Assessment of the treatment effectiveness of men with mild and medium degree of erectile dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: . Aim: To assess the effectiveness of monotherapy and complex treatment of patients with erectile dysfunction depending on its severity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and Methods: Men with moderate and mild erectile dysfunction took part in the study, who, in turn, were divided into groups, depending on the treatment, with the evaluation of the results of the International Index of Erectile Function (MIEF-15), the state of cavernous hemodynamics and the function of the vascular endothelium before and after treatment. RESULTS: Results: In patients with an average degree of severity, who received complex treatment including a course of low-energy shock wave therapy, against the background of taking sildenafil and L-arginine, the best results were obtained in the quality of erection and increased cavernous blood flow, which positively affected satisfaction with sexual intercourse and overall satisfaction. It has also been proven that the function of the endothelium was improved in patients receiving L-arginine, due to which there was a probable decrease in endothelin-1. A probable improvement of erectile function was obtained in the group of patients with a mild degree who received L-arginine, and there was no statistical difference from the indicators in the group who received sildenafil, which was confirmed by the data of dopplerography. CONCLUSION: Conclusions: Patients with an average degree of erectile dysfunction require comprehensive treatment. The use of L-arginine can be an alternative to phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors in the treatment of mild erectile dysfunction.

Abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

Background: Atopic dermatitis is a chronic relapsing inflammatory skin condition. One of the most common skin disorders in children, atopic dermatitis typically manifests before the age of 5 years, but it can develop at any age. Atopic dermatitis is characterised by dry, inflamed skin accompanied by intense itchiness (pruritus). Objectives: To appraise the clinical and cost effectiveness of abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib within their marketing authorisations as alternative therapies for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis compared to systemic immunosuppressants (first-line ciclosporin A or second-line dupilumab and baricitinib). Data sources: Studies were identified from an existing systematic review (search date 2019) and update searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) to November 2021, from bibliographies of retrieved studies, clinical trial registers and evidence provided by the sponsoring companies of the treatments under review. Methods: A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness literature was carried out and a network meta-analysis undertaken for adults and adolescents at different steps of the treatment pathway. The primary outcome of interest was a combined response of Eczema Area and Severity Index 50 + Dermatology Life Quality Index ≥ 4; where this was consistently unavailable for a step in the pathway, an analysis of Eczema Area and Severity Index 75 was conducted. A de novo economic model was developed to assess cost effectiveness from the perspective of the National Health Service in England. The model structure was informed through systematic review of the economic literature and by consulting clinical experts. Effectiveness data were obtained from the network meta-analysis. Costs and utilities were obtained from the evidence provided by sponsoring companies and standard UK sources. Results: Network meta-analyses indicate that abrocitinib 200 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg may be more effective, and tralokinumab may be less effective than dupilumab and baricitinib as second-line systemic therapies. Abrocitinib 100 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg have a more similar effectiveness to dupilumab. Upadacitinib 30 and 15 mg are likely to be more effective than ciclosporin A as a first-line therapy. Upadacitinib 15 mg, abrocitinib 200 and 100 mg may be more effective than dupilumab in adolescents. The cost effectiveness of abrocitinib and upadacitinib for both doses is dependent on the subgroup of interest. Tralokinumab can be considered cost-effective as a second-line systemic therapy owing to greater cost savings per quality-adjusted life-year lost. Conclusions: The primary strength of the analysis of the three new drugs compared with current practice for each of the subpopulations is the consistent approach to the assessment of clinical and cost effectiveness. However, the conclusions are limited by the high uncertainty around the clinical effectiveness and lack of data for the primary outcome for comparisons with baricitinib and for the adolescent and adult first-line populations. Future work and limitations: The most significant limitation that Eczema Area and Severity Index 50 + Dermatology Life Quality Index ≥ 4 could not be obtained for the adolescent and adult first-line systemic treatment populations is due to a paucity of data for dupilumab and ciclosporin A. A comparison of the new drugs against one another in addition to current practice would be beneficial to provide a robust view on which treatments are the most cost-effective. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021266219. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme (NIHR award ref: 135138) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 4. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common skin conditions in children but can also develop in adulthood. People with atopic dermatitis have dry, red (inflamed) skin that is also extremely itchy (pruritus). There is no cure for atopic dermatitis. Therapy starts with topical treatments that are applied to the skin, such as emollients. Severe forms of atopic dermatitis are often treated with systemic treatments, which are drugs that are provided as tablets or an injection. Ciclosporin A is often the first systemic therapy given. If atopic dermatitis does not get better with ciclosporin A, options available in the National Health Service are dupilumab and baricitinib. New therapies that have been evaluated in clinical trials for atopic dermatitis but have not been assessed for use in the National Health Service are abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib. The aim of this project is to review the medical benefits, risks and value for money for the National Health Service of abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in a multiple technology appraisal. Our review found that: For children aged between 12 and 18 years, abrocitinib and a low dose of upadacitinib (15 mg) are good value for money for the National Health Service. For adults who need a first systemic treatment, upadacitinib is unlikely to be good value for money for the National Health Service. For adults who are still suffering from their atopic dermatitis after having a systemic treatment and need a different drug, upadacitinib 15 mg and tralokinumab could be good value for money for the National Health Service if they are used on their own. For adults who are still suffering from their atopic dermatitis after having a systemic treatment and need a different drug, but need to take it with steroid cream, abrocitinib 100 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg and tralokinumab could all be good value for money for the National Health Service.

