The Inflation Reduction Act: Implications for Medicare spending and access to biologic therapies for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis and asthma.

KEY POINTS: In 2021, Medicare spending on biologics was $926 million in Part B (FFS) and $1.3 billion in Part D (FFS/MA). Between 2017 and 2021, annual Medicare spending on biologics increased by approximately 200%. Between 2023 and 2025, Medicare Part D OOP costs for biologics will decrease by an estimated 50%-60%.

Clinical and economic burden of severe asthma among US patients treated with biologic therapies.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe asthma may remain uncontrolled despite biologic therapy in addition to standard therapy, but this disease burden has not been quantified. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the clinical and economic burden in a US national sample. METHODS: Patients who have severe asthma with indicated biologic treatment (earliest use = index date) were selected from the MarketScan database between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2018. Inclusion criteria were continuous enrollment for 12 months postindex with a minimum of 2 biologic fills, greater than or equal to 12 years of age, evidence of medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß-agonist combination before the index, and absence of other respiratory diagnoses and malignancies. Disease exacerbations (used to classify asthma control), health care costs, and treatment characteristics were reported during the 12-month postindex period. RESULTS: The sample included 3262 biologic patients; 88% with anti-immunoglobulin E therapy (omalizumab) and 12% non-anti-immunoglobulin E (reslizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab). The mean age was 49 (±15) years; 64% were women. Prescriptions included inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß-agonist (82%), systemic corticosteroids (76%), and leukotriene receptor antagonists (68%). Notably, 63% of patients presented greater than or equal to 1 asthma exacerbation (mean 1.3 per patient/year). Furthermore, 35% of patients were categorized as having controlled asthma, whereas 28% were suboptimally controlled and 29% were uncontrolled. Patients with uncontrolled disease had higher all-cause and asthma-related costs ($69,206 and $45,693, respectively) than patients with suboptimally controlled ($59,407 and $40,793, respectively) or controlled disease ($53,083 and $38,393, respectively). Furthermore, 62% of newly treated patients were persistent with their index biologic. CONCLUSION: Biologic therapies are effective in reducing exacerbations, but a substantial proportion of patients with severe asthma treated with current biologics continue to experience uncontrolled disease, highlighting a remaining unmet need for patients with severe uncontrolled asthma.

A Critical Look at the Efficacy and Costs of Biologic Therapy for Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyposis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a highly prevalent disease that results in significant healthcare-related costs as well as costs to society with lost productivity and time. Unfortunately, a significant percentage of patients who suffer with this disease will not find relief from current standard of care medications and surgery. With ongoing efforts to understand the pathophysiology of CRSwNP has come the introduction of monoclonal antibodies, or "biologics," targeting specific elements of the inflammatory pathway in CRSwNP. Despite efficacy, these come at significant cost and, to date, no studies on the cost-efficacy of these biologics in CRSwNP have been published. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiple studies have now demonstrated efficacy for biologics in the treatment of CRSwNP as a primary indication. However, the gains in quality of life and objective measures, while consistent, are small and, arguably, the clinical significance is still unclear. In addition, the high cost of these medications may be hard to justify when evaluated in cost-efficacy studies against standard of care therapy in CRSwNP. Furthermore, while the current literature is most robust in showing the benefit of the biologics in asthma, it does not fully support cost-efficacy for biologics. This review evaluates the current literature regarding efficacy of monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of CRSwNP and considers this efficacy in light of the cost implications to individuals and society.

Early Surgery Versus Biologic Therapy in Limited Nonstricturing Ileocecal Crohn's Disease-A Decision-making Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the preferred option for patients with symptomatic localized fibrostenotic ileocecal Crohn's disease (CD) but not for those with predominantly active inflammation without obstruction. The benefit of early surgery in patients with a limited nonstricturing ileocecal CD over biologic treatment is still a debate. OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to formulate a decision analysis model based on recently published data to explore whether early surgery in patients with limited nonstricturing CD is preferred over biologic treatment. METHODS: We constructed a Markov model comparing 2 strategies of treatment: (1) early surgery vs (2) biologic treatment. To estimate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the costs in each strategy, we simulated 10,000 virtual patients with the Markov model using a Monte Carlo simulation 100 times. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the model and address uncertainties in the estimation of model parameters. RESULTS: The costs were $29,457 ± $407 and $50,382 ± $525 (mean ± SD) for early surgery strategy and biologic treatment strategy, respectively. The QALY was 6.24 ± 0.01 and 5.81 ± 0.01 for early surgery strategy and biologic treatment strategy, respectively. CONCLUSION: The strategy of early surgery dominates (higher QALY value [efficacy] and less cost) compared with the strategy of biologic treatment in patients with limited ileocecal CD.

