Real-life cost-effectiveness of benralizumab in patients with severe asthma

Real-world clinical remission of severe asthma with benralizumab in Spanish adults with severe asthma

OBJECTIVE

Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma experience high risk of exacerbations and reduced quality of life. Benralizumab, a monoclonal antibody binding to IL-5 receptor α subunit, is an approved drug for its treatment. The objective was to describe clinical remission after benralizumab prescription in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

Retrospective multicenter study with data from four hospitals in Valencian Community (Spain) with asthma units between 2019 and 2020. Data was gathered at baseline and after 12 months. We considered clinical remission after 1 year if the patient remained without exacerbations and use of systemic corticosteroids and with good clinical control and normal lung function.

RESULTS

Data from 139 patients was gathered. At the 12-month follow-up, 44.1% were in clinical remission, since 84.0%, 77.5%, 51.0% and 95.5% of patients did not experience exacerbations, had total asthma control test score of ≥20, prebronchodilator FEV1 of ≥80% and did not use systemic corticosteroids. A significant reduction of long-acting muscarinic antagonists (p = 0.0001), leukotriene receptor antagonists (p = 0.0326), oral corticosteroids (p < 0.0001) and short-acting beta agonists (p = 0.0499) was observed. Baseline factors with greatest individual influence on clinical remission were employment situation, tobacco use, comorbidity number, eosinophil value, number of exacerbations, FEV1, emergency visit number, and ACT, MiniAQLQ and TAI scores. Final analysis of multiple logistic regression indicated that having baseline FEV1 value below 80% increases remission chance 9.7 times a year compared to FEV1 >80%.

CONCLUSION

Clinical remission after treatment with benralizumab is achievable in a high percentage of patients with severe asthma eosinophilia not controlled in real life.

Real-world association between systemic corticosteroid exposure and complications in US patients with severe asthma

BACKGROUND

Systemic corticosteroid (SCS) use remains widespread among patients with severe asthma, despite associated complications.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the association between cumulative SCS exposure and SCS-related complications in severe asthma.

METHODS

This retrospective, longitudinal study used claims data from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database (GSK ID: 214469). Eligible patients (≥ 12 years old) had an asthma diagnosis and were divided into two cohorts: SCS use and non/burst-SCS use. Patients in the SCS use cohort had a claim for a daily prednisone-equivalent dose ≥ 5 mg SCS following ≥ 6 months of continuous SCS use; those in the non/burst-SCS cohort had no evidence of continuous SCS use and had a non-SCS controller/rescue medication initiation claim. For each cohort, the date of the qualifying claim was the index date. SCS users were further stratified by SCS use during each quarter of follow-up: low (≤ 6 mg/day), medium (> 6-12 mg/day), high (> 12 mg/day), and continuous high (≥ 20 mg/day for 90 days). SCS-related complications were evaluated in the quarter following SCS exposure. The adjusted odds ratios (OR) of experiencing SCS-related complications during follow-up in each of the SCS use groups versus the non/burst SCS cohort were calculated using generalized estimating equations models.

RESULTS

SCS and non/burst-SCS use cohorts included 7473 and 89,281 patients (mean follow-up: 24.6 and 24.2 months), respectively. Compared with the non/burst-SCS use cohort, medium, high, and continuous high SCS use was associated with greater odds of any SCS-related complication (adjusted OR [95% confidence interval]: 1.30 [1.21, 1.39], 1.49 [1.35, 1.64] and 1.63 [1.40, 1.89], respectively) including increased acute gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, and immune system-related complications, and chronic cardiovascular, metabolic/endocrine, central nervous system, bone-/muscle-related, ophthalmologic, and hematologic/oncologic complications. Low-dose SCS use was also associated with significantly increased odds of acute gastrointestinal and immune system-related complications, and chronic bone-/muscle-related and hematologic/oncologic complications versus the non/burst-SCS use cohort.

CONCLUSION

SCS use, even at low doses, is associated with increased risk of SCS-related complications among patients with severe asthma.

Achieving clinical outcomes with benralizumab in severe eosinophilic asthma patients in a real-world setting: orbe II study

BACKGROUND

The ORBE II study aimed to describe the characteristics and clinical outcomes of adult patients with severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) treated with benralizumab in a real-world setting in Spain.

METHODS

ORBE II (NCT04648839) was an observational, retrospective cohort study in adult SEA patients who had been prescribed benralizumab. Demographic and clinical data of 204 SEA patients were collected 12 months prior to benralizumab initiation (baseline) and at follow-up. Exacerbation rate, asthma symptoms, maintenance oral corticosteroid (OCS) use and lung function were evaluated, among other variables.

