Economic evaluations in rheumatoid arthritis: a critical review of measures used to define health States

Research trends in contemporary health economics: a scientometric analysis on collective content of specialty journals

INTRODUCTION

Health economics is a thriving sub-discipline of economics. Applied health economics research is considered essential in the health care sector and is used extensively by public policy makers. For scholars, it is important to understand the history and status of health economics-when it emerged, the rate of research output, trending topics, and its temporal evolution-to ensure clarity and direction when formulating research questions.

METHODS

Nearly 13,000 articles were analysed, which were found in the collective publications of the ten most specialised health economic journals. We explored this literature using patterns of term co-occurrence and document co-citation.

RESULTS

The research output in this field is growing exponentially. Five main research divisions were identified: (i) macroeconomic evaluation, (ii) microeconomic evaluation, (iii) measurement and valuation of outcomes, (iv) monitoring mechanisms (evaluation), and (v) guidance and appraisal. Document co-citation analysis revealed eighteen major research streams and identified variation in the magnitude of activities in each of the streams. A recent emergence of research activities in health economics was seen in the Medicaid Expansion stream. Established research streams that continue to show high levels of activity include Child Health, Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and Cost-effectiveness. Conversely, Patient Preference, Health Care Expenditure and Economic Evaluation are now past their peak of activity in specialised health economic journals. Analysis also identified several streams that emerged in the past but are no longer active.

CONCLUSIONS

Health economics is a growing field, yet there is minimal evidence of creation of new research trends. Over the past 10 years, the average rate of annual increase in internationally collaborated publications is almost double that of domestic collaborations (8.4% vs 4.9%), but most of the top scholarly collaborations remain between six countries only.

Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

General population utility valuation study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop a technique for calculating utilities from the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire v2.0 (SOSGOQ2.0).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The ability to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for metastatic spine disease would enhance treatment decision-making and facilitate economic analysis. QALYs are calculated using utilities.

METHODS

Using a hybrid concept-retention and factorial analysis shortening approach, we first shortened the SOSGOQ2.0 to eight items (SOSGOQ-8D). This was done to lessen the cognitive burden of the utility valuation exercise. A general population sample of 2730 adults was then asked to evaluate 12 choice sets based on SOSGOQ-8D health states in a Discrete Choice Experiment. A utility scoring rubric was then developed using a mixed multinomial-logit regression model.

RESULTS

We were able to reduce the SOSGOQ2.0 to an SOSGOQ-8D with a mean error of 0.003 and mean absolute error of 3.078 compared to the full questionnaire. The regression model demonstrated good predictive performance and was used to develop a utility scoring rubric. Regression results revealed that participants did not regard all SOSGOQ-8D items as equally important.

CONCLUSION

We provide a simple technique for converting the SOSGOQ2.0 to utilities. The ability to evaluate QALYs in metastatic spine disease will facilitate economic analysis and patient counseling. We also quantify the importance of individual SOSGOQ-8D items. Clinicians should heed these findings and offer treatments that maximize function in the most important items.Level of Evidence: 3.

Cost-utility analysis of treatment options after initial tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy discontinuation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND: For patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who discontinued initial treatment with tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), 2 approaches are commonly used: cycling to another TNFi or switching to a drug with another mechanism of action. Currently, there is no consensus on which approach to use first. A report from the IBM MarketScan Research administrative claims database showed adalimumab (cycling strategy) and abatacept (switching strategy) were more commonly prescribed after the first TNFi discontinuation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-utility of adalimumab versus abatacept in patients with RA whose initial TNFi therapy failed. METHODS: A probabilistic cost-utility microsimulation state-transition model was used. Our target population was commercially insured adults with RA, the time horizon was 10 years, and we used a payer perspective. Patients not responding to adalimumab or abatacept were moved to the next drug in a sequence of 3 and, finally, to conventional synthetic therapy. Incremental cost-utility ratios (2016 USD per quality-adjusted-life-year gained [QALY)] were calculated. Utilities were derived from a formula based on the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index and age-adjusted comorbidity score. RESULTS: Switching to abatacept after the first TNFi showed an incremental cost of just more than $11,300 over 10 years and achieved a QALY benefit of 0.16 compared with adalimumab. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $68,950 per QALY. Scenario analysis produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio range of $44,573 per QALY to $148,558 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that switching to abatacept after TNFi therapy failure had an 80.6% likelihood of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to abatacept is a cost-effective strategy for patients with RA whose discontinue initial therapy with TNFi. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this project was provided by a Rheumatology Research Foundation Investigator Award (principal investigator: Maria A. Lopez-Olivo). Karpes Matusevich's work was supported by a Doctoral Dissertation Research Award from the University of Texas, School of Public Health Office of Research. Lal reports competing interests outside of the submitted work (employed by Optum). Suarez-Almazor reports competing interests outside of the submitted work (consulting fees from Pfizer, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Agile Therapeutics, Amag Pharmaceuticals, and Gilead). Chan, Swint, and Cantor have nothing to disclose.