A low-cost voltammetric sensor based on multi-walled carbon nanotubes for highly sensitive and accurate determination of nanomolar levels of the anticancer drug Ribociclib in bulk and biological fluids.

In this study, we present the development and comprehensive characterization of the first electrochemical sensor utilizing multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) for the sensitive and precise detection of Ribociclib (RIBO), an important anticancer drug. The sensor underwent systematic optimization, focusing on critical parameters such as pH, deposition potential, and cumulative time to enhance its electrocatalytic activity and expand the linear range for RIBO determination. The MWCNTs/GCE sensor exhibited excellent reproducibility and repeatability, ensuring reliable and consistent results. The applicability and feasibility of the sensor for real sample analysis were extensively evaluated by analyzing human serum, urine, and tablet samples using the standard addition method. The obtained percent recovery values demonstrated the sensor's exceptional accuracy and precision. Furthermore, interference studies revealed the sensor's remarkable selectivity, with minimal impact from common interfering substances. The developed sensor displayed a wide linear range of 0.01 µM to 5.0 µM, with a limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) calculated to be 0.69 nM and 2.31 nM, respectively, affirming its high sensitivity for detecting low RIBO concentrations. The MWCNTs/GCE sensor demonstrates substantial promise for diverse practical applications with its simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and excellent analytical performance.

Quantitative Assessment of Ribociclib Exposure-Response Relationship to Justify Dose Regimen in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer.

Ribociclib in combination with endocrine therapy (ET) is a globally approved treatment option for patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) and has demonstrated significantly improved overall survival (OS) in 3 phase 3 clinical trials. To justify the dose regimen and dose modification scheme for patients with ABC, the pharmacokinetic (PK), safety, and efficacy data of ribociclib were analyzed. The data of several phase 1-3 clinical studies were pooled and analyzed to characterize the relationship between exposure (dose or PK) and efficacy (progression-free survival (PFS), time to response, and OS) or safety (neutropenia and QT interval prolongation). The exposure-efficacy analysis showed no apparent relationship between ribociclib exposure and efficacy (PFS and OS), and efficacy analysis by dose reduction showed that patients with ABC continued to benefit from the treatment following dose reduction, supporting the starting dose of 600 mg as well as dose reductions to 400 and 200 mg. The exposure-safety analysis showed that neutropenia and QT prolongation are related to ribociclib exposure that can be effectively managed by individualized dose modification (dose reduction/interruption). Collective evidence from the exposure-response analyses for efficacy and safety support the use of ribociclib in combination with ET partners at the starting dose of 600 mg, and also the effectiveness of individualized dose reductions in managing safety, while maintaining efficacy, in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC. This analysis illustrates the utility of quantitative assessment in justifying dose selection and dose modification for oncology medicines.

Real-world analysis of the economic and therapeutic burden in advanced breast cancer patients in Italy.

BACKGROUND: This real-world analysis evaluated drug utilization focusing on wastage and healthcare costs for treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer (aBC) hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative (HER2-) in Italy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on administrative data covering about 13.3 million health-assisted individuals. Across January/2017-June/2021, all patients with HR+/HER2-aBC were identified by ≥ 1 prescription for cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK 4/6i). Cost analysis was performed and updated referring to the prices of November 2021. RESULTS: Overall, 3,647 HR+/HER2-aBC patients were included (2,627 palbociclib treated, 729 ribociclib treated, and 291 abemaciclib treated). After 12 months of follow-up, 35% of palbociclib patients had a dose reduction (on average 8.9 wasted pills/patient), 44.7% of abemaciclib patients had a dose reduction (on average 6.7 wasted pills/patient), 22.1% of ribociclib patients had a dose reduction (no wasted pills). Therapy wastage added up to 528,716€ for palbociclib-treated patients (524€/patient) and 5,738€ in abemaciclib-treated patients (151€/patient). No wastage was attributed to ribociclib. CONCLUSIONS: Dose reduction was associated with drug wastage in palbociclib and abemaciclib-treated patients, but not in ribociclib-treated ones. These findings might be helpful to policy decision-makers who, for healthcare strategies implementation, among several variables should consider the possible restraining of drug wastage.

