Non-invasive monitoring and treat-to-target approach are cost-effective in patients with mild-moderate ulcerative colitis

Background There are no data to assess the value associated with a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy based on tight control of mild-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC). Aim To assess the cost-effectiveness of a T2T approach based on the normalisation of clinical signs and faecal calprotectin (FC) Methods A decision analytical Markov model was developed to compare T2T algorithm combining clinical symptoms and FC levels to define treatment response and the possible switch to the next treatment line (T2T-FC), and the reference strategy based only on symptoms. The model included five treatment lines and was conducted from the Italian national health service (NHS) perspective using a 3-year time horizon. The model calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as euro per relapse avoided. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results The cost-effectiveness analysis produced an increased time spent by a patient in clinical remission and FC <= 100 level (+0.177 years; about 2 months) and a decreasing number of relapses (-0.1937; -20.9%) per patient using a T2T-FC approach compared to only symptoms. Furthermore, the T2T-FC was associated with higher cost (+euro1795). The ICER estimated was euro9263 per relapse avoided. These results were confirmed by sensitivity analyses. Conclusions T2T-FC approach resulted in a higher benefit for mild-moderate UC patients in terms of time in remission and incidence of relapse but was associated with higher costs. Clinical trials and real-world clinical studies are needed to provide additional data on the cost-benefit of this approach.

Automated summary

This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of a treat-to-target strategy based on clinical signs and faecal calprotectin levels in patients with mild-moderate ulcerative colitis. The results showed that this approach increased the time spent in clinical remission and reduced the number of relapses compared to a strategy based solely on symptoms. However, it was also associated with higher costs.