INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of golimumab for the treatment of non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) vs. conventional therapy and other tumor necrosis factor inhibitors from the Scottish payer perspective. METHODS: A model comprising a short-term decision tree and a long-term Markov model was developed to compare cost-effectiveness (incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) for patients in Scotland with nr-axSpA treated by conventional therapy, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, or golimumab for a lifetime period. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to identify clinical and safety data for treatments and synthesize the available evidence into relative treatment effects between comparators. The probability of patients achieving an Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society 20/40% response criteria (ASAS20/ASAS40) or a 50% improvement in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index score (BASDAI50) at week 12 was obtained from the NMA for each of the comparators. Baseline health state utilities were based on the EQ-5D questionnaire collected in the golimumab GO-AHEAD study. The cost of treatment was calculated based on drug acquisition, drug administration, and initiation/monitoring costs. RESULTS: Golimumab resulted in an increase of 2.06 QALYs and additional cost of £39,770 compared with conventional therapy. Incremental cost per QALY gained was £19,280 for golimumab, which was lower than adalimumab (£19,737), etanercept (£20,089), and higher than certolizumab pegol (£18,710). Golimumab remained cost-effective throughout a range of sensitivity analyses where key assumptions were tested. CONCLUSIONS: From a Scottish perspective, golimumab was a cost-effective treatment for nr-axSpA compared with conventional therapy at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per QALY. FUNDING: Merck & Co., Inc.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of golimumab for the treatment of non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) vs. conventional therapy and other tumor necrosis factor inhibitors from the Scottish payer perspective. METHODS: A model comprising a short-term decision tree and a long-term Markov model was developed to compare cost-effectiveness (incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) for patients in Scotland with nr-axSpA treated by conventional therapy, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, or golimumab for a lifetime period. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to identify clinical and safety data for treatments and synthesize the available evidence into relative treatment effects between comparators. The probability of patients achieving an Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society 20/40% response criteria (ASAS20/ASAS40) or a 50% improvement in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index score (BASDAI50) at week 12 was obtained from the NMA for each of the comparators. Baseline health state utilities were based on the EQ-5D questionnaire collected in the golimumab GO-AHEAD study. The cost of treatment was calculated based on drug acquisition, drug administration, and initiation/monitoring costs. RESULTS:Golimumab resulted in an increase of 2.06 QALYs and additional cost of £39,770 compared with conventional therapy. Incremental cost per QALY gained was £19,280 for golimumab, which was lower than adalimumab (£19,737), etanercept (£20,089), and higher than certolizumab pegol (£18,710). Golimumab remained cost-effective throughout a range of sensitivity analyses where key assumptions were tested. CONCLUSIONS: From a Scottish perspective, golimumab was a cost-effective treatment for nr-axSpA compared with conventional therapy at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per QALY. FUNDING: Merck & Co., Inc.
Authors: Joachim Sieper; Xiaohan Hu; Christopher M Black; Kim Grootscholten; Remon W M van den Broek; Sumesh Kachroo Journal: Semin Arthritis Rheum Date: 2016-09-13 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Jasvinder A Singh; George A Wells; Robin Christensen; Elizabeth Tanjong Ghogomu; Lara Maxwell; John K Macdonald; Graziella Filippini; Nicole Skoetz; Damian Francis; Luciane C Lopes; Gordon H Guyatt; Jochen Schmitt; Loredana La Mantia; Tobias Weberschock; Juliana F Roos; Hendrik Siebert; Sarah Hershan; Michael Pt Lunn; Peter Tugwell; Rachelle Buchbinder Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2011-02-16
Authors: M Rudwaleit; D van der Heijde; R Landewé; J Listing; N Akkoc; J Brandt; J Braun; C T Chou; E Collantes-Estevez; M Dougados; F Huang; J Gu; M A Khan; Y Kirazli; W P Maksymowych; H Mielants; I J Sørensen; S Ozgocmen; E Roussou; R Valle-Oñate; U Weber; J Wei; J Sieper Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2009-03-17 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: J Braun; R van den Berg; X Baraliakos; H Boehm; R Burgos-Vargas; E Collantes-Estevez; H Dagfinrud; B Dijkmans; M Dougados; P Emery; P Geher; M Hammoudeh; R D Inman; M Jongkees; M A Khan; U Kiltz; Tk Kvien; M Leirisalo-Repo; W P Maksymowych; I Olivieri; K Pavelka; J Sieper; E Stanislawska-Biernat; D Wendling; S Ozgocmen; C van Drogen; Bj van Royen; D van der Heijde Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: J Sieper; D van der Heijde; M Dougados; W P Maksymowych; B B Scott; J A Boice; Y Berd; G Bergman; S Curtis; A Tzontcheva; S Huyck; H H Weng Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 10.995