with clotting factor concentrates is recommended for severe haemophilia. The prophylactic dose determines both clinical outcome and treatment cost. In the absence of clinical studies, computer simulation was used to explore lifelong effects and clotting factor consumption for various prophylactic dose levels, and optimize strategies for switching between prophylactic and on-demand treatment.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Individual patients' lifetime joint bleeds, radiological arthropathy (Pettersson score, 0-78) and consumption were simulated for each treatment strategy. Treatment effectiveness (expressed as % of patients maintaining a lifetime Pettersson score ≤14) and clotting factor consumption were modelled for lifelong prophylaxis at dose levels 1000-4500 IU kg(-1) year(-1) , for on-demand treatment and for switching strategies. Treatment efficiency (consumption per unit of effectiveness) was used to compare strategies.

RESULTS

Compared to lifelong on-demand treatment, lifelong prophylaxis at 1000 IU kg(-1) year(-1) increased effectiveness from 21 to 36%, at an additional consumption of 0.9 × 10(6) IU kg(-1) . For lifelong prophylaxis, each additional 1000 IU kg(-1) year(-1) resulted in a proportional increase in consumption by ±5 × 10(6) IU kg(-1) but a less than proportional reduction in arthropathy by ±50%; consequently, increasing consumption progressively diminished treatment efficiency. Switching strategies slightly reduce effectiveness and consumption. Optimum switching criteria were similar across prophylactic dose levels.

CONCLUSION

According to the simulation model, low-dose prophylaxis (1000 IU kg(-1) year(-1) ) improved outcome at a limited increase in consumption compared to on-demand treatment. Increasing prophylactic dose further improved health outcomes, but at decreasing efficiency. Optimal prophylactic dose should therefore be selected balancing acceptable health impact and available budget.

An innovative outcome-based care and procurement model of hemophilia management

Hemophilia is a rare bleeding disorder associated with spontaneous and post-traumatic bleeding. Each hemophilia patient requires a personalized approach to episodic or prophylactic treatment, but self-management can be challenging for patients, and avoidable bleeding may occur. Patient-tailored care may provide more effective prevention of bleeding, which in turn, may decrease the likelihood of arthropathy and associated chronic pain, missed time from school or work, and progressive loss of mobility. A strategy is presented here aiming to reduce or eliminate bleeding altogether through a holistic approach based on individual patient characteristics. In an environment of budget constraints, this approach would link procurement to patient outcome, adding incentives for all stakeholders to strive for optimal care and, ultimately, a bleed-free world.

A cohort study of the usefulness of primary prophylaxis in patients with severe haemophilia A

Primary prophylaxis is a method of haemostatic management to prevent bleeding and arthropathy in patients with severe haemophilia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of primary prophylaxis in patients with severe haemophilia A. This study included 15 patients with haemophilia A who received primary prophylaxis at our institution for a minimum of 5 years. We evaluated the annualized bleeding ratio of joints or other sites, current joint function, and X-ray images and MRI scans taken when patients were 6 years old. The range of patients' ages at the end of the study was 6.2-16.8 years, and at the start of primary prophylaxis it was 0.8-2.4 years. Factor VIII concentrates (25-40 units kg(-1) dose(-1)) were administered 3 times/week or every other day, according to the Swedish protocol. Mean joint and non-joint annualized bleeding ratios were 0.49 ± 0.5 and 1.54 ± 1.69, respectively. At the final evaluation, all patients displayed a normal range of motion for both elbows, knees, and ankles. The radiography and MRI findings at the age of 6 were unremarkable in all patients. Overall, primary prophylaxis for patients with severe haemophilia A was performed safely, reduced the number of bleeding events, and prevented progression to arthropathy.

National needs assessment of patients treated at the United States Federally-Funded Hemophilia Treatment Centers

AIM

The National Hemophilia Program Coordinating Center, with the U.S. Regional Hemophilia Network conducted a national needs assessment of U.S. Hemophilia Treatment Center (HTC) patients. The objectives were to determine: (i) To what extent do patients report that they receive needed services and education; (ii) How well do the services provided meet their needs; and (iii) What are the patients' perspectives about their care.