Splenic switch-off in regadenoson 82Rb-PET myocardial perfusion imaging: assessment of clinical utility.

BACKGROUND: Splenic switch-off (SSO) is a phenomenon describing a decrease in splenic radiotracer uptake after vasodilatory stress. We aimed to assess the diagnostic utility of regadenoson-induced SSO. METHODS: We included consecutive patients who had clinically indicated Regadenoson Rb-82 PET-MPI for suspected CAD. This derivation cohort (no perfusion defects and myocardial flow reserves (MFR) ≥ 2) was used to calculate the splenic response ratio (SRR). The validation cohort was defined as patients who underwent both PET-MPI studies and invasive coronary angiography (ICA). RESULTS: The derivation cohort (n = 100, 57.4 ± 11.6 years, 77% female) showed a decrease in splenic uptake from rest to stress (79.9 ± 16.8 kBq⋅mL vs 69.1 ± 16.2 kBq⋅mL, P < .001). From the validation cohort (n = 315, 66.3 ± 10.4 years, 67% male), 28% (via SRR = 0.88) and 15% (visually) were classified as splenic non-responders. MFR was lower in non-responders (SRR; 1.55 ± 0.65 vs 1.76 ± 0.78, P = .02 and visually; 1.18 ± 0.33 vs 1.79 ± 0.77, P < .001). Based on ICA, non-responders were more likely to note obstructive epicardial disease with normal PET scans especially in patients with MFR < 1.5 (SRR; 61% vs 34% P = .05 and visually; 68% vs 33%, P = .01). CONCLUSION: Lack of splenic response based on visual or quantitative assessment of SSO may be used to identify an inadequate vasodilatory response.

Assessment of plasma amino acids, purines, tricarboxylic acid cycle metabolites, and lipids levels in NSCLC patients based on LC-MS/MS quantification.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common type of malignant tumor of the lung with poor prognosis. Currently, there is still no effective strategy for diagnosing lung cancer from the perspective of multiple biomarkers containing both polar and nonpolar molecules. In order to explore the pathological changes of NSCLC at the endogenous molecule levels, and further establish the strategy for identifying and monitoring drug efficacy of NSCLC, targeted metabolomics and lipidomics studies were established with NSCLC patients. Polar metabolites including 21 amino acids, 7 purines, 6 tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle metabolites, and nonpolar lipids like phosphatidylcholine (PC), phosphatidylethanolamine (PE), lysophosphatidylcholine (LPC), lysophosphatidylethanolamine (LPE), sphingomyelin (SM), and ceramide (Cer), diacylglycerol (DG), triacylglycerol (TG), were quantitatively determined based on LC-MS/MS, taking into account their metabolism were significantly concerned with the occurrence of lung cancer in previous study. As a result, 14 polar metabolites and 16 lipids were prominently altered in the plasma of NSCLC patients, among which, after multivariate statistical analysis, LPC 18:0 (sn-2), L-Phenylalanine (Phe), oxaloacetic acid (OAA) and xanthine (XA) were screened out as potential small molecules and lipid biomarkers for NSCLC. Furthermore, a new strategy for formulating equation of NSCLC identification was proposed and clinical utility was successfully evaluated through Kangai injection treatment to NSCLC patients. Taking together, this study investigated the pathological changes of NSCLC from the perspective of endogenous polar and nonpolar molecules, and shed a light on identification of NSCLC.

