The pharmacoeconomic impact of follitropin alpha biosimilars in IVF therapy in Europe: a report of the literature.

Introduction: To study the impact of biosimilars in assisted reproductive treatments, we performed a review of the literature. Biosimilars are a bioequivalent chemical drug referred to the original. Their production is strongly requested in order to reduce drug cost and reduce health economic impact on national health system. In assisted reproductive treatments different gonadotropin biosimilars are being produced.Areas covered: For this reason, we performed a review of the literature on follitropin alfa Gonal-F biosimilar, Ovaleap and Bemfola, to assess their cost efficacy in national health system. Cost effective (CE) analysis and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were used as parameters for biosimilar impact evaluation in the national health system economy. In particular, they had only slight impact on cost reduction of recombinant follitropin alfa products in Europe.Expert opinion: considering cost-effective analysis, Gonal-F remains the first choice for national health systems. However, well-designed powered methods are strongly needed to assess biosimilars cost-effectiveness.

Replacing HMG/FSH by low-dose HCG to complete corifollitropin alfa stimulation reduces cost per clinical pregnancy: a randomized pragmatic trial.

RESEARCH QUESTION: The cost of IVF treatment remains high, among other factors because of the medication needed for ovarian stimulation. This study investigated the effect of using low-dose human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) for the second phase of follicular maturation after corifollitropin alfa induction, to replace the more expensive, either recombinant or human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG), on the cost of ovarian stimulation. DESIGN: One hundred and five patients were randomly divided into two groups: patients in the HCG group (n = 50) received low-dose HCG from Day 7 until the diameter of at least three follicles reached 17 mm or more, while patients in the FSH group (n = 55) received conventional ovarian stimulation with highly purified HMG injections. RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate in the HCG group was 38% higher than in the FSH group (number needed to treat, NNT = 13). The cost per pregnancy needed for ovarian stimulation was reduced from €4902 in the FSH group to €2684 in the HCG group. Hence, the cost of ovarian stimulation medication to obtain 10 pregnancies using the conventional FSH protocol is sufficient to attain 18 pregnancies when applying the low-dose HCG protocol. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence that using HCG instead of HMG/FSH for ovarian stimulation results in a significant reduction in the cost of IVF with, at least, an equivalent pregnancy rate.

A cost-effectiveness modeling evaluation comparing a biosimilar follitropin alfa preparation with its reference product for live birth outcome in Germany, Italy and Spain.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Although biosimilar drugs may be cheaper to purchase than reference biological products, they may not be the most cost-effective treatment to achieve a desired outcome. The analysis reported here compared the overall costs to achieve live birth using the reference follitropin alfa (GONAL-f) or a biosimilar (Ovaleap) in Spain, Italy and Germany. METHODS: Patient and treatment data was obtained from published sources; assisted-reproductive technology, gonadotropin, follow-up and adverse-event-related costs were calculated from tariffs and reimbursement frameworks for each country. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated from the difference in costs between reference and biosimilar in each country, divided by the difference in live-birth rates. Mean cost per live birth was calculated as total costs divided by the live-birth rate. RESULTS: The published live birth rates were 32.2% (reference) and 26.8% (biosimilar). Drug costs per patient were higher for the reference recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone in all three countries, with larger cost differences in Germany (€157.38) and Italy (€141.50) than in Spain (€22.41). The ICER for the reference product compared with the biosimilar was €2917.47 in Germany, €415.43 in Spain and €2623.09 in Italy. However, the overall cost per live birth was higher for the biosimilar in all three countries (Germany €8135.04 vs. €9185.34; Italy €8545.22 vs. €9733.37; Spain €14,859.53 vs. €17,767.19). Uncertainty in efficacy, mean gonadotropin dose and costs did not have a strong effect on the ICERs. CONCLUSIONS: When considering live birth outcomes, treatment with the reference follitropin alfa was more cost effective than treatment with the biosimilar follitropin alfa.

Economic impact of ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa versus conventional daily gonadotropins in oocyte donors: a randomized study.

Assisted reproductive technologies are well-established treatments for many types of subfertility representing substantial economic and healthcare implications for patients, healthcare providers and society as a whole. In order to optimize outcomes according to the type of gonadotrophins within an oocyte donor programme, we performed an economic evaluation based on data collected in a multicentre, prospective, randomized study within three private clinics belonging to the IVI Group. Results showed no relevant between-group differences in the clinical variables. According to the economic analysis, ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa increased the overall cost of the treatment as well as the cost per retrieved and effective oocyte, although the differences were not statistically significant. In conclusion, cost savings can be achieved using cheaper gonadotrophins during ovarian stimulation. The cost of corifollitropin alfa compared with recombinant FSH and highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin should be considered when making treatment decisions.