METHODS

A survey was mailed to active patients of 129 HTCs. Respondents completed the anonymous surveys on line or returned them by mail. Questions focused on management and information, access and barriers to care, coping, resources, and transition.

RESULTS

Of 24 308 questionnaires mailed, 4004 (16.5%) were returned. Most respondents reported very few gaps in needed services or information and reported that services and information met their needs. Over 90% agreed or strongly agreed that care was patient-centred and rated HTC care as important or very important. Identified gaps included dietary advice, genetic testing, information on ageing, sexual health and basic needs resources. Minority respondents reported more barriers.

CONCLUSION

This survey is the largest assessment of the HTC population. Respondents reported that the services and information provided by the HTCs met their needs. Quality improvement opportunities include transition and services related to ageing and sexual health. Further investigation of barriers to care for minorities is underway. Results will help develop national priorities to better serve all patients in the US. HTCs.

Costs and utilization of treatment in patients with hemophilia

Background

Although hemophilia has a potentially high economic impact, there are no published estimates of healthcare costs for this disease in Portugal. The aim of this study was to evaluate costs of treatment and hospital utilization among patients with hemophilia A and B, with and without inhibitors, over a 3-year period in a Portuguese Comprehensive Care Hemophilia Centre. This is the first study on the financial impact of healthcare costs in patients with hemophilia in Portugal.

Methods

This retrospective, observational study identified patients diagnosed with hemophilia A and B using medical and pharmacy electronic medical records and data from Centro Hospitalar São João, between January 2011 and December 2013. Patients with inhibitors were all high responders (>5 Bethesda Units [BU]). Severity was classified as mild, moderate or severe based on clotting factor levels. Two main outcomes were measured: (1) cost associated with hospital pharmacy claims (clotting factor) and (2) number of hospital visits/hospitalization.

Results

A cohort of 103 patients were identified: 72 (69.9 %) with hemophilia A and 31 (30.1 %) with hemophilia B. Among these, five individuals were classified as patients with inhibitors (four with hemophilia A and one with hemophilia B). From the cohort of hemophilia A patients, 36 individuals (35.0 %) were identified as having severe disease; 20 (19.4 %) moderate; and 16 (15.5 %) mild. In the cohort of hemophilia B patients, 14 (13.6 %) were identified as having severe disease; 14 (13.6 %) moderate; and three (2.9 %) mild. The total mean aggregate cost per year (including clotting factor and hospital utilization) for patients with severe hemophilia B was €112,469, compared with €793 for mild hemophilia A. Clotting factor concentrate amounted for 90 % of total cost in severe cases and hospital utilization was also higher in these cases.

Conclusions

Hemophilia treatment is expensive, particularly for patients with severe disease and especially if they develop inhibitors to replacement clotting factors. In our study, severe hemophilia is associated with greater annual total costs in both types of hemophilia (A = €77,587 and B = € 112,469). Patients with inhibitors have costs 3.3 times higher than patients without inhibitors. Age was not associated with significantly greater total costs (clotting factor and hospital visits/hospitalizations).

Health economic models in hemophilia A and utility assumptions from a clinician's perspective

BACKGROUND

The clinical benefits of prophylaxis in patients with hemophilia are well-established and include the following: reduced bleeding episodes, prevention of joint damage, decreased inhibitor development, and improved health-related quality of life. However, the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis is still not clear.

PROCEDURES

We reviewed the published hemophilia prophylaxis economic models focusing on utility assumptions.

RESULTS

We found six cost-utility studies that compared prophylaxis and on-demand regimens. These studies reported remarkably different results, using utility values based on different assumptions and data sources.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest that cooperation among key stakeholders (clinicians, patient organizations and health-care decision makers) as a means of collecting evidence-based and experiential data to represent both the utility and the quality of life changes for patients with Hemophilia A who are treated with prophylaxis or receive on-demand treatments may represent a winning strategy with which to resolve the outstanding issues related to health technology assessments in the care of patients with hemophilia.