Predicting response to anti-TNFα therapy among patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA): results from BSRBR-AS.

OBJECTIVES: While many axSpA patients, eligible to receive anti-TNFα therapy, derive benefit when prescribed them, some patients do not. The current study aims to identify modifiable targets to improve outcome as well as non-modifiable targets that identify groups less likely to derive benefit. METHODS: The BSRBR-AS is a prospective cohort study of axSpA patients who, at recruitment, were naïve to biologic therapy. Those in the 'biologic' sub-cohort commenced their first anti-TNFα therapy at recruitment or during follow-up. Prior to commencement, information was collected on socio-economic, clinical and patient-reported factors. Outcome was assessed according to ASAS20, ASAS40, ASDAS reduction and achieving a moderate/inactive ASDAS disease state. RESULTS: 335 participants commenced their first anti-TNFα therapy and were followed up at a median of 14 (inter-quartile range 12-17) weeks. Response varied between 33% and 52% according to criteria used. Adverse socio-economic factors, fewer years in education predicted lower likelihood of response across outcome measures as did not working full-time. Co-morbidities and poor mental health were clinical and patient-reported factors, respectively, associated with lack of response. The models, particularly those using ASDAS, were good at predicting those who did not respond (negative predictive value (NPV) 77%). CONCLUSION: Some factors predicting non-response (such as mental health) are modifiable but many (such as social/economic factors) are not modifiable in clinic. They do, however, identify patients who are unlikely to benefit from biologic therapy alone. Priority should focus on how these patients receive the benefits that many derive from such therapies.

A call for cost-effectiveness analysis for biologic therapies in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the need for cost-effectiveness analysis of biologic therapies in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). DATA SOURCES: Clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies (omalizumab, benralizumab, mepolizumab and dupilumab) for nasal polyposis or chronic rhinosinusitis published on PubMed. STUDY SELECTIONS: Clinical trials of biologic therapies in CRS and nasal polyposis. RESULTS: No cost-effectiveness analyses of biologic therapies in CRS have been performed. CONCLUSION: As more clinical trials of biologic therapies for CRS are conducted, there is a need for cost-effectiveness analysis. Future analyses should consider these therapies as part of medical therapeutic options compared with surgery. To increase generalizability, analyses should include samples from allergy and primary care clinics rather than only otolaryngology clinics.

Biological therapy in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: economic and epidemiological considerations.

Background: Biological therapies have a significant economic and clinical burden but, in general, lose their effectiveness over time. This study evaluated the medication persistence and costs associated to use of anti-TNF agents for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment. Methods: A historical cohort composed of individuals in Brazil with PsA diagnosis was developed during the period between 2010 and 2015. The difference among the anti-TNF agents was verified by the log-rank test. The predictors of medication non-persistence were identified by Cox regression. The costs were compared by variance analysis with Bonferroni correction. Results: 11,008 patients were analyzed. Adalimumab (51%) was the most used anti-TNF agent. Individuals using adalimumab presented higher medication persistence as compared to etanercept and infliximab. The costs with anti-TNF agents corresponded to 90% of the total costs and were similar among anti-TNF agents. The non-persistence predictors were female sex, younger patients, to live in the Northeastern and Northern regions of Brazil, to use infliximab and etanercept, and have more comorbidities. Conclusion: The direct costs with anti-TNF agents were the main component of total costs. Outpatient and inpatient costs increase when medication persistence decreases. A considerable price reduction of anti-TNF agents has been observed over the years.