Health State Utility Values in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: What is the Evidence?

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this systematic review were to identify health state utility values (HSUV) of children and adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the literature and to assess whether HSUV were appropriately reported and could be used to inform parameter inputs for a model-based cost-utility analysis to inform decision making.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, EconLit and CINAHL databases were searched in July 2019. Inclusion criteria were studies using preference-based instruments, targeting children or adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and in the English language. The quality of studies was assessed using a modified checklist that included relevant sources of bias and assessment of quality of HSUV valuation and measurement. A descriptive analysis was conducted, including assessment on reporting of population characteristics and stratification of HSUV by potential health states or population subgroup.

RESULTS

From 620 identified articles, ten reported HSUV. Seven studies reported HSUV of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and three of adults with a history of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Population disease activity status and drug treatment were reported in less than half of the studies. Six (out of ten) studies stratified HSUV results for at least one of the potential health state categories, but they represent very specific situations or interventions (e.g. patients receiving different types of physiotherapy or treated with etanercept over time).

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified critical gaps in the literature reporting HSUV in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis including a lack of HSUV measures for distinct health states, particularly in adults with a history of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. The current reported HSUV data in juvenile idiopathic arthritis are insufficient for a full cost-utility analysis with a short or lifetime horizon.

Tofacitinib in the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis: a cost-effectiveness analysis compared with adalimumab in Taiwan

Aims: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This analysis investigated the cost-effectiveness of the second-line treatment with tofacitinib, compared with adalimumab, both plus methotrexate (MTX), in patients with moderate-to-severe RA and an inadequate response to the first-line MTX, from a Taiwan National Health Insurance Administration perspective. Materials and methods: A patient-level simulation model was used to project lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Base-case analysis compared second-line treatment with tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily plus MTX vs adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks plus MTX. Patients switched or discontinued treatment due to a lack or loss of effectiveness or a serious adverse event. Efficacy was measured by change in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score. HAQ-DI scores were used to predict mortality and resource utilization, and were mapped onto utility values to estimate QALYs. Efficacy and safety data were derived from clinical trials and other secondary sources. Uncertainty in model parameters was explored using one-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: Patients gained 0.09 more QALYs with second-line tofacitinib plus MTX compared with adalimumab plus MTX (5.13 vs 5.04, respectively) at an additional cost of New Taiwan Dollars (NT$) 12,881. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was NT$143,122/QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis confirmed the base-case result was robust. Limitations: The lack of available clinical data, particularly for HAQ-DI scores, may introduce some bias in the analysis. No patients were in an early stage of RA, which may limit the generalizability of these results. Base-case results from our study are not necessarily generalizable to countries with healthcare systems that differ considerably from Taiwan. Conclusions: From a payer perspective, second-line treatment with tofacitinib plus MTX is a cost-effective treatment strategy, compared with adalimumab plus MTX, in patients with moderate-to-severe RA in Taiwan.

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, debilitating disease affecting an estimated 1.5 million patients in the US. The condition is associated with a substantial health and economic burden. An economic model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib (a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor) versus biologic therapies commonly prescribed in the US for the treatment of RA.

METHODS

A cost-utility model was developed whereby sequences of treatments were evaluated. Response to treatment was modeled by HAQ change, and informed by a network meta-analysis. Mortality, resource use and quality of life were captured in the model using published regression analyses based on HAQ score. Treatment discontinuation was linked to response to treatment and to adverse events. Patients were modeled as having had an inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR), or to a first biologic therapy (TNFi-IR).

RESULTS

The tofacitinib strategy was associated with cost savings compared with alternative treatment sequences across all modeled scenarios (i.e. in both the MTX-IR and TNFi-IR scenarios), with lifetime cost savings per patient ranging from $65,205 to $93,959 (2015 costs). Cost savings arose due to improved functioning and the resulting savings in healthcare expenditure, and lower drug and administration costs. The tofacitinib strategies all resulted in an increase in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with additional QALYs per patient ranging from 0.01 to 0.22.

