Cost impact of different treatment regimens of brolucizumab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: A budget impact analysis

BACKGROUND: Brolucizumab is a new anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) approved for treating neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Multiple treatment regimens are available for treating nAMD. These regimens include manufacturer-recommended regimens, pro re nata (PRN) regimens, and treat-and-extend (T&E) regimens, which are based on clinical practice guidelines and data observed in the real-world clinical setting, classified as real-world evidence (RWE). Most budget impact models predict the financial consequences of adding a new drug to the formulary based on the manufacturer-recommended regimen. With different anti-VEGF treatment regimens being used in nAMD by ophthalmologists, it is OBJECTIVE: To estimate the budget impact of different treatment regimens of brolucizumab in nAMD from a US payer perspective. METHODS: A Microsoft Excel-based budget impact model was developed for different treatment regimens of brolucizumab over a 1-year time frame from a US payer perspective. A separate analysis was performed to estimate the budget impact from a US patient population perspective. Model inputs included drug costs, administration costs, physician visit costs, and disease monitoring costs. Outcomes in the budget impact model included the cost per member per month, annual health plan cost, and the US patient population-based annual cost. Based on the prevalence of nAMD in public and commercial health plans, a scenario analysis was conducted on the US population to account for the differences in the drug cost to the public and commercial payers. Further, 1-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to test model assumptions and uncertainty in model inputs. RESULTS: The addition of brolucizumab to the formulary increased the net budgetary impact under PRN and T&E regimens. The maximum increase in expenditure for a hypothetical health plan with 1 million enrollees was associated with the PRN regimen ($824,696), followed by the T&E regimen ($163,101). In contrast, using the manufacturer-recommended and RWE regimens led to an annual saving of $93,068 and $94,170 for the health plan, respectively. In the US patient population model, the introduction of brolucizumab resulted in savings in the manufacturer-recommended ($30.99 million) and RWE regimens ($31.35 million) but led to an increase in annual expenditures for the PRN ($274.58 million) and T&E ($54.30 million) regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Payers need to evaluate the cost impact of different treatment regimens of existing and new anti-VEGFs when making formulary decisions in nAMD management. DISCLOSURES: Mr Siddiqui, Ms Dhumal, Dr Patel, and Dr LeMasters have nothing to disclose. Dr Kamal has received research funding from Cerevel Therapeutics, served as a consultant to Pfizer/Cytel Inc, and received honoraria from Pharmacy Times Continuing Education. Dr Almony has served as a consultant to Cardinal Health and received honoraria from Pharmacy Times Continuing Education and Prime Education.

Cost and Outcomes Analysis of Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy (Aneurysmal Type 1 Neovascularization) Treatment Strategies

Purpose:

This work compares the relative cost utility of ranibizumab and aflibercept with and without verteporfin photodynamic therapy (vPDT) for the treatment of polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy.

Methods:

A retrospective cost and outcomes analysis of the PLANET (Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Aflibercept for Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy) and EVEREST II (Efficacy and Safety of Ranibizumab With or Without Verteporfin Photodynamic Therapy for Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy) studies was performed. Clinical utilization and outcomes were based on data from these clinical trials, and costs were obtained from Medicare fee schedules. Cost utility was derived from published visual outcomes and expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Cost per QALY and cost per line of vision gained for each treatment strategy (in US dollars) were assessed as the main outcome measure.

Results:

The 1-year facility (nonfacility) costs per QALY were $295,744.41 ($260,088.19), $209,574.09 ($182,831.77), $211,072.63 ($188,425.33), and $212,275.22 ($189,703.05) for ranibizumab as-needed monotherapy, ranibizumab as-needed with combination therapy, aflibercept monotherapy, and aflibercept with delayed vPDT combination therapy, respectively.

Conclusions:

Ranibizumab as-needed monotherapy was the least clinically effective and least cost efficient over 1 year. Ranibizumab as-needed with combination therapy, aflibercept monotherapy, and aflibercept with deferred vPDT combination therapy all had similar overall cost utility at 1 year. If bevacizumab were to be substituted for ranibizumab, the cost per QALY could be reduced by approximately a factor of 5, showing the benefit of bevacizumab for increasing the cost utility of polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy treatment.

A Multinational Comparison of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Use: The United States, the United Kingdom, and Asia-Pacific

PURPOSE

A comparison of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) medication use across multiple countries.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Anti-VEGF medication use is now considered first-line treatment for numerous retinal diseases globally. Exploring medication choices, costs within each healthcare system, policy challenges, emerging treatments, and patient access all provide insight into a newly recognized and major public health issue.

METHODS

All data presented in this review are available through the published English literature in PubMed, non-peer-reviewed trade publications, and reported surveys. The following search terms were used: anti-VEGF OR bevacizumab OR ranibizumab OR aflibercept OR pegaptanib OR conbercept AND trends OR survey OR cost OR patterns OR preference. Countries with large populations and available data included the United States, United Kingdom, China, India, Korea, Singapore, and Australia. Population and economic statistics were obtained from published reports from the World Bank, World Health Organization, and Commonwealth Fund.

RESULTS

Anti-VEGF medication use and costs are significant aspects of patient and healthcare system expenditures in each nation and may have an especially large potential economic burden in India and China. Bevacizumab use comprises the majority of anti-VEGF medication use in the United States and Singapore, although aflibercept use is growing rapidly. Paradoxically, data demonstrate that there is a significant trend in medication choice toward ranibizumab and aflibercept among practice settings outside of the United States, such as the United Kingdom, China, South Korea, and Australia. The price of anti-VEGF medications ranged from US $30 (ziv-aflibercept) to US $1950 (ranibizumab and aflibercept). Ranibizumab's price ranged from US $240 in India to US $1950 in the United States. Conbercept in China costs approximately US $1150 per dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Outside of the United States, many nations are using a majority of more expensive anti-VEGF medications, which may lead to increased costs and decreased access. Increasing the availability of safely compounded anti-VEGF medications will likely improve access, create patient/provider choice, and decrease relative healthcare costs for the growing burden of retinal diseases globally.