RESULTS

A total of 204 SEA patients were evaluated. Mean (standard deviation, SD) age of the study population was 56.4 (12.4) years, 62.3% were women and mean (SD) duration of asthma was 15.1 (12.7) years. Median (Q1-Q3) follow-up duration was 19.5 (14.2-24.2) months. At baseline, 72.6% of the overall population (OP) presented blood eosinophil counts ≥ 300 cells/µL; 36.8% had comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP); 84.8% reported at least one severe exacerbation, and 29.1% were OCS-dependent. At 1 year of follow-up, patients receiving benralizumab treatment had a 85.6% mean reduction in exacerbations from baseline, and 81.4% of patients achieved zero exacerbations. We also found a clinically relevant mean (SD) increase in pre-bronchodilator (BD) FEV1 of 331 (413) mL, with 66.7% of patients achieving a pre-BD FEV1 increase ≥ 100 mL, and 46.3% of patients achieving a pre-BD FEV1 ≥ 80% of predicted. Regarding symptom control, 73.8% of the OP obtained an ACT score ≥ 20 points. After 1 year of follow-up, mean reduction in the daily OCS dose was 70.5%, and complete OCS withdrawal was achieved by 52.8% of the OCS-dependent patients. Almost half (43.7%) of the OP on benralizumab met all four criteria for clinical remission. Patients with concomitant CRSwNP obtained similar or enhanced outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the real-world benefits of benralizumab in SEA patients, and particularly in those with concomitant CRSwNP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04648839.

Influence of anti-interleukin (IL)-5/anti-IL-5 receptor-α treatment on work productivity in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma

This retrospective study shows that treatment with anti-eosinophilic antibodies in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma is associated with an increase in work productivity and a decrease in missed days at work https://bit.ly/3IIPppR.

Economic evaluation of biological treatments in patients with severe asthma: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a highly prevalent disease, one of the chronic diseases with the highest economic costs; thus, it imposes a high economic burden on society, the healthcare system, patients, and third-party payers. Contrary to this study, until now, systematic reviews of economic evaluations (EEs) of treatments for severe asthma have not been exclusively focused on biological treatments, and have included a small number of studies and only model-based EEs.

METHODS

This study systematically reviews EEs of biological therapies for severe asthma published until December 2022 using PRISMA guidelines. The review analyzes the cost-effectiveness of biologicals in comparison to SOC, or SOC plus OCS. The quality of the EEs is assessed using Consensus on Health Economics Checklist extended (CHEC-extended).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies were eligible: 15 based on a Markov model, and 19 trial-based; eight adopting societal and NHS perspectives, and seven the payer's perspective. The reviewed EEs addressed cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and incremental costs and outcomes comparison. Their findings were mainly expressed through ICER-incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (24 studies: 13 concluded that biological were cost-effective) and cost comparison analysis (14 studies: 6 concluded that biological were cost-effective), and were sensitive to a wide variety of factors (e.g. medication cost, treatment response, time horizon, utility benefits, mortality, exacerbation rate, discount rate, etc.).

CONCLUSIONS

There has been some ambiguity concerning the EE of biological therapies due to variation in choice of study design and contradictory results. Nevertheless, it can be concluded that biological treatments improve health outcomes, in many contexts at a high cost.

Incremental net monetary benefit of biologic therapies in moderate to severe asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of economic evaluation studies

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis was conducted to quantitatively pool the incremental net benefit (INB) of using biologic therapies as an add-on treatment to standard therapy in patients with moderate to severe asthma.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search in several databases published until April 2022. Studies were included if they were cost-effectiveness analyses reporting cost per quality-adjusted life-year or life-year on any biologic therapies as an add-on treatment for moderate to severe asthma in patients of all ages. Various monetary units were converted to purchasing power parity, adjusted to 2021 US dollars. The INBs were pooled across studies using a random-effects model, stratified by country income level (high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)) and perspectives (health care or payer perspective (HCPP) and societal perspective (SP)) and age group (>12 years and 6-11 years). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 32 comparisons from 25 studies were included. Pooled INB indicated that the use of omalizumab as an add-on treatment to standard therapy in those aged >12 years was not cost-effective in HICs from the HCPP (n = 8, INB, -6,341 (95% CI, -$25,000 to $12,210), I²=86.18%) and SP (n = 5, -$14,000 (-$170,000 to $140,000), I²=75.64%). A similar finding was observed in those aged 6-11 years from the HCPP in LMICs (n = 2, -$45,000 (-$73,000 to $17,000), I²=00.00%). Subgroup analyses provided no explanations of the potential sources of heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

The use of biologic therapies in moderate to severe asthma is not cost-effective compared to standard treatment alone.

Comparison between clinical trials and real-world evidence studies on biologics for severe asthma

In recent years, the more widespread availability of biological drugs with specific mechanisms of action has led to significant breakthroughs in the management of severe asthma. Over time, numerous randomised clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of these biologics and define the eligibility criteria of patients suitable for various therapeutic options. These studies were conducted under controlled conditions not always applicable to real life. For this and other reasons, real-world evidence and pragmatic studies are required to provide useful information on the effectiveness of biological drugs and their safety, even in the long term. Because differences in outcomes have sometimes emerged between clinical trials and real-life studies, it is important to clarify the causes of these discrepancies and define the significance of the results of studies conducted in the course of daily clinical practice. Thus, a scientific debate is ongoing, and no consensus has been reached. The purpose of this narrative review is to analyse the differences between randomised trials and real-world evidence studies, focusing on their roles in guiding clinicians among different therapeutic options and understanding the reasons for the large discrepancies often found in the results obtained.