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib as a second-line therapy following methotrexate failure and as a third-line therapy following a biologic failure produces lower costs and improved quality of life compared with the current pathway of care.

What is the evidence for the performance of generic preference-based measures? A systematic overview of reviews

OBJECTIVE

To assess the evidence on the validity and responsiveness of five commonly used preference-based instruments, the EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI3, 15D and AQoL, by undertaking a review of reviews.

METHODS

Four databases were investigated using a strategy refined through a highly sensitive filter for systematic reviews. References were screened and a search for grey literature was performed. Identified citations were scrutinized against pre-defined eligibility criteria and data were extracted using a customized extraction template. Evidence on known group validity, convergent validity and responsiveness was extracted and reviewed by narrative synthesis. Quality of the included reviews was assessed using a modified version of the AMSTAR checklist.

RESULTS

Thirty reviews were included, sixteen of which were of excellent or good quality. The body of evidence, covering more than 180 studies, was heavily skewed towards EQ-5D, with significantly fewer studies investigating HUI3 and SF-6D, and very few the 15D and AQoL. There was also lack of head-to-head comparisons between GPBMs and the tests reported by the reviews were often weak. Where there was evidence, EQ-5D, SF-6D, HUI3, 15D and AQoL seemed generally valid and responsive instruments, although not for all conditions. Evidence was not consistently reported across reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

Although generally valid, EQ-5D, SF-6D and HUI3 suffer from some problems and perform inconsistently in some populations. The lack of head-to-head comparisons and the poor reporting impedes the comparative assessment of the performance of GPBMs. This highlights the need for large comparative studies designed to test instruments' performance.

Specialist Bibliographic Databases

Specialist bibliographic databases offer essential online tools for researchers and authors who work on specific subjects and perform comprehensive and systematic syntheses of evidence. This article presents examples of the established specialist databases, which may be of interest to those engaged in multidisciplinary science communication. Access to most specialist databases is through subscription schemes and membership in professional associations. Several aggregators of information and database vendors, such as EBSCOhost and ProQuest, facilitate advanced searches supported by specialist keyword thesauri. Searches of items through specialist databases are complementary to those through multidisciplinary research platforms, such as PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Familiarizing with the functional characteristics of biomedical and nonbiomedical bibliographic search tools is mandatory for researchers, authors, editors, and publishers. The database users are offered updates of the indexed journal lists, abstracts, author profiles, and links to other metadata. Editors and publishers may find particularly useful source selection criteria and apply for coverage of their peer-reviewed journals and grey literature sources. These criteria are aimed at accepting relevant sources with established editorial policies and quality controls.

How to select the right cost-effectiveness model? : A systematic review and stepwise approach for selecting a transferable health economic evaluation model for rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

In the current study, we propose an approach for selection of a model that is transferable to a specific decision-making context (in this case, the Netherlands), using the case of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objectives of this study were (a) to perform a systematic literature review to identify existing health economic evaluation models for economic evaluation of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in RA; and (b) to test the appropriateness of a stepwise model-selection process.

METHODS

First, we searched Medline and Embase to identify relevant studies in the English language, published between 1 January 2002 and 31 August 2012. From the included studies, all unique models were identified. Second, we applied a multi-step approach to model selection. Models that did not meet all minimal methodological and structural requirements based on the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) criteria were excluded. Next, models were assessed on the basis of their fit when transferred to the Dutch health care setting. The criteria for model fit were transferability factors, as published by Welte et al., after exclusion of those that were deemed transferable by simple adaptation. Finally, the remaining models underwent a general quality check using the Philips checklist. Models showing good fit and high quality were considered to be transferable to the Dutch health care setting, using simple adaptation.

RESULTS

The systematic literature search identified 498 articles, which included 33 unique health economic evaluation models. Only six models passed the minimal methodological and structural requirements. Two of these models had an imperfect transferability fit to the Dutch health care setting, according to the Welte method. The remaining four models were, according to the Philips method, of good quality and were expected to be transferable by a simple adaptation.

CONCLUSION

This study introduces a stepwise approach for selecting health economic evaluation models that are transferable by a simple adaptation. The approach seems feasible and can be applied in various therapeutic areas, provided that the minimal methodological and structural requirements are defined accordingly. Availability of health economic evaluation models coupled with structured model selection could improve the efficiency, quality and comparability of health economic research.

