Literature DB >> 28176188

Adalimumab for Treating Moderate-to-Severe Hidradenitis Suppurativa: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal.

Paul Tappenden1, Christopher Carroll2, John W Stevens2, Andrew Rawdin2, Sabine Grimm2, Mark Clowes2, Eva Kaltenthaler2, John R Ingram3, Fiona Collier4, Mohammad Ghazavi5.   

Abstract

As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of adalimumab (AbbVie) to submit evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of adalimumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS). The appraisal assessed adalimumab as monotherapy in adult patients with an inadequate response to conventional systemic HS therapy. The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the technology based on the company's submission to NICE. The evidence was mainly derived from three randomised controlled trials comparing adalimumab with placebo in adults with moderate-to-severe HS. The clinical-effectiveness review found that significantly more patients achieved a clinical response in the adalimumab groups than in the control groups but that the treatment effect varied between trials and there was uncertainty regarding its impact on a range of other relevant outcomes as well as long-term efficacy. The company's submitted Markov model assessed the incremental cost effectiveness of adalimumab versus standard care for the treatment of HS from the perspective of the UK NHS and Personal Social Services (PSS) over a lifetime horizon. The original submitted model, including a patient access scheme (PAS), suggested that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for adalimumab versus standard care was expected to be £16,162 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Following a critique of the model, the ERG's preferred base case, which corrected programming errors and structural problems surrounding discontinuation rules and incorporated a lower unit cost for HS surgery, resulted in a probabilistic ICER of £29,725 per QALY gained. Based on additional analyses undertaken by the company and the ERG following the publication of the appraisal consultation document (ACD), the Appraisal Committee concluded that the maximum possible ICER for adalimumab compared with supportive care was between £28,500 and £33,200 per QALY gained but was likely to be lower. The Appraisal Committee recommended adalimumab (with the PAS) for the treatment of active moderate-to-severe HS in adults whose disease has not responded to conventional systemic therapy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adalimumab; Appraisal Committee; Evidence Review Group; Hidradenitis Suppurativa; Minimum Clinically Important Difference

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28176188     DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0488-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  10 in total

Review 1.  Clinical practice. Hidradenitis suppurativa.

Authors:  Gregor B E Jemec
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-01-12       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Management of hidradenitis suppurativa: a U.K. survey of current practice.

Authors:  J R Ingram; M McPhee
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2015-08-22       Impact factor: 9.302

3.  Hidradenitis suppurativa outcome measures and treatment goals.

Authors:  J R Ingram
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 9.302

4.  The natural history of hidradenitis suppurativa.

Authors:  J M von der Werth; H C Williams
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 6.166

5.  Morbidity in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa.

Authors:  J M von der Werth; G B Jemec
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 9.302

6.  Assessing the validity, responsiveness and meaningfulness of the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR) as the clinical endpoint for hidradenitis suppurativa treatment.

Authors:  A B Kimball; G B E Jemec; M Yang; A Kageleiry; J E Signorovitch; M M Okun; Y Gu; K Wang; P Mulani; M Sundaram
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2014-11-11       Impact factor: 9.302

7.  European S1 guideline for the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa/acne inversa.

Authors:  C C Zouboulis; N Desai; L Emtestam; R E Hunger; D Ioannides; I Juhász; J Lapins; L Matusiak; E P Prens; J Revuz; S Schneider-Burrus; J C Szepietowski; H H van der Zee; G B E Jemec
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 6.166

Review 8.  Systemic therapy with immunosuppressive agents and retinoids in hidradenitis suppurativa: a systematic review.

Authors:  J L Blok; S van Hattem; M F Jonkman; B Horváth
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 9.302

9.  Hidradenitis suppurativa.

Authors:  J Revuz
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 6.166

Review 10.  Hidradenitis suppurativa: a common and burdensome, yet under-recognised, inflammatory skin disease.

Authors:  Deirdre Nathalie Dufour; Lennart Emtestam; Gregor B Jemec
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  2014-02-24       Impact factor: 2.401

  10 in total
  2 in total

1.  The measurement performance of the EQ-5D-5L versus EQ-5D-3L in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa.

Authors:  Alex Bató; Valentin Brodszky; L Hunor Gergely; Krisztián Gáspár; Norbert Wikonkál; Ágnes Kinyó; Ákos Szabó; Zsuzsanna Beretzky; Andrea Szegedi; Éva Remenyik; Norbert Kiss; Miklós Sárdy; Fanni Rencz
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Prevalence of low vitamin D levels in patients with Hidradenitis suppurativa in Jordan: A comparative cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Khaled Seetan; Batool Eldos; Muthanna Saraireh; Rami Omari; Yousef Rubbai; Anas Jayyusi; Maha Abu Jubran
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.