Dataset Information

Cost per Responder Analysis of Secukinumab versus Adalimumab in the Treatment of Psoriatic Disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The EXCEED study evaluated the efficacy and safety of secukinumab versus adalimumab in psoriatic arthritis, but it did not include a pharmacoeconomic analysis. The objective of this study was to compare the cost per responder of secukinumab versus adalimumab in patients with psoriatic disease.

Methods

The cost per responder was calculated by multiplying the cost of treatment by the number needed to treat for each therapy. The 52-week primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology response rate (ACR) 20; secondary endpoints were ACR 50, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90, and minimal disease activity (MDA).

Results

The cost per responder for ACR 20 was €19,846 versus €19,766 for secukinumab and adalimumab, respectively, whereas the costs per responder for ACR 50 and PASI 90 were €27,820 versus €27,384 and €22,102 versus €32,375 for secukinumab and adalimumab, respectively. The cost per MDA responder was €34,072 and €38,906 for secukinumab versus adalimumab.

Conclusions

The costs per responder associated with the psoriatic arthritis end points were similar for adalimumab and secukinumab; conversely, the costs for psoriasis and composite end points were lower for secukinumab.

SUBMITTER: Gisondi P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9142895 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost per Responder Analysis of Secukinumab versus Adalimumab in the Treatment of Psoriatic Disease.

Gisondi Paolo P Geat Davide D Maurelli Martina M Degli Esposti Luca L Bellinato Francesco F Girolomoni Giampiero G

Vaccines 20220420 5

<h4>Background</h4>The EXCEED study evaluated the efficacy and safety of secukinumab versus adalimumab in psoriatic arthritis, but it did not include a pharmacoeconomic analysis. The objective of this study was to compare the cost per responder of secukinumab versus adalimumab in patients with psoriatic disease.<h4>Methods</h4>The cost per responder was calculated by multiplying the cost of treatment by the number needed to treat for each therapy. The 52-week primary endpoint was the American Co ...[more]

PMID: 35632402

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThere are no publications that have demonstrated economic value for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) treatments in Indonesia. Cost per responder (CPR) is a lean method of economic evaluation. We estimated CPR from Indonesia's health system perspective following AS treatment with secukinumab relative to adalimumab, golimumab, and infliximab.MethodsIn the absence of head-to-head trials, a comparative evidence analysis was conducted in the form of matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to estimate the response rate of various competing treatment options against secukinumab. This was followed by a CPR analysis that compared the cost per patient for a defined response level.ResultsBased on MAIC, patients on secukinumab had higher Assessment in Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) 20 response (improvement of ≥ 20% and ≥ 1 unit in at least three domains on a scale of 10 and no worsening of ≥ 20% and ≥ 1 unit in remaining domain on a scale of 10) and ASAS 40 response (improvement of ≥ 40% and ≥ 2 units in at least three domains on a scale of 10 and no worsening at all in remaining domain) versus those on adalimumab, golimumab, and infliximab at week 24. The cost per ASAS 20 at week 24 for secukinumab was 75% lower than adalimumab, 65% lower than golimumab, and 80% lower than infliximab. The cost per ASAS 40 at week 24 for secukinumab was 77% lower than adalimumab, 67% lower than golimumab, and 83% lower than infliximab. Secukinumab dominated adalimumab, golimumab, and infliximab at week 24 and adalimumab at week 52, by being more efficacious at lower cost. Threshold analysis revealed that substantial reduction in efficacy or increase in cost of secukinumab would make secukinumab not cost effective, indicating the robustness of the results.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that if AS patients in Indonesia were treated with secukinumab instead of comparator therapies, more patients could be treated, and more patients would reach response to treatment for the same budget.

Project description:IntroductionThe Phase III FUTURE I and II trials demonstrated the clinical efficacy of secukinumab in active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In the absence of head-to-head trials, this study compared the clinical efficacy and cost effectiveness of adalimumab 40 mg versus secukinumab 150 and 300 mg for the treatment of active PsA.MethodsA matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted using individual patient data from the ADEPT trial of adalimumab and published data from FUTURE I and II. To adjust for the cross-trial differences, individual patients in ADEPT were re-weighted so that the mean baseline characteristics (including age, weight, gender, race, baseline methotrexate use, psoriasis ≥3% body surface area, baseline PASI score, presence of dactylitis and enthesitis, and HAQ-DI) matched those in the FUTURE trials. Response rates relative to placebo and incremental costs per responder (CPR) over 24 weeks for ACR 20/50/70 and PASI 75/90 were compared between adalimumab and secukinumab 150 and 300 mg from the German social health insurance (SHI) perspective.ResultsAfter matching, mean baseline characteristics were balanced across the ADEPT and the FUTURE I and II populations. The mean differences between adalimumab and secukinumab 150 mg in relative ACR 20/50/70 and PASI 75/90 response rates were 9.5, 3.0, 6.0, 13.1, and 6.7%, respectively (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Post-match relative ACR 20/50/70 and PASI 75 to placebo were also higher with adalimumab compared to secukinumab 300 mg. Adalimumab had lower incremental costs per responder over 24 weeks for all outcomes compared with secukinumab 150 and 300 mg.ConclusionsIn the absence of direct comparisons between adalimumab and secukinumab, this study provides valuable and reliable evidence for physicians and payers. After adjusting for cross-trial differences in baseline characteristics, adalimumab was associated with higher relative ACR and PASI rates and lower incremental CPRs compared with secukinumab 150 mg or 300 mg at week 24 among patients with active PsA.FundingAbbVie.