Addition of infliximab compared with addition of sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine to methotrexate in early rheumatoid arthritis: 2-year quality-of-life results of the randomised, controlled, SWEFOT trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare EuroQol 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D) utility and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in patients with early, methotrexate (MTX) refractory rheumatoid arthritis (RA), randomised to addition of infliximab (IFX) or sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine (SSZ+HCQ).

METHODS

RA-patients with symptoms <1 year were enrolled between 2002 and 2005 at 15 Swedish centres. After 3-4 months of MTX monotherapy, patients with a remaining DAS28>3.2 were randomised to addition of IFX or SSZ+HCQ and followed for 21 months. EQ-5D profiles were collected every 3 months. Between-group comparisons of utility change and accumulated QALYs were performed, using last observation carried forward (LOCF) following protocol breach. Missing data were imputed by linear interpolation or LOCF. Sensitivity analyses applying baseline observation carried forward (BOCF) or restricted to completers were conducted.

RESULTS

Of 487 patients initially enrolled, 128 and 130 were randomised to IFX or SSZ+HCQ, respectively. Mean utility in the IFX and SSZ+HCQ groups increased from 0.52 (SD 0.27) and 0.55 (SD 0.27) at randomisation to 0.66 (SD 0.25) and 0.63 (SD 0.27) at 21 months (adjusted mean difference favouring IFX 0.04; 95% CI -0.01, 0.09; p=0.15). Average accumulated QALYs were 1.10 (SD 0.37) and 1.07 (SD 0.42) in the IFX and SSZ+HCQ groups, respectively (adjusted mean difference favouring IFX 0.07; 95%CI -0.01, 0.14; p=0.07). BOCF analysis showed similar results, while differences were reversed, though remained statistically non-significant among completers. Dropout rates in the IFX/SSZ+HCQ groups were 30%/43% (p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing addition of IFX or SSZ+HCQ to MTX in active early RA, no statistically significant differences in utility or QALY gain could be detected over 21 months.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered in WHO database at the Karolinska University Hospital, number CT20080004.

Cost Effectiveness of TNF-α Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Background. TNF-α inhibitors have shown to be effective in reducing disease activity and improving the quality of life. Due to the high costs associated with acquisition of this treatment, this study was undertaken to evaluate the ICER of TNF-α antagonists (etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab) in improving the quality of life. Methods. The HAQ and SF-36 were administered at phases 1, 2, and 3, in order to assess the improvement in the QOL. Suppression of disease activity was assessed through the DAS-28. Results. Statistically significant improvements (P < 0.05) were noted for the SF-36 and HAQ after 3 months and for the DAS-28 after 6 months of TNF-α inhibitor therapy. The mean ICER per 10% improvement in the HAQ, DAS-28, and SF-6D were €1976.5, €2086.5, and €2316.4, respectively, following 6 months of TNF-α intervention. Most favorable ICERs were reported from a patient who had to undergo surgical intervention whilst on DMARD therapy. Conclusion. Significant improvement was observed in patients' quality of life, after a short timeframe of 6 months. Such data is useful information in the light of convincing policy makers, in terms of providing access to the medications to individual patients on national health service schemes.

Multivariate meta-analysis of mixed outcomes: a Bayesian approach

Multivariate random effects meta-analysis (MRMA) is an appropriate way for synthesizing data from studies reporting multiple correlated outcomes. In a Bayesian framework, it has great potential for integrating evidence from a variety of sources. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian model for MRMA of mixed outcomes, which extends previously developed bivariate models to the trivariate case and also allows for combination of multiple outcomes that are both continuous and binary. We have constructed informative prior distributions for the correlations by using external evidence. Prior distributions for the within-study correlations were constructed by employing external individual patent data and using a double bootstrap method to obtain the correlations between mixed outcomes. The between-study model of MRMA was parameterized in the form of a product of a series of univariate conditional normal distributions. This allowed us to place explicit prior distributions on the between-study correlations, which were constructed using external summary data. Traditionally, independent ‘vague’ prior distributions are placed on all parameters of the model. In contrast to this approach, we constructed prior distributions for the between-study model parameters in a way that takes into account the inter-relationship between them. This is a flexible method that can be extended to incorporate mixed outcomes other than continuous and binary and beyond the trivariate case. We have applied this model to a motivating example in rheumatoid arthritis with the aim of incorporating all available evidence in the synthesis and potentially reducing uncertainty around the estimate of interest. © 2013 The Authors. Statistics inMedicine Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Using health state utility values in models exploring the cost-effectiveness of health technologies

BACKGROUND

To improve comparability of economic data used in decision making, some agencies recommend that a particular instrument should be used to measure health state utility values (HSUVs) used in decision-analytic models. The methods used to incorporate HSUVs in models, however, are often methodologically poor and lack consistency. Inconsistencies in the methodologies used will produce discrepancies in results, undermining policy decisions informed by cost per quality-adjusted life-years.