The Cost-effectiveness of Biological Therapy Cycles in the Management of Crohn's Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the cost-effectiveness of continued treatment for patients with moderate-severe Crohn's disease in clinical remission, with a combination of anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha [anti-TNFα] [infliximab] and immunomodulator therapy compared with two different withdrawal strategies: [1] withdrawal of the anti-TNFα therapy; and [2] withdrawal of the immunomodulator therapy, respectively. METHODS: A decision-tree model was constructed mimicking three treatment arms: [1] continued combination therapy with infliximab and immunomodulator; [2] withdrawal of infliximab; or [3] withdrawal of the immunomodulator. Relapses in each arm are managed with treatment intensification and re-institution of the de-escalated drug according to a prespecified algorithm. State-dependent relapse risks, remission probabilities, and quality of life weights were collected from previous published studies. RESULTS: Combination therapy was less costly and more efficient than the withdrawal of the immunomodulator, and more costly and more efficient than withdrawal of infliximab. Whether or not combination therapy is cost-effective, compared with the alternatives, depends primarily on current pharmaceutical prices and the willingness-to-pay per additional quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy using a combination of anti-TNFα [infliximab] and an immunomodulator is cost-effective in the treatment of Crohn's disease compared with treatment cycles in which the immunomodulator is withdrawn. Combination treatment is cost-effective compared with treatment cycles in which infliximab is withdrawn, at prices of infliximab below€192/100 mg, given a willingness-to-pay threshold at€49 020 [Sweden] per additional QALY.

Cost-utility Analysis: Thiopurines Plus Endoscopy-guided Biological Step-up Therapy is the Optimal Management of Postoperative Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative recurrence of Crohn's disease is common. This study sought to assess whether the postoperative management should be based on biological therapy alone or combined with thiopurines and whether the therapy should be started immediately after surgery or guided by either endoscopic or clinical recurrence. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to estimate expected health outcomes in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs in Canadian dollars (CAD$) accrued by hypothetical patients with high recurrence risk after ileocolic resection. Eight strategies of postoperative management were evaluated. A lifetime time horizon, an annual discount rate of 5%, a societal perspective, and a cost-effectiveness threshold of 50,000 CAD$/QALY were assumed. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. The model was validated against randomized trials and historical cohorts. RESULTS: Three strategies dominated the others: endoscopy-guided full step-up therapy (14.80 QALYs, CAD$ 462,180), thiopurines immediately post-surgery plus endoscopy-guided biological step-up therapy (14.89 QALYs, CAD$ 464,099) and combination therapy immediately post-surgery (14.94 QALYs, CAD$ 483,685). The second strategy was the most cost-effective, assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of 50,000 CAD$/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the second strategy has the highest probability of being the optimal alternative in all comparisons at cost-effectiveness thresholds from 30,000 to 100,000 CAD$/QALY. The strategies guided only by clinical recurrence and those using biologics alone were dominated. CONCLUSIONS: According to this decision analysis, thiopurines immediately after surgery and addition of biologics guided by endoscopic recurrence is the optimal strategy of postoperative management in patients with Crohn's disease with high risk of recurrence (see Video Abstract, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/IBD/B654).

Do Biologic Therapies for Rheumatoid Arthritis Offset Treatment-Related Resource Utilization and Cost? A Review of the Literature and an Instrumental Variable Analysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: One justification for using expensive biologic therapy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been that it can reduce future healthcare utilization such as joint surgeries and physician visits. However, the evidence to support this assertion is unclear. We conducted a review of the literature for studies which have analyzed the trends in resource use of RA patients, and then undertook a retrospective observational analysis of a Canadian administrative database using instrumental variable methods. RECENT FINDINGS: Our review found a trend in reduced resource utilization prior to the introduction of biologics and no evidence that biologic therapies have specifically contributed to this reduction. Our observational analysis, which overcame some of the epidemiological challenges with determining the influence of biologics on resource utilization, found a possible reduction in other medications but possible increases rather than decreases in physician visits and hospitalizations. However, our sample was not sufficiently large to make definitive conclusions. Over 15 years since the introduction of biologics for RA, no evidence exists supporting the assumption that biologic therapies reduce future healthcare utilization. While such a question is challenging to generate evidence for, and so an absence of evidence does not suggest that the hypothesis is incorrect, an instrumental variable analysis using sufficient data could provide definitive evidence.