Cost Effectiveness of Ribociclib and Palbociclib in the Second-Line Treatment of Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer in Post-Menopausal Indian Women.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we evaluate the cost and outcomes of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) plus fulvestrant, fulvestrant alone, and conventional chemotherapy as the second-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in India. METHODS: Using a Markov model, the clinical effectiveness of managing HR+, HER2- MBC in postmenopausal women with either a CDK4/6i (either ribociclib or palbociclib) and fulvestrant, fulvestrant alone, and chemotherapy (single-agent paclitaxel or capecitabine) was measured in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The costs were estimated from two different points of view: scenario I, as per the prevailing market prices of the drugs; and scenario II, as per the reimbursement rates set up by the publicly financed national health insurance scheme. Incremental cost per QALY gained with a given treatment option was compared against the next best alternative and was assessed for cost effectiveness using a threshold of 1-time the per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in India from a societal perspective. RESULTS: In scenario I, an MBC patient was found to incur a lifetime cost of Indian Rupees (₹) 2.54 million ($34,644), ₹2.53 million ($34,496), ₹512,598 ($6,984), ₹326,026 ($4,442) and ₹237,115 ($3,230) for the ribociclib and palbociclib combination arms, fulvestrant monotherapy, single-agent paclitaxel and the single-agent capecitabine treatment arms, respectively. The lifetime cost for CDK4/6i (ribociclib and palbociclib) combination therapy, fulvestrant monotherapy, paclitaxel, and capecitabine arms was estimated to be ₹1.94 million ($26,459), ₹1.92 million ($26,220), ₹315,387 ($4,296), ₹187,392 ($2,553) and ₹153,263 ($2,088), respectively, in scenario II. The mean QALYs lived per MBC patient with CDK4/6i (either ribociclib or palbociclib) combination therapy, fulvestrant, paclitaxel and capecitabine were estimated to be 1.4, 1.0, 0.9 and 0.7, respectively. None of the treatment arms are cost effective at current prices and reimbursement rates at a threshold of 1-time the per capita GDP of India. However, a 78% reduction in the current market price or a 72% reduction in the reimbursement rate of fulvestrant in the government-funded insurance program will make it a cost-effective treatment option for HR+, HER2- MBC patients in India. CONCLUSION: CDK4/6i (ribociclib and palbociclib) therapy is not a cost-effective treatment option for MBC patients. A 72% reduction in the reimbursement rate for fulvestrant monotherapy will make it a cost-effective treatment option in the Indian context.

Alkyne modified purines for assessment of activation of Plasmodium vivax hypnozoites and growth of pre-erythrocytic and erythrocytic stages in Plasmodium spp.

Malaria is a major global health problem which predominantly afflicts developing countries. Although many antimalarial therapies are currently available, the protozoan parasite causing this disease, Plasmodium spp., continues to evade eradication efforts. One biological phenomenon hampering eradication efforts is the parasite's ability to arrest development, transform into a drug-insensitive form, and then resume growth post-therapy. Currently, the mechanisms by which the parasite enters arrested development, or dormancy, and later recrudesces or reactivates to continue development, are unknown and the malaria field lacks techniques to study these elusive mechanisms. Since Plasmodium spp. salvage purines for DNA synthesis, we hypothesised that alkyne-containing purine nucleosides could be used to develop a DNA synthesis marker which could be used to investigate mechanisms behind dormancy. Using copper-catalysed click chemistry methods, we observe incorporation of alkyne modified adenosine, inosine, and hypoxanthine in actively replicating asexual blood stages of Plasmodium falciparum and incorporation of modified adenosine in actively replicating liver stage schizonts of Plasmodium vivax. Notably, these modified purines were not incorporated in dormant liver stage hypnozoites, suggesting this marker could be used as a tool to differentiate replicating and non-replicating liver forms and, more broadly, as a tool for advancing our understanding of Plasmodium dormancy mechanisms.

The Validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (vIGA-AD™): a clinical outcome measure for the severity of atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: The validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (vIGA-AD™) is a standardized severity assessment for use in clinical trials and registries for atopic dermatitis (AD). OBJECTIVES: To investigate the reliability, validity, responsiveness and within-patient meaningful change of the vIGA-AD. METHODS: Data were analysed from adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD in the BREEZE-AD1 (N = 624 patients; NCT03334396), BREEZE-AD2 (N = 615; NCT03334422) and BREEZE-AD5 (N = 440; NCT03435081) phase III baricitinib clinical studies. RESULTS: Across studies, test-retest reliability for stable patients showed moderate-to-good agreement [range of Kappa values for Patient Global Impression of Severity-Atopic Dermatitis (PGI-S-AD), 0·516-0·639; for Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), 0·658-0·778]. Moderate-to-large correlations between vIGA-AD and EASI or body surface area (range at baseline, 0·497-0·736; Week 16, 0·716-0·893) supported convergent validity. Known-groups validity was demonstrated vs. EASI and PGI-S-AD (vIGA-AD for severe vs. moderate EASI categories at baseline, P < 0·001). Responsiveness was demonstrated vs. EASI (P < 0·001 for much improved vs. improved and improved vs. stable). Anchor- and distribution-based methods supported a vIGA-AD change of -1·0 as clinically meaningful. These findings are limited to populations defined by the studies' inclusion and exclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The vIGA-AD demonstrated sufficient reliability, validity, responsiveness and interpretation standards for use in clinical trials. What is already known about this topic? A description of the development of the validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (vIGA-AD™) has been published previously. What does this study add? The current study validates the vIGA-AD by demonstrating appropriate test-retest reliability, convergent validity, known-groups validity and responsiveness across three baricitinib clinical studies. In addition, a 1-point change was identified as a clinically meaningful patient-perceived change minimal clinically important difference in the vIGA-AD. What are the clinical implications of the work? The vIGA-AD is a measure for investigator assessment of atopic dermatitis suitable for use in clinical research.

Non-Invasive Assessment of Locally Overexpressed Human Adenosine 2A Receptors in the Heart of Transgenic Mice.

A2A adenosine receptors (A2A-AR) have a cardio-protective function upon ischemia and reperfusion, but on the other hand, their stimulation could lead to arrhythmias. Our aim was to investigate the potential use of the PET radiotracer [18F]FLUDA to non-invasively determine the A2A-AR availability for diagnosis of the A2AR status. Therefore, we compared mice with cardiomyocyte-specific overexpression of the human A2A-AR (A2A-AR TG) with the respective wild type (WT). We determined: (1) the functional impact of the selective A2AR ligand FLUDA on the contractile function of atrial mouse samples, (2) the binding parameters (Bmax and KD) of [18F]FLUDA on mouse and human atrial tissue samples by autoradiographic studies, and (3) investigated the in vivo uptake of the radiotracer by dynamic PET imaging in A2A-AR TG and WT. After A2A-AR stimulation by the A2A-AR agonist CGS 21680 in isolated atrial preparations, antagonistic effects of FLUDA were found in A2A-AR-TG animals but not in WT. Radiolabelled [18F]FLUDA exhibited a KD of 5.9 ± 1.6 nM and a Bmax of 455 ± 78 fmol/mg protein in cardiac samples of A2A-AR TG, whereas in WT, as well as in human atrial preparations, only low specific binding was found. Dynamic PET studies revealed a significantly higher initial uptake of [18F]FLUDA into the myocardium of A2A-AR TG compared to WT. The hA2A-AR-specific binding of [18F]FLUDA in vivo was verified by pre-administration of the highly affine A2AAR-specific antagonist istradefylline. Conclusion: [18F]FLUDA is a promising PET probe for the non-invasive assessment of the A2A-AR as a marker for pathologies linked to an increased A2A-AR density in the heart, as shown in patients with heart failure.

Cost-Effectiveness of Combination of Baricitinib and Remdesivir in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 in the United States: A Modelling Study.

INTRODUCTION: Baricitinib-remdesivir (BARI-REM) combination is superior to remdesivir (REM) in reducing recovery time and accelerating clinical improvement among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), specifically those receiving high-flow oxygen/noninvasive ventilation. Here we assessed the cost-effectiveness of BARI-REM versus REM in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the USA. METHODS: A three-state model was developed addressing costs and patient utility associated with COVID-19 hospitalization, immediate post hospital care, and subsequent lifetime medical care. Analysis was performed from the perspective of a payer and a hospital. Both perspectives evaluated two subgroups: all patients and patients who required oxygen. The primary measures of benefit in the model were patient quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) accrued during and after hospitalization, cost per life years gained, cost per death avoided, and cost per use of mechanical ventilation avoided. RESULTS: In the base-case payer perspective with a lifetime horizon, treatment with BARI-REM versus REM resulted in an incremental total cost of $7962, a gain of 0.446 life years and gain of 0.3565 QALYs over REM. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of using BARI-REM were estimated as $22,334 per QALY and $17,858 per life year. The base-case and sensitivity analyses showed that the total incremental cost per QALY falls within the reduced willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY applied under health emergencies. In all hospitalized patients, treatment with BARI-REM versus REM reduced total hospital expenditures per patient by $1778 and total reimbursement payments by $1526, resulting in a $252 reduction in net costs per patient; it also resulted in a net gain of 0.0018 QALYs and increased survival of COVID-19 hospitalizations by 2.7%. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that BARI-REM is cost-effective compared to using REM for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The base-case results of this cost-effectiveness model were most sensitive to average annual medical costs for recovered patients.

Cost-Effectiveness of Baricitinib Compared With Standard of Care: A Modeling Study in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in the United States.

PURPOSE: In the Phase III COV-BARRIER (Efficacy and Safety of Baricitinib for the Treatment of Hospitalised Adults With COVID-19) trial, treatment with baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor, in addition to standard of care (SOC), was associated with significantly reduced mortality over 28 days in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), with a safety profile similar to that of SOC alone. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of baricitinib + SOC versus SOC alone (which included systemic corticosteroids and remdesivir) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the United States. METHODS: An economic model was developed to simulate inpatients' stay, discharge to postacute care, and recovery. Costs modeled included payor costs, hospital costs, and indirect costs. Benefits modeled included life-years (LYs) gained, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, deaths avoided, and use of mechanical ventilation avoided. The primary analysis was performed from a payor perspective over a lifetime horizon; a secondary analysis was performed from a hospital perspective. The base-case analysis modeled the numeric differences in treatment effectiveness observed in the COV-BARRIER trial. Scenario analyses were also performed in which the clinical benefit of baricitinib was limited to the statistically significant reduction in mortality demonstrated in the trial. FINDINGS: In the base-case payor perspective model, an incremental total cost of 17,276 US dollars (USD), total QALYs gained of 0.6703, and total LYs gained of 0.837 were found with baricitinib + SOC compared with SOC alone. With the addition of baricitinib, survival was increased by 5.1% and the use of mechanical ventilation was reduced by 1.6%. The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 25,774 USD/QALY gained and 20,638 USD/LY gained; a "mortality-only" scenario analysis yielded similar results of 26,862 USD/QALY gained and 21,433 USD/LY gained. From the hospital perspective, combination treatment with baricitinib + SOC was more effective and less costly than was SOC alone in the base case, with an incremental cost of 38,964 USD per death avoided in the mortality-only scenario. IMPLICATIONS: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the United States, the addition of baricitinib to SOC was cost-effective. Cost-effectiveness was demonstrated from both the payor and the hospital perspectives. These findings were robust to sensitivity analysis and to conservative assumptions limiting the clinical benefits of baricitinib to the statistically significant reduction in mortality demonstrated in the COV-BARRIER trial.

Novel quantitative digital image analysis methodology for assessment of inflammatory changes in MRI data in a post-hoc analysis of data acquired from a phase IIb study of baricitinib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate a novel quantitative methodology to assess inflammatory changes in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data from patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and the impact of image quality on imaging outcomes compared to the RA Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (RAMRIS). METHODS: Three-dimensional, T1-weighted, fat-suppressed MRI sequences of the hand/wrist before and after intravenous Gadolinium contrast from patients with RA in a placebo-controlled clinical trial (NCT01185353) were re-evaluated post hoc. The methodology was integrated into proprietary software (DYNAMIKA®) and assessed inflammation through pixelated measurements of the contrast-enhancing (inflammatory) volume. A semi-automatic approach outlined contrast-enhancing synovial tissue in the wrist and second to fifth metacarpophalangeal joints with a rough region of interest (ROI); quantitative imaging biomarkers were generated by means of quantitative total volume of inflammation and quantitative degree of inflammation relative to the signal in a 1 cm in diameter ROI in the center of the thenar or lumbrical muscle for internal reference. The time from Gadolinium injection to finalization of the post-contrast images was calculated from the images' Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine header. An experienced reader graded image quality as poor, acceptable, or good. RESULTS: Results from this quantitative methodology, especially when excluding images with poor quality scores (14-32%), provided a more pronounced and monotonically increasing dose-response than the original RAMRIS results on synovitis and osteitis. CONCLUSIONS: This computer-aided quantitative scoring method provided continuous measures of inflammatory changes relative to muscle and may be more sensitive and interpretable concerning dose/response separation between RA treatment groups.

Cost Effectiveness of Ribociclib in Combination with Fulvestrant for the Treatment of Postmenopausal Women with HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer Who Have Received No or Only One Prior Line of Endocrine Therapy: A Canadian Healthcare Perspective.

BACKGROUND: The MONALEESA-3 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of ribociclib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant for patients with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). This analysis evaluated the cost effectiveness of ribociclib plus fulvestrant versus fulvestrant in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC from a Canadian healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for ribociclib plus fulvestrant versus fulvestrant, was estimated using a semi-Markov cohort model developed in Microsoft Excel, with states for progression-free, post-progression, and dead. A 15-year time horizon was used. Survival distributions for progression-free survival (PFS), post-progression survival (PPS), and time to discontinuation (TTD) were based on parametric survival distributions fit to data from MONALEESA-3. Health-state utilities were estimated using EQ-5D index values collected in MONALEESA-3. Direct costs of ABC treatment (medication and administration costs, follow-up and monitoring, adverse events, subsequent treatments) were based on Canadian-specific values from published sources. Costs (2019 CAN$) and QALYs were discounted at 1.5% annually. RESULTS: In the base case, ribociclib plus fulvestrant was estimated to result in gains of 1.19 life-years and 0.96 QALYs versus fulvestrant, at an incremental cost of $151,371. The ICER of ribociclib plus fulvestrant versus fulvestrant was $157,343 per QALY gained based on the mean of probabilistic analyses. Results were sensitive to parametric distributions used for projecting long-term TTD, PFS, and PPS. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with HR+/HER2- ABC, ribociclib plus fulvestrant is projected to result in substantial gains in QALYs compared with fulvestrant. At its current list price, ribociclib used in combination with fulvestrant is likely to be cost effective in these patients at a threshold ICER of $157,343. These results may be useful in deliberations regarding reimbursement and access to this treatment.

