Uso de carboximaltose férrica no tratamento de deficiência de ferro em pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca na perspectiva da saúde suplementar: análise de custo-efetividade e impacto orçamentário / Ferric carboxymaltose for treatment of iron deficiency in heart failure patients from the supplementary health care system perspective: cost-effectiveness and budgetary impact analysis

Objetivo: Avaliar a relação de custo-efetividade e impacto orçamentário (AIO) do tratamento de deficiência de ferro (DF), com ou sem anemia, em pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca (IC) com fração de ejeção reduzida NYHA II e III, com uso de carboximaltose férrica (CMF), comparada ao placebo (não intervenção), sob a perspectiva pagadora da saúde suplementar (SS). Métodos: No modelo econômico, foi utilizada a árvore de decisão, no horizonte temporal de 52 semanas, na perspectiva da SS, sendo mensurados os benefícios clínicos e os custos associados à intervenção. Também foram executadas análises de sensibilidade determinística e probabilística para avaliar possíveis incertezas futuras. A elaboração da AIO foi realizada considerando o horizonte temporal de cinco anos, a população a ser tratada, os diferentes cenários de market share e os custos diretos envolvidos no tratamento atual e no tratamento proposto. Resultados: A razão de custo-efetividade incremental (RCEI) foi de -R$ 20.517,07 para um ano de vida ajustado pela qualidade (QALYs). O impacto da incorporação da CMF na SS gerou uma economia em cinco anos de -R$ 43.945.225. Conclusões: A análise apresentada mostrou que o tratamento com CMF reduziu o custo de hospitalização, o número de consultas ambulatoriais e o custo de outros medicamentos relacionados à IC e proporcionou uma economia anual. Considerando um horizonte de tempo de 52 semanas, a terapia intravenosa com CMF resultou em uma estratégia de redução de custos, quando comparada ao tratamento proposto para a DF em pacientes com IC.

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact (AIO) of iron carboxymaltose (CMF) for treatment of iron deficiency (ID), with or without anemia, in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction NYHA II and III compared to placebo (non-intervention), from the perspective of paying supplementary health (SS). Methods: In the economic model, the decision tree was used, with a time horizon of 52 weeks, from the SS perspective, measuring the clinical benefits and costs associated with the intervention. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyzes were also performed to assess possible future uncertainties. The elaboration of the AIO was carried out considering a time horizon of five years, population to be treated, different market share scenarios and direct costs involved in the current treatment and in the proposed treatment. Results: The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was -R$ 20,517.07 for 1 quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The budget impact of incorporation of the CMF in SSprovided savings in five years of -R$ 43,945,225. Conclusions: The presented analysis showed that treatment with CMF reduced the cost of hospitalization, the number of outpatient visits and the cost of other HF-related medications and provided annual savings. Considering a time horizon of 52 weeks, intravenous therapy with CMF resulted in a cost-saving strategy when compared to the proposed treatment for DF in patients with HF.

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce.We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.

We treated 533 IBD patients with adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022. No differences between these 4 ADA biosimilars were found for reaching remission in naive patients, maintaining remission for nonmedical switching, clinical response, steroid-free remission, surgery rate, mucosal healing, or safety.

Replacement of Adalimumab Originator to Adalimumab Biosimilar for a Non-Medical Reason in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Real-life Comparison of Adalimumab Biosimilars Currently Available in Italy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have been included into the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the different ADA biosimilars after replacing the ADA originator for a non-medical reason remains scarce. We aimed to compare in a real-life setting the efficacy and safety of four ADA biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in IBD patients after replacing the originator for a non-medical reason. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was performed on consecutive IBD patients, analyzing clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. The primary endpoints of the study were maintenance of clinical remission and safety of the different biosimilars. RESULTS: 153 patients were enrolled, 26 with UC and 127 with CD. Clinical remission was maintained in 124 out of 153 (81%) patients after a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-24) months, without any significant difference between the four ADA biosimilars. ADA biosimilars dosage was optimized in five patients (3.3%). Loss of remission was significantly higher in UC patients (10/26 patients, 38.5%) than in CD patients (19/127 patients, 14.9%, p<0.025). Adverse events occurred in 12 (7.9%) patients; the large majority were mild. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars when used to replace the ADA originator for a non-medical reason. However, in UC patients the replacement of ADA originator for this reason should be carefully assessed.

