Rachael Fleurence1, Eldon Spackman. 1. Health Care Analytics Group, United BioSource Corporation, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 600, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA. rachael.fleurence@unitedbiosource.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Four new biologic treatments have been approved for several autoimmune disorders. Economic evaluations have been used to model their cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted a structured literature review in Embase and PubMed to identify all relevant cost-effectiveness models investigating one or more of these 4 drugs in autoimmune disorders. RESULTS: Fifteen full economic evaluations were identified [13 for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 2 for Crohn's disease (CD), and 1 for ankylosing spondylitis (AS)]. While several studies found adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab to be cost-effective (using a threshold around $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year) for treatment of severe RA, not all studies concurred, and there was significant variation in the range of cost-effectiveness ratios reported. Neither study in CD found treatment with infliximab to be cost-effective. Only one study was identified in AS: treatment with infliximab was found to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Modeling treatment strategies in chronic relapsing diseases such as RA, CD, and AS presents particular challenges, as reflected in the variation in cost-effectiveness results reported. A reference case for economic evaluations, such as that suggested by the OMERACT (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology) Health Economics Working Group will facilitate comparison and interpretation of results.
OBJECTIVE: Four new biologic treatments have been approved for several autoimmune disorders. Economic evaluations have been used to model their cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We conducted a structured literature review in Embase and PubMed to identify all relevant cost-effectiveness models investigating one or more of these 4 drugs in autoimmune disorders. RESULTS: Fifteen full economic evaluations were identified [13 for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 2 for Crohn's disease (CD), and 1 for ankylosing spondylitis (AS)]. While several studies found adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab to be cost-effective (using a threshold around $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year) for treatment of severe RA, not all studies concurred, and there was significant variation in the range of cost-effectiveness ratios reported. Neither study in CD found treatment with infliximab to be cost-effective. Only one study was identified in AS: treatment with infliximab was found to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Modeling treatment strategies in chronic relapsing diseases such as RA, CD, and AS presents particular challenges, as reflected in the variation in cost-effectiveness results reported. A reference case for economic evaluations, such as that suggested by the OMERACT (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology) Health Economics Working Group will facilitate comparison and interpretation of results.