Cargando…

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in the UK

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend nintedanib (OFEV(®)) as an option for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of nintedanib versus pirfenidone, N-acetylcysteine and best supportive care (BSC) for...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rinciog, C., Watkins, M., Chang, S., Maher, T. M., LeReun, C., Esser, D., Diamantopoulos, A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28039616
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0480-2
_version_ 1782516042047684608
author Rinciog, C.
Watkins, M.
Chang, S.
Maher, T. M.
LeReun, C.
Esser, D.
Diamantopoulos, A.
author_facet Rinciog, C.
Watkins, M.
Chang, S.
Maher, T. M.
LeReun, C.
Esser, D.
Diamantopoulos, A.
author_sort Rinciog, C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend nintedanib (OFEV(®)) as an option for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of nintedanib versus pirfenidone, N-acetylcysteine and best supportive care (BSC) for the treatment of IPF from a UK payer’s perspective. METHODS: A Markov model was designed to capture the changes in the condition of adults with IPF. Efficacy outcomes included mortality, lung function decline and acute exacerbations. Treatment safety (serious adverse events) and tolerability (overall discontinuation) were also considered. The baseline risk of these events was derived from patient-level data from the placebo arms of nintedanib clinical trials (TOMORROW, INPULSIS-1, INPULSIS-2). A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to estimate the relative effectiveness of the comparator treatments. Quality of life and healthcare resource use data from the clinical trials were also incorporated in the economic model. RESULTS: Nintedanib showed statistically significant differences against placebo on acute exacerbation events avoided and lung function decline. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the results were split between two treatments with relative low costs and modest effectiveness (BSC and N-acetylcysteine) and two that showed improved effectiveness (lung function) and higher costs (nintedanib and pirfenidone). All comparators were assumed to have similar projected survival and the difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was driven by the acute exacerbations and lung function estimates. In the base-case deterministic pairwise comparison with pirfenidone, nintedanib was found to have fewer acute exacerbations and resulted in less costs and more QALYs gained. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with BSC (placebo), nintedanib and pirfenidone were the only treatments to show statistical significance in the efficacy parameters. We found substantial uncertainty in the overall cost-effectiveness results between nintedanib and pirfenidone. N-Acetylcysteine was largely similar to BSC but with a worse survival profile. INPULSIS-1 and INPULSIS-2 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01335464 and NCT01335477 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40273-016-0480-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5357477
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53574772017-03-30 A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in the UK Rinciog, C. Watkins, M. Chang, S. Maher, T. M. LeReun, C. Esser, D. Diamantopoulos, A. Pharmacoeconomics Original Research Article BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend nintedanib (OFEV(®)) as an option for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of nintedanib versus pirfenidone, N-acetylcysteine and best supportive care (BSC) for the treatment of IPF from a UK payer’s perspective. METHODS: A Markov model was designed to capture the changes in the condition of adults with IPF. Efficacy outcomes included mortality, lung function decline and acute exacerbations. Treatment safety (serious adverse events) and tolerability (overall discontinuation) were also considered. The baseline risk of these events was derived from patient-level data from the placebo arms of nintedanib clinical trials (TOMORROW, INPULSIS-1, INPULSIS-2). A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to estimate the relative effectiveness of the comparator treatments. Quality of life and healthcare resource use data from the clinical trials were also incorporated in the economic model. RESULTS: Nintedanib showed statistically significant differences against placebo on acute exacerbation events avoided and lung function decline. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the results were split between two treatments with relative low costs and modest effectiveness (BSC and N-acetylcysteine) and two that showed improved effectiveness (lung function) and higher costs (nintedanib and pirfenidone). All comparators were assumed to have similar projected survival and the difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was driven by the acute exacerbations and lung function estimates. In the base-case deterministic pairwise comparison with pirfenidone, nintedanib was found to have fewer acute exacerbations and resulted in less costs and more QALYs gained. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with BSC (placebo), nintedanib and pirfenidone were the only treatments to show statistical significance in the efficacy parameters. We found substantial uncertainty in the overall cost-effectiveness results between nintedanib and pirfenidone. N-Acetylcysteine was largely similar to BSC but with a worse survival profile. INPULSIS-1 and INPULSIS-2 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01335464 and NCT01335477 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40273-016-0480-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2016-12-31 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5357477/ /pubmed/28039616 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0480-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Rinciog, C.
Watkins, M.
Chang, S.
Maher, T. M.
LeReun, C.
Esser, D.
Diamantopoulos, A.
A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in the UK
title A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in the UK
title_full A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in the UK
title_fullStr A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in the UK
title_full_unstemmed A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in the UK
title_short A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nintedanib in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in the UK
title_sort cost-effectiveness analysis of nintedanib in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in the uk
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357477/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28039616
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0480-2
work_keys_str_mv AT rinciogc acosteffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT watkinsm acosteffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT changs acosteffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT mahertm acosteffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT lereunc acosteffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT esserd acosteffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT diamantopoulosa acosteffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT rinciogc costeffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT watkinsm costeffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT changs costeffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT mahertm costeffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT lereunc costeffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT esserd costeffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk
AT diamantopoulosa costeffectivenessanalysisofnintedanibinidiopathicpulmonaryfibrosisintheuk