Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Celecoxib versus Ibuprofen and Naproxen in Patients with Osteoarthritis in United Arab Emirates Based on the PRECISION Trial

The cost-effectiveness of guideline-recommended treatments for osteoarthritis: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To critically appraise the literature on the cost-effectiveness of guideline-recommended treatments for osteoarthritis (OA).

DESIGN

Electronic databases were searched for studies that provided incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) for treatments recommended by key international guidelines to manage OA in adults. Treatments were grouped as lifestyle and rehabilitative therapies, pharmacological, injection, or surgical. Primary outcome was ICERs, converted to 2023 US dollars for comparability across studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist for trials and the Drummond checklist for modelling studies. Studies were deemed cost-effective based on established country-specific thresholds per quality-adjusted life-year.

RESULTS

There were 110 studies that included 33 lifestyle and rehabilitative therapies, 25 pharmacological, 11 injection and 42 surgical studies. Most studies (95%) were conducted in high-income countries. Time horizons varied from 8 weeks to a lifetime. Risk of bias domains were frequently scored poorly related to cost methods. Overall, the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle and rehabilitative therapies and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) was mixed. Hyaluronic acid injection was cost-effective in knee OA compared to placebo, usual care and paracetamol but not to corticosteroid injections and NSAIDs. Total hip or knee replacement was cost-effective compared to usual care or no surgery, with early access to replacement cost-effective compared to delaying surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a diversity of analytical perspectives and clinical heterogeneity of interventions. Policymakers should consider their local context when deciding clinical care and resource allocation.

Decision-Analytical Modelling of Medicines in the Middle East: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluation Studies

BACKGROUND

Economic evaluations through decision-analytical models have played a limited role in shaping healthcare resource optimisation and reimbursement decisions in the Middle East.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to systematically examine economic evaluation studies focusing on decision-analytical models of medicines in the Middle East, defining methodological characteristics and appraising the quality of the identified models.

METHODS

A systematic review approach was employed to identify published decision-analytical models of medicines in the Middle East. Six databases were searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Econlit, Web of Science, Global Health Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry and the Global Index Medicus) from 1998 to July 2024. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria-full economic evaluations of medicines using decision-analytical models in the Middle East-were considered. Data were extracted and tabulated to include study characteristics and methodological specifications, and data were narratively analysed. The Philips checklist was used to assess the quality of studies.

RESULTS

Sixty-three decision-analytical modelling studies of medicines were identified and reviewed, from eight Middle Eastern countries, with the majority (90%) conducted in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Egypt. The cost-effectiveness of medications for non-communicable diseases was explored in 77% of the models. Gross domestic product-based cost-effectiveness thresholds were commonly used, and international sources provided data on intervention effectiveness and health outcomes, while national sources were mainly used for the costs of resource use. Most models incorporated an assessment of parameter uncertainty, whereas other types of uncertainty were not explored. Studies from high-income countries were generally of higher quality than those from middle-income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of published decision-analytical models in the Middle East was low, considering the available medicinal products and disease burden. Key elements related to the quality of decision-analytical models, including analysis of the model structure, appropriateness of model inputs and uncertainty assessment, were not consistently fulfilled. Recommendations are provided to enhance the quality of future economic evaluation studies. This includes strengthening the existing health economics capacities, establishing country-specific health technology assessment systems (where possible), and initiating collaborations to generate national cost and outcome data. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021283904.

The economic burden of systemic lupus erythematosus in United Arab Emirates

AIMS

Our study aims to provide an enhanced comprehension of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) burden in United Arab Emirates (UAE), over a five-year period from payer and societal perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Markov model was established to simulate the economic consequences of SLE among UAE population. It included four health states: i) the three phenotypes of SLE, representing mild, moderate, and severe states, and ii) death. Clinical parameters were retrieved from previous literature and validated using the Delphi panel-the most common clinical practice within the Emirati healthcare system. We calculated the disease management, transient events, and indirect costs by macro costing. One-way sensitivity analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