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of the current evidence base relating to populating decision-analytic models with HSUVs.

FINDINGS

Research exploring suitable methods to accurately reflect the baseline or counterfactual HSUVs in decision-analytic models is limited, and while one study suggested that general population data may be appropriate, guidance in this area is poor. Literature describing the appropriateness of different methods used to estimate HSUVs for combined conditions is growing, but there is currently no consensus on the most appropriate methodology. While exploratory analyses suggest that a statistical regression model might improve accuracy in predicted values, the models require validation and testing in external data sets. Until additional research has been conducted in this area, the current evidence suggests that the multiplicative method is the most appropriate technique. Uncertainty in the HSUVs used in decision-analytic models is rarely fully characterized in decision-analytic models and is generally poorly reported.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial volume of research is required before definitive detailed evidence-based practical advice can be provided. As the methodologies used can make a substantial difference to the results generated from decision-analytic models, the differences and lack of clarity and guidance will continue to lead to inconsistencies in policy decision making.

Cost-effectiveness modelling of sequential biologic strategies for the treatment of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis in Finland

Objective:

The main objective was to compare the cost-effectiveness of therapeutic options in moderate or severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) when a clinical response to a first TNF-blocker, either etanercept (ETA), adalimumab (ADA), or infliximab (INF), is insufficient.

Methods:

Effectiveness criteria were defined as remission (RS), low disease activity (LDAS), and moderate to high disease activity (MHDAS). Cost-effectiveness was derived as cost per day in RS and in LDAS using simulation modelling to assess six sequential biologic strategies over 2 years. Each sequential treatment strategy was composed of three biologic agents and included a first anti-TNF agent, ETA, ADA or INF, followed by either abatacept (ABA) or rituximab (RTX) as a second therapeutic option in case of an insufficient response, followed by another anti-TNF agent in case of further insufficient response.

Results:

Over two years and taking into account biologic costs, the following estimated mean costs per day in RS and LDAS were respectively of €829 and €428 for the biologic sequence composed of ADA-ABA-ETA, €1292 and €516 for the sequence ADA-RTX-ETA, €829 and €429 for the sequence ETA-ABA-ADA, €1292 and €517 for the sequence ETARTX- ADA, €840 and €434 for the sequence INF-ABA-ETA, and €1309 and €523 for the sequence INF-RTX-ETA.

Conclusion:

The treatment sequences including ABA as the second biologic option appear more cost-effective than those including RTX in a patients with moderate to severe RA and an insufficient response to a first anti-TNF agent.

The loss of health status in rheumatoid arthritis and the effect of biologic therapy: a longitudinal observational study

Introduction

The long-term course of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in terms of health status is not well understood, nor is the degree of effectiveness of biologic therapy in the community. We modeled the progression of loss of health status, and measured incremental costs and effectiveness of biologic therapy in the community.

Methods

We studied change in function and health status in 18,485 RA patients (135,731 observations) at six-month intervals for up to 11 years, including a group of 4,911 patients (59,630 observations) who switched to biologic therapy from non-biologic therapy. We measured the SF-36 Physical Component (PCS) and Mental Component (MCS) Summary scales, the EQ-5D health utility scale, and the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability scale; and we calculated treatment and direct medical costs.

Results

RA onset caused an immediate and substantial reduction in physical but not mental health status. Thereafter, the progression of dysfunction in RA was very slow (HAQ 0.016 units and PCS -0.125 units annually), only slightly worse than the age and sex-adjusted US population. We estimated biologic treatment to improve HAQ by 0.29 units, PCS by 5.3 units, and EQ-5D by 0.05 units over a 10-year period. The estimated incremental 10-year total direct medical cost for this benefit was $159,140.

Conclusions

Biologic therapy retards RA progression, but its effect is far less than is seen in clinical trials. In the community, cost-effectiveness is substantially less than that estimated from clinical trial data. The study results represent the incremental benefit of adding biologic therapy to optimum non-biologic therapy.

