Cost-effectiveness analysis of branded and authorized generic celecoxib for patients with chronic pain in Japan.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of branded and authorized generic (AG) celecoxib for chronic pain patients with osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and low back pain (LBP), using real-world cost information for loxoprofen and pharmacotherapy for gastrointestinal bleeding. METHODS: This cost-effectiveness analysis was performed as a long-term simulation using the Markov model from the Japanese public healthcare payer's perspective. The analysis was conducted using loxoprofen with real-world weighted price by branded/generic distribution (hereinafter, loxoprofen with weighted price) as a comparator. In the model, we simulated the prognosis of patients with chronic pain by OA, RA, and LBP treated with loxoprofen or celecoxib, over a lifetime period. RESULTS: A cost-increase of 129,688 JPY (1,245.00 USD) for branded celecoxib and a cost-reduction of 6,268 JPY (60.17 USD) for AG celecoxib were recognized per patient in lifetime horizon, compared to loxoprofen with weighted price. No case was recognized to reverse the results of cost-saving by AG celecoxib in one-way sensitivity analysis. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of branded celecoxib attained 5,403,667 JPY/QALY (51,875.20 USD/QALY), compared to loxoprofen with the weighted price. CONCLUSION: The current cost-effectiveness analysis for AG celecoxib revealed its good value for costs, considering the patients' future risk of gastrointestinal injury; also, the impact on costs due to AG celecoxib against loxoprofen will be small. It implies that the disadvantage of AG celecoxib being slightly more expensive than generic loxoprofen could be offset by the good cost-effectiveness during the prognosis.

Direct and Indirect Pathways for Health-Related Quality of Life Change from Pain Improvement in Neuropathic Pain Patients with Spine Diseases: Path Analysis with Structural Equation Modeling Using Non-Interventional Study Results of Pregabalin.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain or chronic cervical pain often has a neuropathic pain (NeP) component and patients with these conditions complain of sleep deprivation, loss of physical function, and reduced productivity due to pain. The objective of this study was to clarify the pathway by which pain, sleep disturbance due to pain, and physical function status influence QOL measures in chronic low back pain patients with NeP associated with lumbar spine diseases (CLBP-NeP) and in chronic cervical pain patients with NeP associated with cervical spine diseases (CCP-NeP). METHODS: A model assuming pain numeric rating scale (NRS), pain-related sleep interference scale (PRSIS), and functional indices (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire [RMDQ], Neck Disability index [NDI]) as factors that can affect outcomes such as QOL (calculated using EuroQoL 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)), the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), and the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) was developed using structural equation modeling. RESULTS: Overall trends were frequently observed in both patients with CLBP-NeP and CCP-NeP. Pain NRS had the largest comprehensive direct impact on QOL based on EQ-5D and an overall impression of changing symptoms. The effects of pain NRS on each outcome were largely due to direct pain-related effects; however, for EQ-5D, an indirect effect via functional improvement was the primary factor. CONCLUSION: Although the results of this study suggest that the indirect functional improvement of pain relief may not be recognized as a significant component of therapeutic effects by both physicians and patients, the pain-relieving intervention contributes directly to improvement of patients' overall QOL and also indirectly via functional improvement in Japanese primary care settings. Accordingly, to achieve the therapeutic goal for patients with NeP and minimize the impact of pain burden, our findings indicate that pain relief interventions are also crucial from the perspective of the patient's HRQOL.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of Pregabalin For The Treatment Of Patients With Chronic Cervical Pain With A Neuropathic Component In Japan.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pregabalin versus other analgesics among patients with chronic cervical pain with neuropathic components during routine clinical practice in Japan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The analysis considered patients with chronic cervical pain with a neuropathic pain component (radiating pain to the upper limb) and who were treated with pregabalin with or without other analgesics (pregabalin-containing treatments) or other analgesics alone (usual care) for 8 weeks. Other analgesics included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), weak opioids, antidepressants, and antiepileptic drugs. A Markov cohort simulation model was constructed to estimate costs and effectiveness (in terms of quality-adjusted life-years, QALYs) of each treatment over a 12-month time horizon. In the model, patients transitioned among three states of pain severity (no/mild, moderate, and severe). Data were derived from a previous observational study (pregabalin-containing treatments, n = 138; usual care, n = 211). Cost inputs included medical costs and productivity losses. QALYs were calculated using the EuroQol five-dimensional, five-level questionnaire. The cost-effectiveness was evaluated using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of results. RESULTS: From the payer's perspective, pregabalin-containing treatments were more costly (JPY 61,779 versus JPY 26,428) but also more effective (0.763 QALYs versus 0.727 QALYs) than the usual care, with an ICER of JPY 970,314 per QALY gained. From the societal perspective, which also included productivity losses, the ICER reduced to JPY 458,307 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of the results. Given a hypothetical threshold value of one additional QALY of JPY 5,000,000, the probability of pregabalin-containing treatments being cost-effective was 100%. CONCLUSION: Compared with using other analgesics alone, the use of pregabalin, alone or in addition to other analgesics, was cost-effective for the treatment of chronic cervical pain with a neuropathic pain component in Japan.