Primary antibody deficiencies represent an underestimated comorbidity in asthma patients: efficacy of immunoglobulin replacement therapy in asthma control

OBJECTIVE

Primary antibody deficiencies (PAD) are an underestimated comorbidity in asthma and its treatment could improve disease control.

METHODS

a retrospective cohort of asthmatics, affected by IgG subclass deficiency or unclassified antibody deficiency and treated with low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IRT) was recruited. Demographic and clinical data, chest CT scan, blood eosinophils, atopy, chronic oral corticosteroid (OCS) therapy were evaluated at baseline. Asthma exacerbations, lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI), upper respiratory tract infections (URTI) and asthma-related hospitalizations were assessed after one and two years of IRT.

RESULTS

57 moderate-to-severe asthmatics were enrolled, mostly affected by T2 low asthma (39/57, 68.4%). After one year, IRT was effective in improving, irrespective of bronchiectasis, atopy, eosinophils and PAD type: 1) trough IgG (826.9 ± 221.3 vs 942.2 ± 195.1 mg/dl; p < 0.0001) and IgG subclasses (IgG1 355.4 ± 88.4 vs 466.7 ± 122.3, p < 0.0001; IgG2 300.1 ± 130.1 vs 347.6 ± 117.3, p < 0.0005) serum levels. 2) asthma exacerbations (6.4 ± 4.1 vs 2.4 ± 1.9, p < 0.0001), LRTI (4.3 ± 3.9 vs 1.3 ± 1.5, p < 0.0001) and hospitalization rate (0.26 ± 0.7 vs 0.05 ± 0.2, p < 0.01). These results persisted after 2 years of therapy. Estimated mean cumulative OCS exposure was reduced by 4500 mg over the 2-year period.

CONCLUSIONS

low-dose IRT is effective in improving asthma control and lessening OCS burden in asthmatics affected by PAD.

Reliability, Satisfaction and Effectiveness of Benralizumab Home Self-Administration in Patients with Severe Eosinophilic Asthma in Real-World Practice: The Auto-Benra Study

Introduction

The increase in drugs available for severe uncontrolled asthma and the lifestyle of these patients make it necessary to implement self-administration programs of these therapies at home. Benralizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting IL5R, was authorized in Spain for poorly controlled severe eosinophilic asthma. The possibility of administration at home was approved in March 2020 in Spain. The aim of the Auto-Benra study was to evaluate the usability and satisfaction of the benralizumab prefilled syringe and autoinjector and assessing the effectivity of these devices in uncontrolled severe eosinophilic asthma (SEA) in home-self administration.

Methods

This is a retrospective, observational multicenter study uncontrolled SEA patients treated with benralizumab at least with 3 doses self-administered at home before April 30, 2021. Reliability and satisfaction with benralizumab at home were evaluated with subcutaneous administration assessment questionnaire (SQAAQ) and visual analogic scales (VAS). Effectiveness was evaluated in all patients with asthma control test (ACT), Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (MiniAQLQ), annual exacerbation rate, oral corticosteroid treatment (OCS) and asthma-related hospitalizations and emergency visits.

Results

Fifty-four patients across 9 hospitals in Spain were included. The mean SQAAQ score was 6.89 (±0.16) points. Patients and their caregivers and doctors report excellent satisfaction by VAS, with no differences between benralizumab devices used (prefilled syringe and autoinjector). Severe exacerbation rate decreased by 65% (p = 0.0007) after benralizumab treatment. ACT score improved on average 6.27 ± 5.35 points (p < 0.0001) and the mean MiniAQLQ increased up to 1.58 ± 1.47 points (p < 0.0001). Twenty-four patients were OCS-dependent and at the end of study 14 patients get complete OCS withdrawal.

Conclusion

AUTO-BENRA study supports the use of benralizumab at home given the excellent results of satisfaction and usability by patients and their caregivers.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the first-line EGFR-TKIs in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer

AIM

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line treatments, such as erlotinib, gefitinib, afatinib, dacomitinib, and osimertinib, for patients diagnosed with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC harboring EGFR mutations.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A partitioned survival model was developed to estimate quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. Two Bayesian NMAs were performed independently, by using the polynomial fraction method to fit Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival and progression-free survival. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the uncertainty.

RESULTS

The ICER was calculated for the four first-line treatments by comparing them with gefitinib, and the ratios obtained were as follows: €166,416/QALY for osimertinib, €183,682/QALY for dacomitinib, €167,554/QALY for afatinib, €36,196/QALY for erlotinib. It was seen that patients who received osimertinib presented higher QALYs (0.49), followed by dacomitinib (0.33), afatinib (0.32), erlotinib (0.31), and gefitinib (0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Gefitinib is the most cost-effective treatment. In terms of QALYs gained, Osimertinib was more effective than all other TKIs. Nevertheless, with a Spanish threshold of €24,000/QALY, the reduction in the acquisition cost of osimertinib will have to be greater than 70%, to obtain a cost-effectiveness alternative.