4.7 Article

Cost-effectiveness of biological therapy for Crohn's disease: Markov cohort analyses incorporating United Kingdom patient-level cost data

Journal

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
Volume 30, Issue 3, Pages 265-274

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.04033.x

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Welsh Office for Research and Development for Health and Social Care
  2. Medical Research Council [G0800792] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. MRC [G0800792] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Anti-TNF-alpha agents for Crohn's disease (CD) have good clinical efficacy but high acquisition cost compared to rival drugs. Aim To assess the cost-effectiveness of infliximab and adalimumab for Crohn's disease from the perspective of the UK NHS, incorporating recent trial and observational data. Methods Lifetime Markov analyses constructed to simulate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs. CD was represented by four health-states representing: Full response, partial response, nonresponse, surgery and death. The course of CD under standard care was based on the Olmsted county cohort. Systematic review identified ACCENT I (infliximab) and CHARM (adalimumab) as sources for efficacy data. We modelled an intention-to-treat strategy for biologics including surgical rates based on observational data, cost estimates from our UK dataset and utilities from an algorithm converting CDAI to EQ-5D utilities. Results The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) compared to standard care for 1-year of treatment with infliximab or adalimumab were 19 pound 050 and 7190 pound per QALY gained, respectively. Lifetime therapy was dominated by standard care. Analyses over shorter time horizons, matched to treatment duration, resulted in unfavourable ICERs. Conclusion The model suggests acceptable ICERs for biological agents when considering a lifetime horizon with periods of up to 4 years continuous therapy. As with all economic evaluations, the results may not be generalizable beyond the perspective of analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available