E Losina1, I M Usiskin2, S R Smith3, J K Sullivan4, K C Smith5, D J Hunter6, S P Messier7, A D Paltiel8, J N Katz9. 1. Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe), Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Research Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: elosina@bwh.harvard.edu. 2. Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe), Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Research Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: ilanausiskin@gmail.com. 3. Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe), Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Research Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: savannah.reid.smith@gmail.com. 4. Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe), Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Research Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: jsullivan76@bwh.harvard.edu. 5. Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe), Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Research Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: ksmith81@bwh.harvard.edu. 6. Institute of Bone and Joint Research, Kolling Institute, University of Sydney and Rheumatology Department, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: David.Hunter@sydney.edu.au. 7. Department of Health and Exercise Science, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, USA. Electronic address: messier@wfu.edu. 8. Yale School of Public Health, Yale School of Management, New Haven, CT, USA. Electronic address: david.paltiel@yale.edu. 9. Division of Rheumatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: jnkatz@bwh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The cost-effectiveness of the recently-introduced generic celecoxib in knee OA has not been examined. METHOD: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy (OAPol) Model, a validated computer simulation of knee OA, to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of generic celecoxib in persons with knee OA. We examined eight treatment strategies consisting of generic celecoxib, over-the-counter (OTC) naproxen, or prescription naproxen, with or without prescription or OTC proton-pump-inhibitors (PPIs) to reduce gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. In the base case, we assumed that annual cost was $130 for OTC naproxen, $360 for prescription naproxen, and $880 for generic celecoxib. We considered a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and discounted costs and benefits at 3% annually. In sensitivity analyses we varied celecoxib toxicity, discontinuation, cost, and pain level. RESULTS: In the base case analysis of the high pain cohort (WOMAC 50), celecoxib had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $284,630/QALY compared with OTC naproxen. Only under highly favorable cost, toxicity, and discontinuation assumptions (e.g., annual cost below $360, combined with a reduction in the cardiovascular (CV) event rates below baseline values) was celecoxib likely to be cost-effective. Celecoxib might also be cost-effective at an annual cost of $600 if CV toxicity were eliminated completely. In subjects with moderate pain (WOMAC 30), at the base case CV event rate of 0.2%, generic celecoxib was only cost-effective at the lowest plausible cost ($190). CONCLUSION: In knee OA patients with no comorbidities, generic celecoxib is not cost-effective at its current price.
OBJECTIVE: The cost-effectiveness of the recently-introduced generic celecoxib in knee OA has not been examined. METHOD: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy (OAPol) Model, a validated computer simulation of knee OA, to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of generic celecoxib in persons with knee OA. We examined eight treatment strategies consisting of generic celecoxib, over-the-counter (OTC) naproxen, or prescription naproxen, with or without prescription or OTC proton-pump-inhibitors (PPIs) to reduce gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. In the base case, we assumed that annual cost was $130 for OTC naproxen, $360 for prescription naproxen, and $880 for generic celecoxib. We considered a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and discounted costs and benefits at 3% annually. In sensitivity analyses we varied celecoxibtoxicity, discontinuation, cost, and pain level. RESULTS: In the base case analysis of the high pain cohort (WOMAC 50), celecoxib had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $284,630/QALY compared with OTC naproxen. Only under highly favorable cost, toxicity, and discontinuation assumptions (e.g., annual cost below $360, combined with a reduction in the cardiovascular (CV) event rates below baseline values) was celecoxib likely to be cost-effective. Celecoxib might also be cost-effective at an annual cost of $600 if CV toxicity were eliminated completely. In subjects with moderate pain (WOMAC 30), at the base case CV event rate of 0.2%, generic celecoxib was only cost-effective at the lowest plausible cost ($190). CONCLUSION: In knee OA patients with no comorbidities, generic celecoxib is not cost-effective at its current price.
Authors: David W Brown; Lina S Balluz; Gregory W Heath; David G Moriarty; Earl S Ford; Wayne H Giles; Ali H Mokdad Journal: Prev Med Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Nadir Arber; Craig J Eagle; Julius Spicak; István Rácz; Petr Dite; Jan Hajer; Miroslav Zavoral; Maria J Lechuga; Paola Gerletti; Jie Tang; Rebecca B Rosenstein; Katie Macdonald; Pritha Bhadra; Robert Fowler; Janet Wittes; Ann G Zauber; Scott D Solomon; Bernard Levin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-08-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kelly A Grindrod; Carlo A Marra; Lindsey Colley; Jolanda Cibere; Ross T Tsuyuki; John M Esdaile; Louise Gastonguay; Jacek Kopec Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: W G Bensen; J J Fiechtner; J I McMillen; W W Zhao; S S Yu; E M Woods; R C Hubbard; P C Isakson; K M Verburg; G S Geis Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Nora K Lenhard; James K Sullivan; Eric L Ross; Shuang Song; Robert R Edwards; David J Hunter; Tuhina Neogi; Jeffrey N Katz; Elena Losina Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2022-03-29 Impact factor: 5.178
Authors: James K Sullivan; James J Irrgang; Elena Losina; Clare Safran-Norton; Jamie Collins; Swastina Shrestha; Faith Selzer; Kim Bennell; Leslie Bisson; Angela T Chen; Courtney K Dawson; Alexandra B Gil; Morgan H Jones; Melissa A Kluczynski; Kathleen Lafferty; Jeffrey Lange; Emma C Lape; John Leddy; Aaron V Mares; Kurt Spindler; Jennifer Turczyk; Jeffrey N Katz Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Jacek A Kopec; Eric C Sayre; Anya Okhmatovskaia; Jolanda Cibere; Linda C Li; Nick Bansback; Hubert Wong; Shahzad Ghanbarian; John M Esdaile Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-12-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: J K Sullivan; J Huizinga; R R Edwards; D J Hunter; T Neogi; E Yelin; J N Katz; E Losina Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2020-11-07 Impact factor: 6.576