Public versus Private Drug Insurance and Outcomes of Patients Requiring Biologic Therapies for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Background. Antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy is a highly effective but costly treatment for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of IBD patients who were prescribed anti-TNF therapy (2007-2014) in Ontario. We assessed if the insurance type was a predictor of timely access to anti-TNF therapy and nonroutine health utilization (emergency department visits and hospitalizations). Results. There were 268 patients with IBD who were prescribed anti-TNF therapy. Public drug coverage was associated with longer median wait times to first dose than private one (56 versus 35 days, P = 0.002). After adjusting for confounders, publicly insured patients were less likely to receive timely access to anti-TNF therapy compared with those privately insured (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45-0.95). After adjustment for demographic and clinical characteristics, publicly funded subjects were more than 2-fold more likely to require hospitalization (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 2.30; 95% CI: 1.19-4.43) and ED visits (IRR 2.42; 95% CI: 1.44-4.08) related to IBD. Conclusions. IBD patients in Ontario with public drug coverage experienced greater delays in access to anti-TNF therapy than privately insured patients and have a higher rate of hospitalizations and ED visits related to IBD.

Economic impact of expanded use of biologic therapy for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate economic impact resulting from increased biologics use for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and Crohn's disease (CD) in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico. METHODS: The influence of increasing biologics use for treatment of RA during 2012-2022 and for treatment of CD during 2013-2023 was modeled from a societal perspective. The economic model incorporated current and projected medical, indirect, and drug costs and epidemiologic and economic factors. Costs associated with expanded biologics use for RA were compared with non-expanded use in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico. A similar analysis was conducted for CD in Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico. RESULTS: Accounting for additional costs of biologics and medical and indirect cost offsets, the model predicts that expanded use of biologics for patients with RA from 2012 to 2022 will result in cumulative net cost savings of ARS$2.351 billion in Argentina, R$9.004 billion in Brazil, COP$728.577 billion in Colombia, and MXN$18.02 billion in Mexico; expanded use of biologics for patients with CD from 2013 to 2023 will result in cumulative net cost savings for patients with CD of R$0.082 billion in Brazil, COP$502.74 billion in Colombia, and MXN$1.80 billion in Mexico. Indirect cost offsets associated with expanded biologics use were a key driver in reducing annual per-patient net costs for RA and CD. LIMITATIONS: Future economic projections are limited by the potential variance between projected and actual future values of biologic prices, wages, medical costs, and gross national product for each country. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing biologics use to treat RA and CD may limit cost growth over time by reducing medical and indirect costs. These findings may inform policy decisions regarding biologics use in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico.

Treatment patterns and costs for anti-TNFα biologic therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data regarding anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (anti-TNFα) biologic therapy use in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are limited; therefore, we described treatment patterns and costs of anti-TNFα therapy in PsA patients in the United States. METHODS: PsA patients (N = 990) aged ≥18 years who initiated anti-TNFα therapy were selected from MarketScan claims databases (10/1/2009 to 9/30/2010). Number of patients on first- (n = 881), second- (n = 72), or third- or greater (n = 37) line of anti-TNFα therapy, persistence, time-to-switch or modification, pharmacy and medical costs (measured per patient per month [PPPM]) for each line of therapy were observed during the 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: PsA patients receiving only one line of anti-TNFα therapy remained on first-line for ~17 months while those who switched to second- or third- or greater persisted on first-line for ~11 to 12 months, respectively. Time to first-line modification was longer for patients who switched to third- or greater line therapy (7 months) than those who did not switch or switched to second-line (range, ~2 to 4 months). Time-to-switch and time to first-line modification was progressively shorter with each line of therapy for patients who received third- or greater line. PPPM medical costs were higher for patients who did not switch ($322) than those who switched to second- ($167) or third- or greater ($217) line. PPPM pharmacy costs were greater for patients with third- or greater line therapy ($2539) than those who did not switch ($1985) or switched to second-line ($2045). CONCLUSION: While the majority of patients received only one line of anti-TNFα therapy, a subset of patients switched to multiple lines of therapy during the 3-year follow-up period. Persistence and therapy modifications differed between these patients and those receiving only one line. Overall medical costs were highest for patients who did not switch, and pharmacy costs increased as patients switched to each new line of therapy.

