Doug Coyle1, Matthew C Cheung2, Gerald A Evans3. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada (DC) 2. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Odette Cancer Center, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada (MCC) 3. Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Kingston General Hospital and Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada (GAE).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both ethical and economics concerns have been raised with respect to the funding of drugs for rare diseases. This article reports both the cost-effectiveness of eculizumab for the treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) and its associated opportunity costs. METHODS: Analysis compared eculizumab plus current standard of care v. current standard of care from a publicly funded health care system perspective. A Markov model covered the major consequences of PNH and treatment. Cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of the incremental cost per life year and per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Opportunity costs were assessed by the health gains foregone and the alternative uses for the additional resources. RESULTS: Eculizumab is associated with greater life years (1.13), QALYs (2.45), and costs (CAN$5.24 million). The incremental cost per life year and per QALY gained is CAN$4.62 million and CAN$2.13 million, respectively. Based on established thresholds, the opportunity cost of funding eculizumab is 102.3 discounted QALYs per patient funded. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. If the acquisition cost of eculizumab was reduced by 98.5%, it could be considered cost-effective. LIMITATIONS: The nature of rare diseases means that data are often sparse for the conduct of economic evaluations. When data were limited, assumptions were made that biased results in favor of eculizumab. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of conducting economic evaluations in the context of rare diseases. Eculizumab may provide substantive benefits to patients with PNH in terms of life expectancy and quality of life but at a high incremental cost and a substantial opportunity cost. Decision makers should fully consider the opportunity costs before making positive reimbursement decisions.
BACKGROUND: Both ethical and economics concerns have been raised with respect to the funding of drugs for rare diseases. This article reports both the cost-effectiveness of eculizumab for the treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) and its associated opportunity costs. METHODS: Analysis compared eculizumab plus current standard of care v. current standard of care from a publicly funded health care system perspective. A Markov model covered the major consequences of PNH and treatment. Cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of the incremental cost per life year and per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Opportunity costs were assessed by the health gains foregone and the alternative uses for the additional resources. RESULTS:Eculizumab is associated with greater life years (1.13), QALYs (2.45), and costs (CAN$5.24 million). The incremental cost per life year and per QALY gained is CAN$4.62 million and CAN$2.13 million, respectively. Based on established thresholds, the opportunity cost of funding eculizumab is 102.3 discounted QALYs per patient funded. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. If the acquisition cost of eculizumab was reduced by 98.5%, it could be considered cost-effective. LIMITATIONS: The nature of rare diseases means that data are often sparse for the conduct of economic evaluations. When data were limited, assumptions were made that biased results in favor of eculizumab. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of conducting economic evaluations in the context of rare diseases. Eculizumab may provide substantive benefits to patients with PNH in terms of life expectancy and quality of life but at a high incremental cost and a substantial opportunity cost. Decision makers should fully consider the opportunity costs before making positive reimbursement decisions.
Authors: Lingjun Zhang; Wen Qiu; Stephen Crooke; Yan Li; Areeba Abid; Bin Xu; M G Finn; Feng Lin Journal: ACS Chem Biol Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 5.100
Authors: George Goshua; Pranay Sinha; Jeanne E Hendrickson; Christopher Tormey; Pavan K Bendapudi; Alfred Ian Lee Journal: Blood Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Samuel A Merrill; Zachary D Brittingham; Xuan Yuan; Alison R Moliterno; C John Sperati; Robert A Brodsky Journal: Blood Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Jason P Cooper; Rafic J Farah; Philip A Stevenson; Ted A Gooley; Rainer Storb; Bart L Scott Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Brandon L Garcia; D Andrew Skaff; Arindam Chatterjee; Anders Hanning; John K Walker; Gerald J Wyckoff; Brian V Geisbrecht Journal: J Immunol Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 5.422