Cost analysis of the impact of caplacizumab in the treatment of acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura from a US hospital perspective.

AIM: This study aimed to model the financial impact of caplacizumab with therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) + immunosuppression for patients experiencing an acute acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP) episode versus TPE + immunosuppression, from a US hospital's perspective. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We developed an economic model to estimate the impact of caplacizumab on a US hospital's budget. Cost offsets from caplacizumab utilization targeted inpatient general ward days, intensive care unit (ICU) days, and TPE utilization. Costs and event probabilities were estimated from primary data analyses of the phase 3 HERCULES trial and peer-reviewed literature or other public sources. Plan reimbursement was obtained from 2019 Medicare Fee Schedules and adjusted to represent reimbursement from different US payers. Cost of ICU and general ward utilization were estimated from Medicare Provider Analysis and Review data analyses capturing hospital discharges. RESULTS: The model results indicate that caplacizumab leads to hospitalization cost savings of over $8,000 ($23,148 versus $14,904) along with TPE cost savings of over $14,000 ($37,150 versus $23,033) per patient. When the cost of caplacizumab and plan reimbursement are incorporated into the results, the per-patient cost of TPE + immunosuppression is $23,120 versus $70,068 for caplacizumab with TPE + immunosuppression, an incremental cost of $46,948. The model was robust to several scenario analyses; however, when limited to Medicare fee-for-service (FFS), the incremental cost of caplacizumab per patient was reduced to $4,852 due to add-on payments. CONCLUSIONS: Caplacizumab with TPE + immunosuppression is associated with an increase in costs; however, the increase is nominal among payers who provide an add-on payment consistent with that of Medicare FFS.

Burden of illness among Medicare and non-Medicare US populations with acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura.

BACKGROUND: Acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP) is a rare hematologic disorder that can lead to serious life-threatening medical complications. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe aTTP-related hospital resource utilization, cost, complications, and overall survival among US Medicare and non-Medicare populations following aTTP episodes prior to the US approval of caplacizumab. METHODS: This retrospective study utilized administrative claims data for Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) beneficiaries (100% sample) and a sample of commercial, managed Medicaid [MM], Medicare Advantage [MA] plan members from the Inovalon MORE2 Registry. aTTP patients ages 18+ were identified between 2010 and 2018 using a published validated algorithm: ≥1 hospitalization for thrombotic microangiopathy + therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE). 2,279 patients were identified; 65.2% were enrolled in Medicare FFS, 13.6% in commercial, 15.7% in MM, and 5.4% in MA. Mean hospitalization days for aTTP index episode ranged between 12 and 17 days; ∼60% of patients required intensive care. Mean payments for index hospitalization varied by payer [Medicare FFS: $29,024; MA: $12,860; commercial: $9,996 and MM: $10,470]. Among FFS patients, 15.7% died during initial hospitalization and 21.0% died within first 30 days of the event. During follow-up, 11.6-19.6% experienced aTTP-related exacerbation. Incidence rate of relapse and complications per 100 person-years was 5.6 [Medicare FFS: 3.6; MA: 8.7; commercial: 10.4 and MM: 14.7] and 16.7 [FFS: 15.5; MA: 20.5; commercial: 21.7 and MM: 19.1], respectively. Among Medicare patients with and without aTTP, mortality risk was 2.9 (95 % CI: 2.4-3.4) times higher for aTTP vs. non-aTTP patients. CONCLUSION: This is the first real-world study evaluating burden of illness among aTTP patients in the US across payer types. Despite being treated with TPE, patients with aTTP have lower survival rates in comparison to a matched cohort without aTTP. These findings highlight the need for more effective and novel therapies to reduce disease burden for this population.Key pointsIn US Medicare and managed care populations with aTTP between 2010 and 2018, aTTP can lead to significant utilization of ICU services due to clinical complications, and/or relapse following hospital discharge.Despite treatment with therapeutic plasma exchange, acute mortality remains high (15.7%) indicating the need for more effective and novel treatments.

Indirect Treatment Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab Monotherapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Inadequate Response to Conventional Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy administered every 2 weeks (q2w) versus other monotherapies of biologic, targeted and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs, tsDMARDs, csDMARDs) at recommended doses for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patients who are intolerant of or inadequate responders to csDMARDs (csDMARD-IR). METHODS: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted on 24-week efficacy outcomes: Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) score, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 criteria, and European League Against Rheumatism Disease Activity Score 28-joint count erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28) < 2.6. In addition, serious infections and serious adverse events (SI/SAE) were examined at 24 weeks. RESULTS: Nine trials were selected for the NMA. Sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority versus adalimumab monotherapy on all efficacy outcomes and versus tofacitinib monotherapy on ACR20. Compared with csDMARDs, sarilumab 200 mg showed superiority on ACR 20/50/70 criteria and DAS28 < 2.6 but had similar efficacy on HAQ-DI. Efficacy of sarilumab 200 mg was similar versus certolizumab, etanercept, tofacitinib and tocilizumab 8 mg/kg monotherapy across all efficacy outcomes. SI/SAE appeared similar for sarilumab 200 mg versus all comparators. CONCLUSION: In csDMARD-IR patients, sarilumab 200 mg monotherapy has superior efficacy and similar safety versus csDMARDs, superior efficacy and similar safety versus adalimumab, and similar efficacy and safety versus bDMARDs and tsDMARDs. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.