Economic Burden of Switching to a Non-Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Versus a Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Biologic Therapy among Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to examine healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with switching to another tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitor (TNFi) therapy versus a non-TNFi therapy among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) discontinuing use of an initial TNFi biologic therapy. METHODS: Patients with ≥2 RA diagnoses who used ≥1 TNFi on or after their initial RA diagnosis were identified in a US employer-based insurance claims database. Patients were selected based on ≥1 claim of another TNFi or a non-TNFi biologic therapy (occurring after 2010, and within 30 days before to 60 days after discontinuation of the initial TNFi), and continuous insurance ≥6 months before (baseline period) and ≥12 months after the switch date (study period). Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were measured during the baseline period. All-cause and RA-related HRU and costs were analyzed during the 12-month study period using multivariable regression analysis controlling for baseline characteristics and selected comorbidities. RESULTS: Of the 1577 patients with RA that switched therapies, 1169 patients used another TNFi and 408 patients used a non-TNFi biologic. The most commonly used initial TNFi treatments were etanercept (50%) and adalimumab (34%) among the TNFi cohort, and infliximab (39%) and etanercept (28%) among the non-TNFi cohort. The TNFi cohort had significantly fewer outpatient visits [all-cause: 23.01 vs. 29.77 visits/patient/year; adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.78, P < 0.001; RA-related: 7.42 vs. 13.58; adjusted IRR = 0.58, P < 0.001] and rheumatologist visits (all-cause: 4.01 vs. 6.81; adjusted IRR = 0.66, P < 0.001; RA-related: 3.23 vs. 6.40; adjusted IRR = 0.58, P < 0.001) than the non-TNFi cohort. All-cause total costs were significantly lower for patients who switched to another TNFi instead of a non-TNFi therapy ($36,932 vs. $44,566; adjusted difference = $7045, P < 0.01), as were total RA-related costs ($26,973 vs. $31,735; adjusted difference = $4904, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Adult patients with RA discontinuing TNFi therapy who switched to an alternative TNFi incurred lower healthcare costs than patients who switched to a non-TNFi biologic. FUNDING: AbbVie, Inc.

A Retrospective Cohort Study Comparing Utilization and Costs of Biologic Therapies and JAK Inhibitor Therapy Across Four Common Inflammatory Indications in Adult US Managed Care Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Biologic therapies are used to treat several inflammatory diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis (PsO), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Data from a commercial claims database were used to evaluate utilization and cost of biologic treatment for these conditions. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Optum Research Database. Patients were aged 18-63 years with diagnosis of moderate to severe RA, PsO, PsA, and/or AS and first (index) claim for biologics abatacept, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab, tocilizumab, or ustekinumab or non-biologic tofacitinib between March 1, 2011 and February 28, 2013. One-year treatment costs were based on observed paid amounts and used to impute dosing. Treatment patterns (persistence, switching, discontinuing, restarting) were evaluated. RESULTS: Data from 20,159 patients were analyzed for index medications abatacept (n = 583), adalimumab (n = 6521), certolizumab pegol (n = 415), etanercept (n = 9116), golimumab (n = 231), infliximab (n = 1906), rituximab (n = 295), tocilizumab (n = 165), ustekinumab (n = 922), and tofacitinib (n = 5). For patients with RA only, costs were lowest for tofacitinib ($18,769), rituximab ($19,569), or abatacept ($21,877), and ranged from $23,682 to $30,269 for all other medications. For patients with PsO only, costs were lowest for adalimumab ($29,186), etanercept ($31,212), and infliximab ($32,409) compared with ustekinumab ($53,746). For patients with PsA only, costs were lowest for etanercept ($26,916), followed by golimumab ($27,987), adalimumab ($28,749), and infliximab ($31,974). Costs were lowest with etanercept for RA plus PsA ($25,477) and for PsO plus PsA ($29,376), and with golimumab for AS only ($24,225). Across indications, annual costs were $29,521, $27,488, and $28,672 for adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab, respectively; persistence was greatest with infliximab (range 66-79%) compared with 11-59% for all other biologics. CONCLUSION: One-year treatment costs varied considerably between medications and indications. Some newly approved agents had lower costs but further research is needed to confirm these estimates as more patients are treated. FUNDING: Immunex (a wholly owned subsidiary of Amgen Inc.) and Wyeth (acquired by Pfizer).