Short term colectomy rate and mortality for severe ulcerative colitis in the last 40 years. Has something changed?

BACKGROUND: About 20% of ulcerative colitis patients will experience a severe attack during the course of the disease. Intensive treatment, early surgery and, more recently, "rescue therapies" improved prognosis. AIMS: To evaluate in-hospital colectomy and mortality rates for severe ulcerative colitis over 40 years in two referral centres. METHODS: All in-patients with severe ulcerative colitis from 1976 to 2010 were considered. 159 patients were assigned to 4 cohorts: cohort 1 n=34 (1976-1980); cohort 2 n=29 (1986-1990); cohort 3 n=45 (1996-2000); cohort 4 n=51 (2006-2010). RESULTS: The colectomy rate was 64.7%, 62.0%, 44.4% and 9.8%, respectively, in the four cohorts (p<0.0001). The mortality rate decreased from 8.8% in cohort 1, to 0 in cohort 4 (p=0.04). Infliximab was used only in cohort 4 (17 patients). CONCLUSIONS: A significant reduction of colectomy and mortality rates in severe ulcerative colitis was observed in the last 40 years. Better management of patients, reduced attitude to operate severe ulcerative colitis, as well as the use of Infliximab in the last cohort, all could have contributed to the improved outcome.

[Prevention of post-operative recurrence in Crohn's disease: a critical review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses of different therapeutic strategies]. / La prevenzione della recidiva post-chirurgica nella malattia di Crohn. Revisione degli studi clinici controllati e delle meta-analisi sulle strategie terapeutiche.

Surgery is an almost inevitable event in Crohn's disease but is not curative; post-operative recurrence follows a sequential and predictable course. Prevention of post-operative recurrence in Crohn's disease is therefore a relevant problem in the management of the disease. Several drugs have been evaluated to decrease the risk of recurrence: these include mesalazine, antibiotics, probiotics, budesonide, thiopurines and biologic agents. This review focuses on the randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses addressing different drugs and strategies for preventing post-operative recurrence in Crohn's disease.

Low bioavailability and traditional systemic steroids in IBD: can the former take over the latter?

Systemic corticosteroids have been used to treat active inflammatory bowel disease for over 50 years by virtue of their unquestionable efficacy in inducing clinical remission rapidly in the vast majority of patients. Nevertheless, traditional corticosteroids are associated to a plethora of potentially serious side effects due to their systemic metabolism; for this reason, interest has lately been growing in newer steroid compounds characterized by a high topical anti-inflammatory activity and a low systemic bioavailability. These compounds, namely budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate--regarding the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease--can be administered orally and thanks to sophisticated delivery systems are conveyed specifically to the inflamed gut mucosa where they exert their anti-inflammatory action. After intestinal absorption, these drugs are promptly and efficiently inactivated by the liver, so that only inactive molecules reach the systemic circulation. This review revises the main clinical trials, meta-analyses and observational studies conducted on traditional and newer steroids, and critically interprets the main results achieved by these studies.

Historical evolution of the management of severe ulcerative colitis.

Ulcerative colitis was first described in 1859, but it was not until the early 20th century that it became a well recognized clinical entity. The patients of the old series showed high mortality rate ranging from 30% in the severe forms to 60% in the fulminating forms. The introduction of corticosteroids in the 1950s dramatically improved the prognosis of patients with severe ulcerative colitis. The strategy based on intensive medical treatment, early detection of risk factors and early surgery progressively reduced the mortality rate to less than 1%. Tachycardia, fever, reduced number of intestinal sounds, hypoalbuminaemia, hypokalaemia metabolic alkalosis and elevated C-reactive protein were recognized to be the most useful risk factors. Plain abdominal X-ray remains the very reliable suitable tool to detect early complications of severe colitis. Once reduced the mortality near to zero, treatment has been addressed to avoid colectomy. Cyclosporine and Infliximab are currently used as rescue therapy, however, despite the high remission rates achieved with both drugs, about 50% of the treated patients ultimately will come to colectomy over the next few years.