Pfizer-sponsored satellite symposium at the European Haemophilia Consortium (EHC) Congress: changing the policy landscape: haemophilia patient involvement in healthcare decision-making

The annual European Haemophilia Consortium (EHC) Conference 2013, held in Bucharest, Romania, 4-5 October, was attended by over 200 patient advocates, policy makers and healthcare professionals from across Europe. Pfizer sponsored a satellite symposium at the conference entitled: 'Changing the policy landscape: haemophilia patient involvement in healthcare decision making', drawing on expertise from a panel specialising in the field of rare disease. The symposium, chaired by Declan Noone (Irish Haemophilia Society) on behalf of Brian O'Mahony (Irish Haemophilia Society), examined the current policy and economic landscape in Europe and how pressures on healthcare budgets are impacting haemophilia care. The symposium also discussed the importance of representing the 'patient voice' in key policy decisions through identification of opportunities for patient advocacy group engagement. Alastair Kent (Genetic Alliance UK) opened the session by highlighting that the downturn in the global economy has refocused decision-making in healthcare, moving cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions higher up the agenda for decision-makers and payers. In light of this, patient engagement is more important than ever, particularly in healthcare technology assessments (HTAs), to ensure that patient and family opinions are represented. Ségolène Aymé (Orphanet) built upon this in her session discussing the rare disease policy landscape and regional initiatives taking place in Europe, including the EUROPLAN process, for which the participation of the haemophilia community is critical. Finally, Declan Noone provided an example of how the EHC, through its survey of 35 countries, demonstrated not only the considerable differences in the quality of care available for people with haemophilia across Europe, but also how the data from the survey could be used as a powerful advocacy tool to initiate change in countries with lower gross domestic product (GDP) that face healthcare spending challenges. The meeting closed with a 'call to action' for patient advocacy groups, focusing on avenues by which patients can become involved in the decision-making for policies that will ultimately affect access to, and quality of, haemophilia care in their country.

Unravelling adherence to prophylaxis in haemophilia: a patients' perspective

Given the lifelong therapy in haemophilia patients, insight in non-adherence behaviour from a patient perspective is important to understand patients' difficulties with the following treatment recommendations. The aim of this study was to clarify the process underlying adherence (behaviour) to prophylactic treatment, from a patients' perspective. To develop a grounded theory, a qualitative study using individual in-depth interviews was performed to understand experiences, perceptions and beliefs concerning adherence to prophylaxis. From two Dutch treatment centres, 21 adults with haemophilia using prophylaxis were interviewed. Patients were asked how they experience their task to administer prophylaxis and how they adhere to this. The interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed in an iterative process, leading to the development of the grounded theory. Adherence was determined by the position of prophylaxis in life. The position of prophylaxis was determined by the perception of prophylaxis and the ability to exert prophylaxis. Patients' perception was influenced by two main factors: acceptance of haemophilia and feeling/fearing symptoms. The ability to exert prophylaxis was influenced by understanding haemophilia and prophylaxis and planning/infusion skills. The combination of different perceptions and skills led to four main positions of prophylaxis in life: (i) prophylaxis integrated in life, (ii) prophylaxis according to doctors' advice, struggling with irregular situations, (iii) prophylaxis is too much to handle, (iv) prophylaxis is a confrontation with illness. The adherence level gradually decreased from position 1 to 4. This information can be used to design tailored interventions to promote adherence.

Factor VIII alloantibody inhibitors: cost analysis of immune tolerance induction vs. prophylaxis and on-demand with bypass treatment