Commercial-scale biotherapeutics manufacturing facility for plant-made pharmaceuticals.

Rapid, large-scale manufacture of medical countermeasures can be uniquely met by the plant-made-pharmaceutical platform technology. As a participant in the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Blue Angel project, the Caliber Biotherapeutics facility was designed, constructed, commissioned and released a therapeutic target (H1N1 influenza subunit vaccine) in <18 months from groundbreaking. As of 2015, this facility was one of the world's largest plant-based manufacturing facilities, with the capacity to process over 3500 kg of plant biomass per week in an automated multilevel growing environment using proprietary LED lighting. The facility can commission additional plant grow rooms that are already built to double this capacity. In addition to the commercial-scale manufacturing facility, a pilot production facility was designed based on the large-scale manufacturing specifications as a way to integrate product development and technology transfer. The primary research, development and manufacturing system employs vacuum-infiltrated Nicotiana benthamiana plants grown in a fully contained, hydroponic system for transient expression of recombinant proteins. This expression platform has been linked to a downstream process system, analytical characterization, and assessment of biological activity. This integrated approach has demonstrated rapid, high-quality production of therapeutic monoclonal antibody targets, including a panel of rituximab biosimilar/biobetter molecules and antiviral antibodies against influenza and dengue fever.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment strategies for initial Clostridium difficile infection.

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is costly. Current guidelines recommend metronidazole as first-line therapy and vancomycin as an alternative. Recurrence is common. Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an effective therapy for recurrent CDI (RCDI). This study explores the cost-effectiveness of FMT, vancomycin and metronidazole for initial CDI. We constructed a decision-analytic computer simulation using inputs from published literature to compare FMT with a 10-14-day course of oral metronidazole or vancomycin for initial CDI. Parameters included cure rates (baseline value (range)) for metronidazole (80% (65-85%)), vancomycin (90% (88-92%)) and FMT(91% (83-100%)). Direct costs of metronidazole, vancomycin and FMT, adjusted to 2011 dollars, were $57 ($43-72), $1347 ($1195-1499) and $1086 ($815-1358), respectively. Our effectiveness measure was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted from the third-party payer perspective. Analysis using baseline values showed that FMT($1669, 0.242 QALYs) dominated (i.e. was less costly and more effective) vancomycin ($1890, 0.241 QALYs). FMT was more costly and more effective than metronidazole ($1167, 0.238 QALYs), yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $124 964/QALY. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that metronidazole dominated both strategies if its probability of cure were >90%; FMT dominated if it cost <$584. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY, metronidazole was favoured in 55% of model iterations; FMT was favoured in 38%. Metronidazole, as the first-line treatment for CDIs, is less costly. FMT and vancomycin are more effective. However, FMT is less likely to be economically favourable, and vancomycin is unlikely to be favourable as first-line therapy when compared with FMT.

Economical impact associated with a biological therapy prioritization protocol in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the Hospital of Sagunto.

