OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of infliximab use in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Swedish clinical practice, based on patient-level data from the Stockholm TNF-alpha follow-up registry (STURE). METHODS: Real-world patient-level data on infliximab use from the STURE registry were implemented in a Markov cohort model, in which health states of functional status were classified according to the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-five categories) and twenty-eight joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28). The transition probabilities between HAQ and DAS28 states during treatment, as well as discontinuation rates were modeled based on data from the registry for patients using infliximab as their first-line biological treatment. The transition probabilities in the comparator arm, that is, disease progression without biologic treatment, as well as mortality rates, costs, and utilities were based on published literature. The analysis had a societal cost perspective. RESULTS: Infliximab was associated with an incremental gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 1.02 and an incremental cost of 23,264 euros per patient compared with progression without biologic treatment, producing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 22,830 euros (SEK211,136 or US$31,230). Sensitivity analyses of input parameters and model assumptions produced ICERs in the range from 18,000 euros to 47,000 euros. CONCLUSIONS: Results from base-case and sensitivity analyses fell well below established benchmarks for cost-effectiveness in Sweden. The results, therefore, indicated that infliximab treatment for RA has provided good societal value for money in Swedish clinical practice, compared with a scenario of no biological treatment.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of infliximab use in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Swedish clinical practice, based on patient-level data from the Stockholm TNF-alpha follow-up registry (STURE). METHODS: Real-world patient-level data on infliximab use from the STURE registry were implemented in a Markov cohort model, in which health states of functional status were classified according to the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-five categories) and twenty-eight joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28). The transition probabilities between HAQ and DAS28 states during treatment, as well as discontinuation rates were modeled based on data from the registry for patients using infliximab as their first-line biological treatment. The transition probabilities in the comparator arm, that is, disease progression without biologic treatment, as well as mortality rates, costs, and utilities were based on published literature. The analysis had a societal cost perspective. RESULTS:Infliximab was associated with an incremental gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 1.02 and an incremental cost of 23,264 euros per patient compared with progression without biologic treatment, producing an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 22,830 euros (SEK211,136 or US$31,230). Sensitivity analyses of input parameters and model assumptions produced ICERs in the range from 18,000 euros to 47,000 euros. CONCLUSIONS: Results from base-case and sensitivity analyses fell well below established benchmarks for cost-effectiveness in Sweden. The results, therefore, indicated that infliximab treatment for RA has provided good societal value for money in Swedish clinical practice, compared with a scenario of no biological treatment.
Authors: Christine M Nguyen; Mark Bounthavong; Margaret A S Mendes; Melissa L D Christopher; Josephine N Tran; Rashid Kazerooni; Anthony P Morreale Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2012-07-01 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Ingrid Lekander; Fredrik Borgström; Jörgen Lysholm; Ronald F van Vollenhoven; Staffan Lindblad; Pierre Geborek; Gisela Kobelt Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2012-09-19
Authors: Jaana T Joensuu; Saara Huoponen; Kalle J Aaltonen; Yrjö T Konttinen; Dan Nordström; Marja Blom Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 3.240