Project description:ObjectiveTo study cost-effectiveness of an interleukin (IL)-17A inhibitor secukinumab, with other biologics and apremilast in patients with Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) from payer perspective in Finland.MethodsIn this semi-Markov model, subcutaneous (SC) secukinumab was compared with SC treatments etanercept and its biosimilar, certolizumab pegol, adalimumab and its biosimilar, golimumab, ustekinumab, intravenous (IV) treatment infliximab, as well as oral non-biologic apremilast. Patients without prior exposure (naïve) to biologics and without moderate to severe psoriasis were considered for secukinumab 150 mg group. Secukinumab 300 mg group included naïve patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and all patients with prior biologic exposure. The PsA Response Criteria (PsARC) at 12-week was primary criteria for treatment response. Other clinical as well as cost related model inputs were derived from relevant clinical trials as well as Finnish publications. The key model outcomes were quality-adjusted life years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. An annual 3% discount rate was applied to all future costs and benefits. Model input variations were assessed through sensitivity analyses and alternative scenario analyses.ResultsFor a lifetime horizon (60 years), secukinumab 150 mg dominated all branded SC biologics and apremilast with highest QALY of 8.01 and lowest lifetime cost of €187,776, while it was cost-effective against IV infliximab among biologic-naïve patients without moderate to severe psoriasis. Secukinumab 300 mg was cost-effective against all branded SC biologics and apremilast and dominated IV infliximab among biologic-naïve patients with moderate to severe psoriasis, while it was cost-effective in biologic experienced patients. With the one-way sensitivity analysis, PsARC response, drug acquisition cost, and health assessment questionnaire score were the most important parameters affecting the outcomes. Across all treatment groups, patients on secukinumab were most likely to achieve highest net monetary benefit than other competitors in probabilistic sensitivity analysis. With alternative scenario analysis, results largely remained unchanged.ConclusionsSecukinumab is a cost-effective treatment for PsA patients from a Finnish payer's perspective.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Secukinumab and adalimumab are approved for adults with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In the absence of direct randomized controlled trial (RCT) data, matching-adjusted indirect comparison can estimate the comparative effectiveness in anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-naïve populations. METHODS:Individual patient data from the FUTURE 2 RCT (secukinumab vs. placebo; N = 299) were adjusted to match baseline characteristics of the ADEPT RCT (adalimumab vs. placebo; N = 313). Logistic regression determined adjustment weights for age, body weight, sex, race, methotrexate use, psoriasis affecting ≥ 3% of body surface area, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score, Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index score, presence of dactylitis and enthesitis, and previous anti-TNF therapy. Recalculated secukinumab outcomes were compared with adalimumab outcomes at weeks 12 (placebo-adjusted), 16, 24, and 48 (nonplacebo-adjusted). RESULTS:After matching, the effective sample size for FUTURE 2 was 101. Week 12 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response rates were not significantly different between secukinumab and adalimumab. Week 16 ACR 20 and 50 response rates were higher for secukinumab 150 mg than for adalimumab (P = 0.017, P = 0.033), as was ACR 50 for secukinumab 300 mg (P = 0.030). Week 24 ACR 20 and 50 were higher for secukinumab 150 mg than for adalimumab (P = 0.001, P = 0.019), as was ACR 20 for secukinumab 300 mg (P = 0.048). Week 48 ACR 20 was higher for secukinumab 150 and 300 mg than for adalimumab (P = 0.002, P = 0.027), as was ACR 50 for secukinumab 300 mg (P = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS:In our analysis, patients with PsA receiving secukinumab were more likely to achieve higher ACR responses through 1 year (weeks 16-48) than those treated with adalimumab. Although informative, these observations rely on a subgroup of patients from FUTURE 2 and thus should be considered interim until the ongoing head-to-head RCT EXCEED can validate these findings. FUNDING:Novartis Pharma AG.

Project description:ObjectiveTo conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System (NHS) comparing ixekizumab versus secukinumab.DesignA Markov model with a lifetime horizon and monthly cycles was developed based on the York model. Four health states were included: a biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) induction period of 12 or 16 weeks, maintenance therapy, best supportive care (BSC) and death. Treatment response was assessed based on both Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) and ≥90% improvement in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index score (PASI90). At the end of the induction period, responders transitioned to maintenance therapy. Non-responders and patients who discontinued maintenance therapy transitioned to BSC. Clinical efficacy data were derived from a network meta-analysis. Health utilities were generated by applying a regression analysis to Psoriasis Area Severity Index and Health Assessment Questionnaire‒Disability Index scores collected in the ixekizumab SPIRIT studies. Results were subject to extensive sensitivity and scenario analysis.SettingSpanish NHS.ParticipantsA hypothetical cohort of bDMARD-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis and concomitant moderate-to-severe psoriasis was modelled.InterventionsIxekizumab and secukinumab.ResultsIxekizumab performed favourably over secukinumab in the base-case analysis, although cost savings and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains were modest. Total costs were €153 901 compared with €156 559 for secukinumab (difference -€2658). Total QALYs were 9.175 vs 9.082 (difference 0.093). Base-case results were most sensitive to the annual bDMARD discontinuation rate and the modification of PsARC and PASI90 response to ixekizumab or secukinumab.ConclusionIxekizumab provided more QALYs at a lower cost than secukinumab, with differences being on a relatively small scale. Sensitivity analysis showed that base-case results were generally robust to changes in most input parameters.Trial registration numberSPIRIT-P1: NCT01695239; Post-results, SPIRIT-P2: NCT02349295; Post-results.

Dataset Information

Cost per Responder Analysis of Secukinumab versus Adalimumab in the Treatment of Psoriatic Disease.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Cost per Responder Analysis of Secukinumab versus Adalimumab in the Treatment of Psoriatic Disease.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets