Expected Impact of Universal Immunization With Nirsevimab Against RSV-Related Outcomes and Costs Among All US Infants in Their First RSV Season: A Static Model.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is associated with substantial morbidity in the United States, especially among infants. Nirsevimab, an investigational long-acting monoclonal antibody, was evaluated as an immunoprophylactic strategy for infants in their first RSV season and for its potential impact on RSV-associated, medically attended lower respiratory tract illness (RSV-MALRTI) and associated costs. METHODS: A static decision-analytic model of the US birth cohort during its first RSV season was developed to estimate nirsevimab's impact on RSV-related health events and costs; model inputs included US-specific costs and epidemiological data. Modelled RSV-related outcomes included primary care and emergency room visits, hospitalizations including intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilations, and RSV-related mortality. RESULTS: Under current standard of care, RSV caused 529 915 RSV-MALRTIs and 47 281 hospitalizations annually, representing $1.2 billion (2021 US dollars [USD]) in costs. Universal immunization of all infants with nirsevimab is expected to reduce 290 174 RSV-MALRTI, 24 986 hospitalizations, and expenditures of $612 million 2021 USD. CONCLUSIONS: An all-infant immunization strategy with nirsevimab could substantially reduce the health and economic burden for US infants during their first RSV season. While this reduction is driven by term infants, all infants, including palivizumab-eligible and preterm infants, would benefit from this strategy.

Budget impact of lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Three novel acute treatments for migraine-lasmiditan, ubrogepant, and rimegepant-were approved by the FDA in 2019 and 2020 for adults with migraine with and without aura. American Headache Society guidance recommends that these novel acute treatments be considered for patients who are contraindicated to or fail to respond or tolerate oral triptans, the current standard of acute care. OBJECTIVE: To estimate, from a US commercial plan perspective, the budget impact of adding lasmiditan as an option to a formulary that already includes ubrogepant and rimegepant. METHODS: Epidemiologic data were drawn from US Census data, the American Migraine Prevalence and Preventive study, and the first wave of the OVERCOME US survey, a web-based survey that included 21,000 patients with migraine. A model with a 3-year time horizon was built assuming that demand for the novel acute treatments would not vary based on whether lasmiditan is included in the formulary. The model examined a variety of populations, in particular beneficiaries with previous use of 1 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to triptans and beneficiaries with previous use of 2 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to triptans. Primary outcomes were the incremental differences in total cost and average cost per member per month (PMPM) between scenarios with and without lasmiditan. One-way sensitivity analyses with model parameters that were varied by plus or minus 15% were conducted to assess the effect of key parameters on the incremental total cost over 3 years. RESULTS: The addition of lasmiditan to a formulary that already includes ubrogepant and rimegepant resulted in a total savings of -$927,657 (-1.5% compared with the scenario without lasmiditan) over a 3-year time horizon in the population with previous history of using 1 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to a triptan. In the population with previous history of using 2 or more oral triptans or contraindicated, the addition of lasmiditan resulted in a total budget impact of -$466,518 (-1.3%) over a 3-year time horizon. Most of the cost savings was attributable to reductions in drug acquisition cost. Savings in total costs resulted in average incremental cost per PMPM of -0.03 and -$0.01, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of lasmiditan to the formulary as a novel acute treatment option for migraine alongside ubrogepant and rimegepant resulted in lower budget impact on a 3-year time horizon from a US commercial payer's perspective. This result is important to US commercial payers as they seek to incorporate the emerging novel acute treatments for migraine into their benefit designs. DISCLOSURES: This work was funded by Eli Lilly and Company. Milev and Sun are employed by Evidera, which received funding from Eli Lilly and Company for work on this project. Pohl, Mason, Njuguna, and Loo are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly and Company.

Durability of Externally Bonded Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composites in Concrete Structures: A Critical Review.

Externally bonded fiber-reinforced polymer composites have been in use in civil infrastructure for decades, but their long-term performance is still difficult to predict due to many knowledge gaps in the understanding of degradation mechanisms. This paper summarizes critical durability issues associated with the application of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) composites for rehabilitation of concrete structures. A variety of factors that affect the longevity of FRP composites are discussed: installation, quality control, material selection, and environmental conditions. Critical review of design approaches currently used in various international design guidelines is presented to identify potential opportunities for refinement of design guidance with respect to durability. Interdisciplinary approaches that combine materials science and structural engineering are recognized as having potential to develop composites with improved durability.

Economic Evaluation of an N-terminal Pro B-type Natriuretic Peptide-Supported Diagnostic Strategy Among Dyspneic Patients Suspected of Acute Heart Failure in the Emergency Department.

Our objective was to perform an economic evaluation of an N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)-supported diagnostic strategy in dyspneic patients suspected of acute heart failure in the emergency department (ED). A decision-tree model was developed to evaluate clinical outcomes and costs for NT-proBNP-supported assessment compared with clinical assessment alone over 6 months from the United States (US) Medicare perspective. The model considered rule-in/rule-out cutoffs identified in the ICON and ICON-RELOADED studies. Acute heart failure prevalence, diagnostic accuracies, and medical resource use conditional on disease status and test results were derived from ICON-RELOADED. Several assumptions based on previous studies of NT-proBNP acute dyspnea and verified with clinicians were applied to medical resource use and assessed in sensitivity analyses. Compared with clinical assessment alone, NT-proBNP-supported assessment improved overall probability of correct diagnosis by a relative 7% (18% for true-positive and 5% for true-negative). This led to relative reductions in medical resource use in ED and hospital, including fewer initial hospitalizations (-14%), required echocardiograms (-31%), cardiology admissions (-16%), intensive care unit admissions (-12%), ED readmissions (-3%), and hospital readmissions (-22%). NT-proBNP use decreased average inpatient management costs by a relative 10%, yielding cost savings of US$2,337 per patient ED visit. These findings were robust in sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, based on a contemporary trial of patients with acute dyspnea, this analysis reaffirmed that using NT-proBNP as a diagnostic tool may improve the management of patients with dyspnea presenting to EDs and is likely to be cost-saving from the US Medicare perspective.

Cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib compared with infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab and ustekinumab for the treatment of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis in Germany.

OBJECTIVES: Tofacitinib is an oral, small molecule Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib versus other available treatments for patients with moderate to severe UC following an inadequate response to conventional treatment and who are either naïve to or have failed previous biologics in Germany. METHODS: A Markov cohort model was developed to evaluate the differences in long-term costs and outcomes between tofacitinib and its comparators from the perspective of German statutory health insurance (SHI) for patients either naïve or exposed to biologics. Tofacitinib was compared to infliximab, infliximab biosimilar, adalimumab, adalimumab biosimilar, golimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and conventional therapy. Health states modeled were remission, treatment response, active UC, and post-colectomy. Patients not responding to treatment could switch to a different treatment. Treatment efficacy for induction and maintenance phases were assessed by a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA). The model included costs associated with drug administration, adverse events, and medical resource use. Extensive deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSA and PSA) were conducted. RESULTS: Over a life-time horizon, patients treated with tofacitinib gained 0.035-0.083 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and had direct cost savings to the SHI of €4,228-€17,184 compared to biologic treatments other than adalimumab biosimilar. When compared to adalimumab biosimilar, treatment with tofacitinib resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €17,497 per QALY gained and can be considered a cost-effective alternative. Compared with conventional therapy, tofacitinib resulted in a lower ICER than all other biologics. The DSA showed that the model results were most influenced by differences in treatment efficacy. The PSA suggested confidence in the base-case results considering uncertainty around parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this economic model suggest tofacitinib is a cost-effective treatment option for patients with moderate to severe UC in Germany.

An economic evaluation of tofacitinib for the treatment of moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis: modeling the cost of treatment strategies in the United States.

Aims: To evaluate the cost differences between a treatment strategy including tofacitinib (TOFA) vs treatment strategies including adalimumab (ADA), golimumab (GOL), infliximab (IFX), and vedolizumab (VEDO) among all patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) (further stratified by patients naïve/exposed to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors [TNFis]). Materials and methods: An Excel-based decision-analytic model was developed to evaluate costs from the perspective of a third-party US payer over 2 years. Efficacy and safety parameters were taken from prescribing information and published trials. All patients started induction therapy on the first treatment in the strategy and continued if efficacy criteria were met and no major adverse event occurred (in which cases they proceeded to the next treatment in the strategy). Results: The cost per member per month (PMPM) of the TOFA->IFX->VEDO->GOL strategy ($1.11) was lower than that of the ADA->IFX->VEDO->GOL strategy ($1.34; Δ = $-0.23) among the TNFi-naïve population (n = 204 patients out of a plan of one million members). Similarly, the use of TOFA before ADA (i.e. TOFA->ADA->IFX-> VEDO) was also associated with lower PMPM costs than the use of ADA before TOFA (i.e. ADA->TOFA->IFX->VEDO): $1.15 vs $1.25 (Δ = $-0.10). Similar, and often larger, differences were observed in both the overall moderate-to-severe population and the TNFi-exposed population. Sensitivity analyses resulted in the same conclusions. Limitations: Our model relied on efficacy data from prescribing information and published trials, which were not head-to-head and slightly differed with respect to methods. Additionally, our model used representative minor and major ADRs (and the associated costs) to represent toxicity management, which was a simplifying assumption. Conclusions: This analysis, the first of its kind to evaluate TOFA vis-à-vis other advanced therapies in the US, suggests the early use of TOFA among both TNFi-naïve and TNFi-failure patients results in lower PMPM costs compared with other treatment alternatives.

Comparison of Recommendations and Use of Cardiovascular Risk Equations by Health Technology Assessment Agencies and Clinical Guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: To identify risk equations for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) in primary and secondary prevention settings that are used or recommended by health technology assessment (HTA) organizations and in clinical guidelines (CGs). METHODS: A targeted literature review was conducted using a two-stage search strategy. First, HTA reviews of manufacturers' drug submissions, reports from established HTA organizations (Europe, Canada, and Australia), and CGs from countries with and without HTA organizations, including the United States, were identified. Documents published between September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2016, were examined for cardiovascular risk equations, recommendations, and commentaries. Next, publications associated with risk equations and cited by HTA and CG documents were retrieved. This literature was examined to extract commentaries and risk equation study characteristics. RESULTS: The review identified 47 risk equations, 25 in the primary CVD prevention setting (i.e., patients with no CVD history), including 5 for CVD prevention in diabetes and 22 solely in secondary prevention settings; 11 were identified for heart failure, 3 for stroke or transient ischemic attack, 2 for stable angina, and 11 for acute coronary syndrome or related conditions. A small set of primary prevention equations was found to be commonly used by HTAs, whereas secondary prevention equations were less common in HTA documents. CGs provided more risk equations as options than HTA documents. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is an abundance of risk equations developed for primary and secondary prevention, there remains a need for additional research to provide sufficient clinical and HTA guidance for risk estimation, particularly in high-risk or secondary prevention settings.