Cargando…

Cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK

INTRODUCTION: The economic and clinical burden of haemophilia A is high. Primary prophylaxis with factor VIII replacement therapy is the recognised standard of care, but the emergence of non‐factor therapies, such as emicizumab, is extending treatment options for people with haemophilia A. AIM: Ther...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kragh, Nana, Tytula, Anna, Pochopien, Michał, Aballéa, Samuel, Toumi, Mondher, Hakimi, Zalmai, Nazir, Jameel, Bystrická, Linda, Fatoye, Francis
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10107896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36398467
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejh.13901
_version_ 1785026708352532480
author Kragh, Nana
Tytula, Anna
Pochopien, Michał
Aballéa, Samuel
Toumi, Mondher
Hakimi, Zalmai
Nazir, Jameel
Bystrická, Linda
Fatoye, Francis
author_facet Kragh, Nana
Tytula, Anna
Pochopien, Michał
Aballéa, Samuel
Toumi, Mondher
Hakimi, Zalmai
Nazir, Jameel
Bystrická, Linda
Fatoye, Francis
author_sort Kragh, Nana
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The economic and clinical burden of haemophilia A is high. Primary prophylaxis with factor VIII replacement therapy is the recognised standard of care, but the emergence of non‐factor therapies, such as emicizumab, is extending treatment options for people with haemophilia A. AIM: There are currently no direct comparisons of efficacy or cost between recombinant factor FVIII Fc‐fusion protein efmoroctocog alfa (a recombinant factor FVIII Fc‐fusion protein referred to herein as rFVIIIFc) and emicizumab; therefore, a cost‐effectiveness model was developed to compare prophylactic treatment with rFVIIIFc versus emicizumab in patients with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK. METHODS: The cost‐effectiveness model was based on a matching‐adjusted indirect comparison and included male patients, aged ≥12 years, with haemophilia A without inhibitors. The model was designed as a Markov process with a flexible lifelong time horizon, and cost‐effectiveness was presented as an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio. Base‐case analysis and sensitivity analyses (including scenario analyses, one‐way deterministic sensitivity analysis [DSA] and probability sensitivity analysis [PSA]) were performed using the following treatment strategies: individualised prophylaxis with rFVIIIFc and prophylaxis with emicizumab administered once weekly (scenario analyses used regimens of once every 2 weeks or once every 4 weeks). RESULTS: Base‐case analysis, DSA and PSA indicated that, compared with emicizumab administered once weekly, rFVIIIFc individualised prophylaxis was the dominant treatment strategy, with lower costs, a greater number of quality‐adjusted life years, and a lower number of bleeds. CONCLUSIONS: rFVIIIFc has proven efficacy and is cost‐effective compared with emicizumab, providing clinicians with a viable treatment option to improve the health outcomes for adults and adolescents with haemophilia A in the UK.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10107896
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101078962023-04-18 Cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK Kragh, Nana Tytula, Anna Pochopien, Michał Aballéa, Samuel Toumi, Mondher Hakimi, Zalmai Nazir, Jameel Bystrická, Linda Fatoye, Francis Eur J Haematol Original Articles INTRODUCTION: The economic and clinical burden of haemophilia A is high. Primary prophylaxis with factor VIII replacement therapy is the recognised standard of care, but the emergence of non‐factor therapies, such as emicizumab, is extending treatment options for people with haemophilia A. AIM: There are currently no direct comparisons of efficacy or cost between recombinant factor FVIII Fc‐fusion protein efmoroctocog alfa (a recombinant factor FVIII Fc‐fusion protein referred to herein as rFVIIIFc) and emicizumab; therefore, a cost‐effectiveness model was developed to compare prophylactic treatment with rFVIIIFc versus emicizumab in patients with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK. METHODS: The cost‐effectiveness model was based on a matching‐adjusted indirect comparison and included male patients, aged ≥12 years, with haemophilia A without inhibitors. The model was designed as a Markov process with a flexible lifelong time horizon, and cost‐effectiveness was presented as an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio. Base‐case analysis and sensitivity analyses (including scenario analyses, one‐way deterministic sensitivity analysis [DSA] and probability sensitivity analysis [PSA]) were performed using the following treatment strategies: individualised prophylaxis with rFVIIIFc and prophylaxis with emicizumab administered once weekly (scenario analyses used regimens of once every 2 weeks or once every 4 weeks). RESULTS: Base‐case analysis, DSA and PSA indicated that, compared with emicizumab administered once weekly, rFVIIIFc individualised prophylaxis was the dominant treatment strategy, with lower costs, a greater number of quality‐adjusted life years, and a lower number of bleeds. CONCLUSIONS: rFVIIIFc has proven efficacy and is cost‐effective compared with emicizumab, providing clinicians with a viable treatment option to improve the health outcomes for adults and adolescents with haemophilia A in the UK. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-12-11 2023-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10107896/ /pubmed/36398467 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejh.13901 Text en © 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Kragh, Nana
Tytula, Anna
Pochopien, Michał
Aballéa, Samuel
Toumi, Mondher
Hakimi, Zalmai
Nazir, Jameel
Bystrická, Linda
Fatoye, Francis
Cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK
title Cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK
title_full Cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK
title_fullStr Cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK
title_full_unstemmed Cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK
title_short Cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK
title_sort cost‐effectiveness of recombinant factor viii fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia a without inhibitors in the uk
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10107896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36398467
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejh.13901
work_keys_str_mv AT kraghnana costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk
AT tytulaanna costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk
AT pochopienmichał costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk
AT aballeasamuel costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk
AT toumimondher costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk
AT hakimizalmai costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk
AT nazirjameel costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk
AT bystrickalinda costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk
AT fatoyefrancis costeffectivenessofrecombinantfactorviiifcversusemicizumabforprophylaxisinadultsandadolescentswithhaemophiliaawithoutinhibitorsintheuk