Costs and outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biological drugs in Sweden: a model based on registry data

OBJECTIVE

To design an economic model describing the costs and outcomes for patients treated with tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in current clinical practice in Sweden, to be used as a tool to estimate cost-effectiveness of the next generation of treatments.

METHODS

The model was constructed as a discrete event simulation (DES) model analysed at patient level. It contains treatment and outcome data for 1903 patients followed in the RA registry for biological drugs in southern Sweden between 1999 and 2007 [the Southern Swedish Arthritis Treatment Group (SSATG) Register]. Resource consumption was based on a survey of 1027 patients in the same region. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) are presented for 10(5) years, for patients with the mean characteristics at treatment start in SSATG [Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score 1.33, disease duration 12.1 years, age 55 years], but also for patients with more or less severe disease. Cost and outcomes (QALYs) are discounted with 3%.

RESULTS

The 10-year costs in the base case amount to USD 336,000 (SD USD 64,000) or EUR 223 000, with a total of 4.4 QALYs. Over 5 years, the costs amount to USD 208,000 or EUR 138,000 and QALYs to 2.5. The results were most sensitive to HAQ level at treatment start, but also to underlying disease progression, age, and disease duration. Starting treatment at a lower HAQ level (0.85) reduces costs by 10% and increase QALYs by 20%.

CONCLUSION

This analysis is based on the longest available follow-up for patients treated with TNFalpha inhibitors and provides an opportunity to explore treatment strategies when new therapies become available using actual clinical practice data.

Diagnosis and referral of rheumatoid arthritis by primary care physician: results of a pilot study on the city of Pisa, Italy

The aims of the present study were to evaluate, in the city of Pisa: (1) the prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis; (2) the reliability of the prevalence estimated by primary care physicians, using the rheumatologist's diagnosis as the "gold standard" and (3) the economic impact of the disease. The Tuscany registry of primary care physicians constituted the framework from which a sample of subjects was selected. The rheumatoid arthritis (RA) subjects >18 years followed by each primary care physician constituted the population studied. Each general practitioner (GP) was asked to fill out a questionnaire regarding their patients affected by RA and to send it to the tertiary rheumatologic centre, where the diagnosis was confirmed/discarded, the clinical and epidemiological data were collected in a standardized form and a number of data for the estimation of costs were gathered. The estimated prevalence of RA was 5.1 per thousand (CI, 4.4-5.7). The reliability of general practitioners in the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis was on the whole 69%. However, when an analysis of every physician was carried out, a high degree of heterogeneity in the prevalence of RA per physician was found. Overall, the mean annual cost per patient with RA was estimated at about 5,878 euro (euro; median, 6,434 euro; inter quartile range, 669-7,052 euro), with a high variability mainly dependent on the degree of patient disability. More than 90% of the overall annual cost per patient was due to the medical and non-medical direct components of costs. The prevalence of RA in Tuscany seems highly comparable with similar prevalence studies in Italy. The annual cost per patient with RA was highly variable and strictly dependent on the level of disability. More than 90% of the overall cost was due to the direct burden of costs.

Modeling the cost-effectiveness of treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with rituximab using registry data from Southern Sweden

Objectives:The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of rituximab in patients not responding adequately to the first tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor using a model constructed to predict resource consumption and health outcomes in a population-based registry of biological treatments in Southern Sweden (SSATG).

Methods:The model was developed as a discrete event simulation model, using SSATG data for the years 1999–2007. The data set included 1,903 patients with complete data on treatments (up to three treatment lines), functional capacity (HAQ), disease activity (DAS28), and utility (EQ-5D). Resource consumption was based on a regular population-based survey of patients in Southern Sweden. Rituximab was incorporated as second line treatment, using effectiveness data for the active group (N= 311) in a clinical trial comparing rituximab to placebo (REFLEX). It is thus compared to the mix of second line biologics used in SSATG. The analysis starts after failure of the first TNF inhibitor. Results are reported as costs (€2008) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY; both discounted 3 percent), for the societal perspective in Sweden.

Results:Total costs in the rituximab strategy are estimated at €401,100 compared with €403,000 in the TNF-inhibitor arm. Total QALYs are 5.98 and 5.78, respectively. The findings were found to be robust in extensive sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions:In our model, a strategy where rituximab is used as second line treatment after failure of the first TNF inhibitor provides a small saving (essentially due to the lower price of rituximab) and a QALY gain (due to better effect than the mix of second line TNF inhibitors).