BACKGROUND: Until 2010 the cost of biological treatments in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) was increasing annually by 15% in our hospital. In 1st January 2011, a Hospital Commission of Biological Therapies involving rheumatology and pharmacy services was created to improve the management of biological drugs and a biological therapy prioritization protocol in RA patients was also established to improve the efficient usage of biological drugs in RA. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic impact associated with a biological therapy prioritization protocol for RA patients in the Hospital of Sagunto. METHODS: Observational, ambispective study comparing the associated cost of RA patients treated with biological drugs in the pre-protocol (2009 - 2010) versus post-protocol periods (2011 - 2012). RA patients treated with Abatacept (ABA), Adalimumab (ADA), Etanercept (ETN) or Infliximab (IFX) for at least 6 months during the study period (2009 - 2012) were included. In 2012, Tocilizumab (TCZ) was also included in the prioritization protocol. Prioritization protocol was established based on both clinical and economical aspects and supervised case by case by our Commission. Cost savings and economic impact were calculated using Spanish official prices. RESULTS: In the pre-protocol period (2009 - 2010), total expenses were increasing by €110,000, up to €1,761,000 in 2010 (€11,362 pat/year). After protocol implementation, total expenses decreased by 53,676€ on the 2010 - 2011 period, and 149,200€ on the 2011 - 2012 period. On the 2010 - 2011 period the cost of biological therapy per patient-year decreased 355€ (11,007€ pat/year) and additional 653€ (up to 10,354€ pat/year) by 2012, with a cumulative effect of the protocol implementation of 1,008€ per patient-year. In the pre-protocol period (2009), the annual cost/patient was 10.812€ with ETN, 10.942€ with IFX, 12.961€ with ADA and 12.739€ with ABA. By 1st January 2013, the annual cost per patient was 9,469€ with ETN, 10,579€ with IFX, 11,117€ with ADA, 13,540€ with ABA and 14,932€ with TCZ. CONCLUSIONS: The creation of our Commission of Biological Therapies is key to rational management of RA patients and optimization of resources, allowing us to save 200,000€ after 2-year efficiency protocol implementation.

Cost-effectiveness of competing strategies for management of recurrent Clostridium difficile infection: a decision analysis.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is an important cause of morbidity and healthcare costs, and is characterized by high rates of disease recurrence. The cost-effectiveness of newer treatments for recurrent CDI has not been examined, yet would be important to inform clinical practice. The aim of this study was to analyze the cost effectiveness of competing strategies for recurrent CDI. METHODS: We constructed a decision-analytic model comparing 4 treatment strategies for first-line treatment of recurrent CDI in a population with a median age of 65 years: metronidazole, vancomycin, fidaxomicin, and fecal microbiota transplant (FMT). We modeled up to 2 additional recurrences following the initial recurrence. We assumed FMT delivery via colonoscopy as our base case, but conducted sensitivity analyses based on different modes of delivery. Willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: At our base case estimates, initial treatment of recurrent CDI using FMT colonoscopy was the most cost-effective strategy, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $17 016 relative to oral vancomycin. Fidaxomicin and metronidazole were both dominated by FMT colonoscopy. On sensitivity analysis, FMT colonoscopy remained the most cost-effective strategy at cure rates >88.4% and CDI recurrence rates <14.9%. Fidaxomicin required a cost <$1359 to meet our cost-effectiveness threshold. In clinical settings where FMT is not available or applicable, the preferred strategy appears to be initial treatment with oral vancomycin. CONCLUSIONS: In this decision analysis examining treatment strategies for recurrent CDI, we demonstrate that FMT colonoscopy is the most cost-effective initial strategy for management of recurrent CDI.

Efficacy and cost-efficacy of biologic therapies for moderate to severe psoriasis: a meta-analysis and cost-efficacy analysis using the intention-to-treat principle.

BACKGROUND: Compared to conventional therapies, biologics are more effective but expensive in treating psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and cost-efficacy of biologic therapies for psoriasis. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis to calculate the efficacy of etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, and ustekinumab for at least 75% reduction in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI 75) and Physician's Global Assessment clear/minimal (PGA 0/1). The cost-efficacy was assessed by calculating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per subject achieving PASI 75 and PGA 0/1. RESULTS: The incremental efficacy regarding PASI 75 was 55% (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 38%-72%), 63% (95% CI 59%-67%), 71% (95% CI 67%-76%), 67% (95% CI 62%-73%), and 72% (95% CI 68%-75%) for etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, and ustekinumab 45 mg and 90 mg, respectively. The corresponding 6-month ICER regarding PASI 75 was $32,643 (best case $24,936; worst case $47,246), $21,315 (best case $20,043; worst case $22,760), $27,782 (best case $25,954; worst case $29,440), $25,055 (best case $22,996; worst case $27,075), and $46,630 (best case $44,765; worst case $49,373), respectively. The results regarding PGA 0/1 were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Infliximab and ustekinumab 90 mg had the highest efficacy. Meanwhile, adalimumab had the best cost-efficacy, followed by ustekinumab 45 mg and infliximab.