Comparison of healthcare resource utilization and costs of patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer treated with ribociclib versus other CDK4/6 inhibitors.

AIMS: To assess healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and healthcare costs among women with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (HR+/HER2- aBC) treated with cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors. METHODS: Women with HR+/HER2- aBC, initiating CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment were identified using IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases (Q1/2000-Q3/2018). Based on the first CDK4/6 inhibitor patients received (index therapy), three cohorts were identified: abemaciclib, palbociclib, and ribociclib. The baseline period (six months preceding treatment initiation) was used to describe patient characteristics. All-cause HRU and direct total healthcare costs (medical and pharmacy) from treatment initiation until the earliest of the end of index therapy, continuous health plan enrollment, or data availability, were compared for the ribociclib cohort versus the abemaciclib and palbociclib cohorts, separately, using weighted regression analyses balanced on baseline covariates. RESULTS: Average age at treatment initiation was ∼60 years and the majority of patients were postmenopausal (abemaciclib: 92%; palbociclib: 92%; ribociclib: 79%). Average follow-up duration was 3.9, 8.8, and 5.9 months for the abemaciclib, palbociclib, and ribociclib cohorts, respectively. After reweighting, HRU was not statistically different between the ribociclib and abemaciclib cohorts, however, the ribociclib cohort incurred significantly lower total healthcare costs (-$5,452; 95% CI: -$8,726; -$1,139, p = .01). Medical costs (driven by outpatient costs) and pharmacy costs (driven by CDK4/6 inhibitor costs) were significantly lower for the ribociclib cohort. Among the reweighted ribociclib and palbociclib cohorts, HRU and total healthcare costs were not statistically different, although the ribociclib cohort had lower outpatient costs per-patient-per-month (-$1,245, 95% CI: -$2,349; -$37, p = .04). LIMITATIONS: Due to the retrospective, observational design, treatment cohorts were not randomly assigned. CONCLUSIONS: During CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy, ribociclib patients tended to incur lower medical and pharmacy costs than abemaciclib patients. Among ribociclib and palbociclib patients, HRU and healthcare costs were similar.

Cost Effectiveness of Ribociclib Plus a Nonsteroidal Aromatase Inhibitor in Pre-/Perimenopausal, HR+ and HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer: A Canadian Healthcare Perspective.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The MONALEESA-7 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of ribociclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) [with goserelin] for pre-/perimenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer. This analysis evaluated the cost effectiveness of ribociclib plus NSAI vs NSAI monotherapy and tamoxifen monotherapy from the perspective of the Canadian healthcare system. METHODS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for ribociclib plus an NSAI vs an NSAI and vs tamoxifen was estimated using a semi-Markov cohort model developed in Microsoft Excel with a 15-year time horizon and states for progression-free survival, post-progression survival, and dead. Survival distributions for progression-free survival, post-progression survival, and time to discontinuation as well as health-state utilities were estimated using data from MONALEESA-7. Direct costs of advanced breast cancer treatment were based on Canadian-specific values from published sources. Costs ($CAN 2019) and QALYs were discounted at 1.5% annually. RESULTS: Ribociclib plus an NSAI was estimated to yield gains of 1.42 life-years and 1.17 QALYs vs an NSAI, and 2.61 life-years and 2.12 QALYs vs tamoxifen, at incremental costs of $209,701 and $220,836, respectively. In probabilistic analyses, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for ribociclib plus an NSAI was estimated to be $178,872 per QALY gained vs an NSAI and $104,400 per QALY gained vs tamoxifen. Results of deterministic analyses were similar (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $177,245 and $103,316 vs NSAI and tamoxifen, respectively). Results were sensitive to parametric distributions used for projecting progression-free survival and the time horizon. CONCLUSIONS: At its current list price, ribociclib used in combination with NSAI is likely to be co-effective relative to an NSAI alone or tamoxifen alone if the willingness-to-pay threshold is less than approximately $178,000 per QALY. These results have informed deliberations regarding reimbursement and access to this treatment in Canada and may be useful for decision makers in other settings.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ribociclib plus fulvestrant for hormone receptor-positive/human EGF receptor 2-negative breast cancer.

Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ribociclib plus fulvestrant versus fulvestrant in hormone receptor-positive/human EGF receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer. Materials & methods: A three-state Markov model was developed to evaluate the costs and effectiveness over 10 years. Direct costs and utility values were obtained from previously published studies. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to evaluate the cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per additional quality-adjusted life year. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $1,073,526 per quality-adjusted life year of ribociclib plus fulvestrant versus fulvestrant. Conclusions: Ribociclib plus fulvestrant is not cost-effective versus fulvestrant in the treatment of advanced hormone receptor-positive/human EGF receptor 2-negative breast cancer. When ribociclib is at 10% of the full price, ribociclib plus fulvestrant could be cost-effective.

First-line Treatment with Ribociclib plus Endocrine Therapy for Premenopausal Women with Hormone-receptor-positive Advanced Breast Cancer: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis incorporating recent phase III clinical trial (MONALEESA-7) data to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ribociclib (RIB) as a first-line treatment for premenopausal women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC) from the United States healthcare payer perspective. In addition, because RIB has not been marketed in China, we identified the range of drug costs for which RIB could be considered cost effective from a Chinese healthcare system perspective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding RIB to endocrine therapy over a lifetime. The clinical outcomes and utility data were obtained from published literature. Costs data were obtained from United States and Chinese official websites, and we determined the potential price for RIB in China based on its price in the United States. The main outcomes of this study were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: The model projected that mean outcome was better with RIB and endocrine combined (3.83366 QALYs) than with endocrine therapy alone (2.71203 QALYs). In the United States, RIB and endocrine therapy cost an additional $604,960.06, resulting in an ICER of $539,357.95/QALY compared with endocrine monotherapy. Subgroup analyses indicated that, in China, the projected mean outcomes were better for RIB and endocrine therapy (6.37 QALYs) than for endocrine monotherapy (2.71 QALYs). The corresponding incremental costs were $224,731.88943. Thus, the ICER comparing RIB and endocrine therapy with endocrine therapy alone represented a $61,454.96/QALY gain. CONCLUSION: Additional use of RIB is estimated to not be cost effective as a first-line treatment for premenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative ABC in the United States. A value-based price for the cost of RIB is less than $31.74/200 mg for China.

Cost-effectiveness of ribociclib plus endocrine therapy versus placebo plus endocrine therapy in HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The 2015 American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines recommend first-line treatment of hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer with endocrine therapy plus or minus palbociclib, a selective cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitor. In 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved ribociclib, a new orally available selective CDK4/6 inhibitor. While gains in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from ribociclib are important for clinical and treatment outcomes, trade-offs in adverse events (AEs) and additional costs necessitate cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to assist consideration by third-party payer systems, physicians, and patients. OBJECTIVES: To (a) develop a Markov model and (b) determine the cost-effectiveness of ribociclib plus endocrine therapy versus endocrine therapy alone as treatment for premenopausal and perimenopausal patients with HR-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer. METHODS: A lifetime 3-state Markov model ("stable," "progressed," and "dead" health states) was developed using a U.S. payer perspective. Transition probabilities were calculated based on OS and PFS outcomes from the randomized controlled phase 3 trial MONALEESA-7. These Kaplan-Meier curves were extended to lifetime by estimating best-fit distributions using loglogistic distribution for ribociclib curves and Weibull distribution for placebo curves. Costs were obtained from national data sources using 2019 U.S. dollars (USD) and discounted by 3%. Utilities were obtained via published breast cancer literature and were included for each health state and for time spent with each AE. Results were expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as USD per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved. Treatments were assumed to be cost-effective based on a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. Base-case, 1-way sensitivity tornado diagrams and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated changes in the ICER and were driven by the cost of ribociclib and the utility of remaining in the stable health state. RESULTS: Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy was cost-effective at an ICER of $124,513 per QALY when compared with endocrine therapy alone at a WTP threshold of $150,000. The ribociclib plus endocrine therapy arm had an effectiveness of 5.28 QALYs and a total cost of $385,112, while placebo plus endocrine therapy provided only 2.46 QALYs at a lower total cost of $67.246. The model was sensitive to the cost of ribociclib and the utility of time spent in the stable health state. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that endocrine therapy alone was cost-effective until a WTP of $125,000 and was cost-effective 72% of the time at the WTP threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy is more cost-effective than endocrine therapy alone. Professionals in managed care settings should consider the pharmacoeconomic benefits of ribociclib for the treatment of HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer as they make value-based formulary decisions. Further CEAs should be considered as direct treatment comparison trials between CDK4/6 inhibitors are completed in the future. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have nothing to disclose.