The estimated number of SLE patients in our study was 13,359. The number of SLE patients with mild, moderate, and severe phenotypes was 3,914, 8,109, and 1,336, respectively. Disease management costs, including treatment of each phenotype and disease follow-up, were AED 2 billion ($0.89 billion), whereas the costs of transient events (infections, flares, and consequences of SLE-related organ damage) were AED 1 billion ($0.44 billion). The productivity loss costs among adult-employed patients with SLE in the UAE were estimated at AED 7 billion ($3.1 billion). The total SLE cost over five years from payer and societal perspectives is estimated at AED 3 ($1.3 billion) and 10 billion ($4.4 billion), respectively. Additionally, the costs per patient per year from the payer and societal perspectives were AED 45,960 ($20,610) and AED 148,468 ($66,578), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that the burden of SLE in the UAE is enormous, mainly because of the costly complications and productivity loss. More awareness should be created to limit the progression of SLE and reduce the occurrence of flares, necessitating further economic evaluations of novel treatments that could help reduce the economic consequences of SLE in the UAE.

Microsimulation model of the cost-effectiveness of anifrolumab compared to belimumab in the United Arab Emirates

INTRODUCTION

SLE imposes a significant morbidity and mortality as well as a substantial burden on the healthcare system. The model aimed to measure the cost-effectiveness of anifrolumab implementation against belimumab as an add-on-therapy to the standard of care (SoC) over a lifetime horizon for Emirati patients.

METHODOLOGY

A microsimulation model was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of anifrolumab against belimumab (IV/SC) as an add-on therapy to SoC in a hypothetical cohort of adult Emirati patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) over a lifetime horizon. The clinical data was captured from published clinical trials as; TULIP-1, TULIP-2, BLISS-52, BLISS-76 and BLISS-SC. Health utility scores were constructed according to a linear regression model from the pooled data of the two TULIP Phase III trials of anifrolumab. Our model captures direct SLE-related medical costs from the Dubai Health Authority. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess model uncertainty.

RESULTS

Using BICLA as a response criterion in the Johns Hopkins cohort, anifrolumab was found to be more effective than belimumab (IV/SC; the incremental discounted QALY of anifrolumab against belimumab was 0.42). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of anifrolumab against belimumab IV and belimumab SC were AED 466,371 ($209,135) and AED 252,612 ($113,279), respectively, these ICERs are below the cost-effectiveness threshold in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) (three times gross domestic product capita; AED 592,278). In the Toronto lupus cohort, the ICER of anifrolumab against belimumab IV and belimumab SC were AED 491,403 ($220,360) and AED 276,642 ($124,055), respectively (anifrolumab was a cost-effective option vs. belimumab IV and belimumab SC).

CONCLUSION

The addition of anifrolumab to SoC is a cost-effective option versus belimumab for the treatment of adult patients with active, autoantibody-positive SLE, despite being allocated to SoC. Cost-effectiveness was demonstrated by a reduction in complications and organ damage, which reflected costs and outcomes.

Cost Effectiveness of Pharmacological Management for Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent, disabling disease requiring chronic management that is associated with an enormous individual and societal burden. This systematic review provides a global cost-effectiveness evaluation of pharmacological therapy for the management of OA.

METHODS

Following Center for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) guidance, a literature search strategy was undertaken using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation database (NHS EED) to identify original articles containing cost-effectiveness evaluation of OA pharmacological treatment published before 4 November 2021. Risk of bias was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for economic evaluations. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was used to assess the reporting quality of included articles.

RESULTS

Database searches identified 43 cost-effectiveness analysis studies (CEAs) on pharmacological management of OA that were conducted in 18 countries and four continents, with one study containing multiple continents. A total of four classes of drugs were assessed, including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioid analgesics, symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis (SYSADOAs), and intra-articular (IA) injections. The methodological approaches of these studies showed substantial heterogeneity. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) were (in 2021 US dollars) US$44.40 to US$307,013.56 for NSAIDS, US$11,984.84 to US$128,028.74 for opioids, US$10,930.17 to US$27,799.73 for SYSADOAs, and US$258.36 to US$58,447.97 for IA injections in different continents. The key drivers of cost effectiveness included medical resources, productivity, relative risks, and selected comparators.

CONCLUSION

This review showed substantial heterogeneity among studies, ranging from a finding of dominance to very high ICERs, but most studies found interventions to be cost effective based on specific ICER thresholds. Important challenges in the analysis were related to the standardization and methodological quality of studies, as well as the presentation of results.