Cargando…

A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in Germany

Background and objectives: Demand for assisted reproduction technology (ART) in Germany is high, with 100,844 treatment cycles during 2016. Many ART procedures involve ovarian stimulation with follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). Recently, biosimilar FSH products have become available. The objective...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xue, Weiguang, Lloyd, Adam, Falla, Edel, Roeder, Claudia, Papsch, Rudiger, Bühler, Klaus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524790/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31191040
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S193048
_version_ 1783419609369542656
author Xue, Weiguang
Lloyd, Adam
Falla, Edel
Roeder, Claudia
Papsch, Rudiger
Bühler, Klaus
author_facet Xue, Weiguang
Lloyd, Adam
Falla, Edel
Roeder, Claudia
Papsch, Rudiger
Bühler, Klaus
author_sort Xue, Weiguang
collection PubMed
description Background and objectives: Demand for assisted reproduction technology (ART) in Germany is high, with 100,844 treatment cycles during 2016. Many ART procedures involve ovarian stimulation with follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). Recently, biosimilar FSH products have become available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the recombinant FSH Gonal-f(®) (Originator) in comparison to biosimilar follitropin alfa, Bemfola(®) (Biosimilar 1) and Ovaleap(®) (Biosimilar 2), from a German payer perspective in terms of cost per live birth. Methods: A decision tree model was developed, based on one cycle of assisted reproduction, to compare the original product to biosimilars. Clinical inputs, including live birth rates and adverse event rates were obtained from published randomized trials. Cost inputs were obtained from publicly available German sources. Clinical inputs, model structure and methodology were based on previous publications and validated by a clinical expert. Results: Results indicated that the live birth rate is higher for the Originator compared to Biosimilar 1 (40.7% vs 32.1% respectively), and Biosimilar 2 (32.2% vs 26.8%). The average cost per live birth for women treated with the Originator was estimated to be lower than those who were treated with biosimilars: Originator vs Biosimilar 1 (€10,510 vs €12,192), Originator vs Biosimilar 2 (€12,590 vs €13,606). The analysis also found that the Originator is associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness of €4,168 and €7,540 per additional live birth versus Biosimilar 1 and Biosimilar 2 respectively. Sensitivity analysis indicated probabilities of pregnancy, embryo transfer and live birth, were key drivers of model costs. Scenario analysis confirmed the robustness of the model outcomes. Conclusion: This study suggests that treatment with the Originator could result in a lower cost per live birth in comparison to biosimilars. Further analysis using real-world data, when available, is recommended to validate the results of the present study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6524790
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65247902019-06-12 A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in Germany Xue, Weiguang Lloyd, Adam Falla, Edel Roeder, Claudia Papsch, Rudiger Bühler, Klaus Int J Womens Health Original Research Background and objectives: Demand for assisted reproduction technology (ART) in Germany is high, with 100,844 treatment cycles during 2016. Many ART procedures involve ovarian stimulation with follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). Recently, biosimilar FSH products have become available. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the recombinant FSH Gonal-f(®) (Originator) in comparison to biosimilar follitropin alfa, Bemfola(®) (Biosimilar 1) and Ovaleap(®) (Biosimilar 2), from a German payer perspective in terms of cost per live birth. Methods: A decision tree model was developed, based on one cycle of assisted reproduction, to compare the original product to biosimilars. Clinical inputs, including live birth rates and adverse event rates were obtained from published randomized trials. Cost inputs were obtained from publicly available German sources. Clinical inputs, model structure and methodology were based on previous publications and validated by a clinical expert. Results: Results indicated that the live birth rate is higher for the Originator compared to Biosimilar 1 (40.7% vs 32.1% respectively), and Biosimilar 2 (32.2% vs 26.8%). The average cost per live birth for women treated with the Originator was estimated to be lower than those who were treated with biosimilars: Originator vs Biosimilar 1 (€10,510 vs €12,192), Originator vs Biosimilar 2 (€12,590 vs €13,606). The analysis also found that the Originator is associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness of €4,168 and €7,540 per additional live birth versus Biosimilar 1 and Biosimilar 2 respectively. Sensitivity analysis indicated probabilities of pregnancy, embryo transfer and live birth, were key drivers of model costs. Scenario analysis confirmed the robustness of the model outcomes. Conclusion: This study suggests that treatment with the Originator could result in a lower cost per live birth in comparison to biosimilars. Further analysis using real-world data, when available, is recommended to validate the results of the present study. Dove 2019-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6524790/ /pubmed/31191040 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S193048 Text en © 2019 Xue et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Xue, Weiguang
Lloyd, Adam
Falla, Edel
Roeder, Claudia
Papsch, Rudiger
Bühler, Klaus
A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in Germany
title A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in Germany
title_full A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in Germany
title_fullStr A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in Germany
title_full_unstemmed A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in Germany
title_short A cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in Germany
title_sort cost-effectiveness evaluation of the originator follitropin alpha compared to the biosimilars for assisted reproduction in germany
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6524790/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31191040
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S193048
work_keys_str_mv AT xueweiguang acosteffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT lloydadam acosteffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT fallaedel acosteffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT roederclaudia acosteffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT papschrudiger acosteffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT buhlerklaus acosteffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT xueweiguang costeffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT lloydadam costeffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT fallaedel costeffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT roederclaudia costeffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT papschrudiger costeffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany
AT buhlerklaus costeffectivenessevaluationoftheoriginatorfollitropinalphacomparedtothebiosimilarsforassistedreproductioningermany