Development of inhibitors (alloantibodies to exogenous factor VIII) is the most significant treatment complication in patients with haemophilia A. The only proven way to eradicate inhibitors is through immune tolerance induction (ITI), while bypassing agents are typically employed to treat or prevent bleeds in patients with high titre inhibitors. Costs of these approaches have not been well studied. The aim of this study was to compare lifetime costs of treating patients with severe haemophilia A with inhibitors using on-demand or prophylaxis treatment with bypassing agents and ITI. A decision-analytic model was developed to compare the treatment costs and outcomes. Quantitation of the reduction in bleeding events for patients on prophylaxis and after eradication of inhibitors when on ITI and relapse of inhibitors was derived from published studies. Costs were obtained from standard US costing sources and are reported in 2014 US dollars. Costs and outcomes were discounted 3% per annum. Lifetime costs of treating patients with inhibitors are lower for ITI vs. on-demand or prophylaxis. Patients are also projected to live longer, have greater quality-adjusted life-years, and have fewer bleeding events than patients treated on-demand. Treating patients via ITI to eradicate inhibitors may result in lower lifetime costs and greater life-years and quality-adjusted life-years than treating with bypassing agents.

The social burden and quality of life of patients with haemophilia in Italy

BACKGROUND

In Italy, the project on the social burden and quality of life (QoL) of patients with haemophilia investigates costs from a society perspective and provides an overview of their quality of life. Moreover, as life expectancy increased in recent years along with new treatment strategies implemented in the last decades, it analyses trends of costs other than drugs simulating impacts during patient whole life.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We ran a web-based cross-sectional survey supported by the Italian Federation of Haemophilia Societies in recruiting patients with haemophilia and their caregivers. We developed a questionnaire to collect information on demographic characteristics, healthcare and social services consumption, formal and informal care utilisation, productivity loss and quality of life. In particular, quality of life was assessed through the EuroQoL tool. Last, we applied the illness cost method from a society perspective.

RESULTS

On average, quality of life is worse in adult patients compared to child and caregivers: more than 75% of adult patients declare physical problems, 43% of adult patients and 54% of their parents have anxiety problems. Assuming a society perspective, the estimated mean annual total cost per patient in 2012 is 117,732 €. Drugs represent 92% of total costs. Focusing on costs other than drugs, each additional point of EuroQoL tool implies a costs' reduction of 279 €. The impact of age varies across age groups: each added year implies a total decrease of costs up to 46.6 years old. Afterwards, every additional year increases costs.

DISCUSSION

Quality of life of patients with haemophilia and their caregivers improved and it influences positively on consumed resources and on their contribution to the social-economic system. Costs other than drugs for patients with haemophilia follow the same trends of general population.

Estimates of utility weights in hemophilia: implications for cost-utility analysis of clotting factor prophylaxis

Estimates of preference-weighted health outcomes or health state utilities are needed to assess improvements in health in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. Gains in quality-adjusted life-years are used to assess the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic use of clotting factor compared with on-demand treatment among people with hemophilia, a congenital bleeding disorder. Published estimates of health utilities for people with hemophilia vary, contributing to uncertainty in the estimates of cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis. Challenges in estimating utility weights for the purpose of evaluating hemophilia treatment include selection bias in observational data, difficulty in adjusting for predictors of health-related quality of life and lack of preference-based data comparing adults with lifetime or primary prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis living within the same country and healthcare system.

Haemophilia A: pharmacoeconomic review of prophylaxis treatment versus on-demand

OBJECTIVES

Haemophilia A is a congenital disorder of coagulation that mainly affects males and causes a considerable use of resources, especially when hemophilic patients are treated with prophylaxis. The aim of the present review was to discuss and appraise the methodological aspects and results of published economic evaluations of haemophilia A treatments in the last decade.

METHODS

The literature search, performed by consulting four engines, covered studies published between 2002 and 2014. Full economic evaluations published in English language were identified and included in the review. A quality assessment of the studies was also carried out based on Drummond's checklist.

RESULTS

After careful evaluations of the identified records, 5 studies were reviewed. Primary and secondary prophylaxis resulted cost-effective compared to on-demand therapy: the ICER of primary prophylaxis ranged from € 40.236 to € 59.315/QALY gained, while the ICER of secondary prophylaxis was € 40.229/QALY gained. Furthermore, 60% were high quality and 40% were medium quality studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The review underlines the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis versus on-demand treatment and the different methodological approaches applied. Further economic evaluations are required with models that reflect the clinical reality and consumption of resources in each country.