Economic Evaluation of Three Frequently Used Gonadotrophins in Assisted Reproduction Techniques in the Management of Infertility in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Subfertility represents a multidimensional problem associated with significant distress and impaired social well-being. In the Netherlands, an estimated 50,000 couples visit their general practitioner and 30,000 couples seek medical specialist care for subfertility. We conducted an economic evaluation comparing recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (follitropin alfa, r-hFSH, Gonal-F®) with two classes of urinary gonadotrophins-highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin (hp-HMG, Menopur®) and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (uFSH, Fostimon®)-for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment in the Netherlands. METHODS: A pharmacoeconomic model was developed, simulating each step in the IVF protocol from the start of therapy until either a live birth, a new IVF treatment cycle or cessation of IVF, following a long down-regulation protocol. A decision tree combined with a Markov model details progress through each health state, including ovum pickup, fresh embryo transfer, up to two subsequent cryo-preserved embryo transfers, and (ongoing) pregnancy or miscarriage. A health insurer perspective was chosen, and the time horizon was set at a maximum of three consecutive treatment cycles, in accordance with Dutch reimbursement policy. Transition probabilities and costing data were derived from a real-world observational outcomes database (from Germany) and official tariff lists (from the Netherlands). Adverse events were considered equal among the comparators and were therefore excluded from the economic analysis. A Monte Carlo simulation of 5000 iterations was undertaken for each strategy to explore uncertainty and to construct uncertainty intervals (UIs). All cost data were valued in 2013 Euros. The model's structure, parameters and assumptions were assessed and confirmed by an external clinician with experience in health economics modelling, to inform on the appropriateness of the outcomes and the applicability of the model in the chosen setting. RESULTS: The mean total treatment costs were estimated as €5664 for follitropin alfa (95 % UI €5167-6151), €5990 for hp-HMG (95 % UI €5498-6488) and €5760 for uFSH (95 % UI €5256-6246). The probability of a live birth was estimated at 36.1 % (95 % UI 27.4-44.3 %), 33.9 % (95 % UI 26.2-41.5 %) and 34.1 % (95 % UI 25.9-41.8 %) for follitropin alfa, hp-HMG and uFSH, respectively. The costs per live birth estimates were €15,674 for follitropin alfa, €17,636 for hp-HMG and €16,878 for uFSH. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a probability of 72.5 % that follitropin alfa is cost effective at a willingness to pay of €20,000 per live birth. The probabilistic results remained constant under several analyses. CONCLUSION: The present analysis shows that follitropin alfa may represent a cost-effective option in comparison with uFSH and hp-HMG for IVF treatment in the Netherlands healthcare system.

[Can we transfer the mechanisms of the generics market to biosimilars?]

Personalized medicines such as biologics and their generic equivalents, biosimilars, are pouring onto the pharmaceutical markets. Data of 16 private health insurance companies were used to describe the market shares of selected biosimilars available in 2014 and 2015. The purpose of this study focuses on the question of whether market access of biosimilars will lead to a price competition of the expense of innovation competition. The results show that prescriptions of biosimilars made up 37% of total prescriptions in 2015 compared to 35% in 2014, and that their share of prescription costs went up from 21% to 23% in the same period. Price competition similar to that found in the generic markets has been established for erythropoietin and filgrastim. The same has not been observed for follitropin alfa and somatropin due to the limited number of competitors and products available at this stage. No definitive conclusions can be drown from the results at this stage. Time will tell whether it will be possible for physicians and individuals with private health insurance to fully leverage the savings potential of biosimilars while safeguarding patient safety.

Human recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) compared to urinary human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG) for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction: a literature review and cost evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Gonadotropins are protein hormones which are central to the complex endocrine system that regulates normal growth, sexual development, and reproductive function. There is still a lively debate on which type of gonadotropin medication should be used, either human menopausal gonadotropin or recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone. The objective of the study was to perform a systematic review of the recent literature to compare recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone to human menopausal gonadotropin with the aim to assess any differences in terms of efficacy and to provide a cost evaluation based on findings of this systematic review. METHODS: The review was conducted selecting prospective, randomized, controlled trials comparing the two gonadotropin medications from a literature search of several databases. The outcome measure used to evaluate efficacy was the number of oocytes retrieved per cycle. In addition, a cost evaluation was performed based on retrieved efficacy data. RESULTS: The number of oocytes retrieved appeared to be higher for human menopausal gonadotropin in only 2 studies while 10 out of 13 studies showed a higher mean number of oocytes retrieved per cycle for recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone. The results of the cost evaluation provided a similar cost per oocyte for both hormones. CONCLUSIONS: Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone treatment resulted in a higher oocytes yield per cycle than human menopausal gonadotropin at similar cost per oocyte.

Clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of HP-human FSH (Fostimon®) versus rFSH (Gonal-F®) in IVF-ICSI cycles: a meta-analysis.

Clinical efficacy of human-derived follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) versus recombinant FSH (rFSH) in IVF-ICSI cycles has long been compared, but no clear evidence of the superiority of a preparation over the other has been found. Human gonadotropins have been often grouped together, but a different glycosylation may be present in each preparation, therefore influencing the specific bioactivity. To exclude confounding factors, a meta-analysis and a cost-effectiveness analysis were designed to compare effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a specific highly purified human FSH (HP-hFSH) (Fostimon®) versus rFSH (Gonal-F®) in IVF/ICSI cycles. Research methodology filters were applied in MEDLINE, Current Contents and Web of Science from 1980 to February 2012. Eight randomized trials met selection criteria. The meta-analysis showed no significant differences between rFSH and HP-hFSH treatment in live-birth rate (odds ratio [OR] 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-1.11), clinical pregnancy rate (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68-1.07), number of oocytes retrieved, number of mature oocytes and days of stimulation. The cost-effectiveness ratio was € 7174 in the rFSH group and € 2056 in the HP-hFSH group. HP-hFSH is as effective as rFSH in ovarian stimulation for IVF-ICSI cycles, but the human preparation is more cost-effective.

Stakeholder involvement in expensive drug recommendation decisions: an international perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To describe stakeholder involvement in the priority setting and appeals processes across five drug reimbursement recommendation committees. METHODS: We conducted qualitative case studies of how five independent drug advisory committees from Canada, Israel, England and Wales, Australia, and the USA made funding decisions for six expensive drugs. Interviews with 48 informants were conducted with committee members, patient groups, and industry representatives. RESULTS: Different stakeholders were allowed, in varying degrees, to participate in the formal mechanisms for revisions and appeals of decisions. Participants identified a number of stakeholder groups who were already involved in the process, as well as stakeholders whom they believed should be included in the decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: A central component of a legitimate and fair priority setting process is to make priority setting explicit and to involve both pertinent values and stakeholders in decision-making. Study participants believed that the involvement of multiple stakeholder groups within the deliberative and appeals/revisions processes would contribute to a fair and legitimate drug reimbursement process.

Cost-effectiveness of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) versus human FSH in intrauterine insemination cycles: a statistical model-derived analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Recently we proposed a randomized trial specifically designed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two different protocols of stimulation in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles. Computer-simulated clinical models have been developed to perform pharmacoeconomic studies, creating a decision tree in which the complex procedure is performed and repeated. The present study was designed to compare the cost-effectiveness of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) and human-derived FSH (hFSH) in ovarian stimulation and to indicate which protocol should be used in IUI cycles. STUDY DESIGN: Two computer-generated decision tree models were constructed to compare the clinical effects and costs of rFSH versus hFSH in IUI cycles. A first decision tree model was built according to the trial previously published. In a second model, 10 000 hypothetical infertile patients were entered in a computer-generated simulation and were stimulated with two different protocols for IUI. IUI was hypothetically performed in both groups of patients with a known pregnancy, cancellation, miscarriage and abandonment rate. The two protocols were compared using a cost-effective analysis: cost-effectiveness ratios (CE) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) was constructed. RESULTS: The overall estimated costs with each ovarian stimulation strategy in the first model demonstrated that rFSH was a less cost-effective strategy, with an ICER of euro 13,727. The CEAC showed that at a level of euro 0 of willingness to pay, hFSH was cost-effective in 73% of the samples while rFSH was cost-effective in 27% only. Recombinant FSH would be more cost-effective than hFSH at an effectiveness threshold of 0.170 and at a cost per cycle of euro 235. This finding was also confirmed by the acceptability curve obtained with 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, in which hFSH was cost-effective in about 96-98% of samples at any threshold of willingness to pay. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first statistical model developed with a computer-generated clinical simulation with the intent to elaborate a pharmacoeconomic comparison between rFSH and hFSH in ovarian stimulation for IUI cycles. Results demonstrated that hFSH is more cost-effective than rFSH.

[Health economic consequences of the choice of follicle stimulating hormone alternatives in IVF treatment]. / Sundhedsøkonomiske konsekvenser af valg af follikelstimulerende hormonpraeparat ved in vitro-fertilisationsbehandlinger.

INTRODUCTION: There is a choice between two types of hormones for stimulation of the follicles in IVF treatment - recombinant FSH and the urine-derived menotrophin. A literature review by NICE (2004) in the United Kingdom documented that the two types of hormones were equally effective and safe, which is why it was recommended to use the cheaper urine-derived hormone. Based on the EISG study (European and Israeli Study Group), the aim was to analyse the health economic consequences of the choice between the two types of hormone in IVF treatment in Denmark. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a prospective cost-effectiveness analysis (health care sector perspective), menotrophin and recombinant FSH (Gonal-F) were compared. Differences in costs were compared with differences in effects of the two alternatives. RESULTS: The total costs for the average patient are lower when using menotrophin compared with recombinant FSH. Furthermore, the cost per clinical pregnancy was lower with menotrophin compared with recombinant FSH hormone. Menotrophin is therefore less expensive both for the patient as well as for the health care sector. The use of menotrophin instead of recombinant FSH can result in savings of up to DKK 16 million on the drug budget--savings that could finance 1,400 additional IVF cycles. CONCLUSION: The analysis shows that urine-derived menotrophin is a cost-effective alternative to recombinant FSH with a potential for considerable savings for patients as well as the public drug budget.