Cargando…

Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the 1-year cost-effectiveness between three different initial treatment strategies in autoantibody-negative RA patients, according to 2010 criteria. METHODS: For this analysis we selected all RA patients within the intermediate probability stratum of the treatment in the Rott...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nathalie, Luurssen-Masurel, Mulligen, Van Elise, Maria, Weel Angelique Elisabeth Adriana, Wilhelmina, Hazes Johanna Maria, Pieter, de Jong Pascal Hendrik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8645278/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33725091
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keab251
_version_ 1784610272616382464
author Nathalie, Luurssen-Masurel
Mulligen, Van Elise
Maria, Weel Angelique Elisabeth Adriana
Wilhelmina, Hazes Johanna Maria
Pieter, de Jong Pascal Hendrik
author_facet Nathalie, Luurssen-Masurel
Mulligen, Van Elise
Maria, Weel Angelique Elisabeth Adriana
Wilhelmina, Hazes Johanna Maria
Pieter, de Jong Pascal Hendrik
author_sort Nathalie, Luurssen-Masurel
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the 1-year cost-effectiveness between three different initial treatment strategies in autoantibody-negative RA patients, according to 2010 criteria. METHODS: For this analysis we selected all RA patients within the intermediate probability stratum of the treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort (tREACH) trial. The tREACH had a treat-to-target approach, aiming for low DAS <2.4, and treatment adjustments could occur every 3 months. Initial treatment strategies consisted of MTX 25 mg/week (initial MTX, iMTX), iHCQ 400 mg/day or an oral glucocorticoids tapering scheme without DMARDs (iGCs). Data on quality-adjusted life-years, measured with the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions 3 Levels (EQ-5D-3L), healthcare and productivity costs were used. RESULTS: Average quality-adjusted life-years (s.d.), for iMTX, iHCQ and iGCs were respectively 0.71 (0.14), 0.73 (0.14) and 0.71 (0.15). The average total costs (s.d.) for iMTX, iHCQ and iGCs were, respectively, €10 832 (14.763), €11 208 (12.801) and €10 502 (11.973). Healthcare costs were mainly determined by biological costs, which were significantly lower in the iHCQ group compared with iGCs (P < 0.05). However, costs due to presenteeism were the highest in the iHCQ group (55%) followed by iMTX (27%) and iGCs (18%). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios did not differ between treatment strategies. At a willingness-to-pay level of €50 000, the Dutch threshold for reimbursement of medical care, iHCQ had the highest probability (38.7%) of being cost-effective, followed by iGCs (31.1%) and iMTX (30.2%). CONCLUSION: iHCQ had the lowest healthcare and highest productivity costs, resulting in a non-significant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. However, iHCQ had the highest chance of being cost-effective at the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold for healthcare reimbursement. Therefore, we believe that iHCQ is a good alternative to iMTX in autoantibody-negative RA patients, but validation is needed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26791028
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8645278
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86452782021-12-06 Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients Nathalie, Luurssen-Masurel Mulligen, Van Elise Maria, Weel Angelique Elisabeth Adriana Wilhelmina, Hazes Johanna Maria Pieter, de Jong Pascal Hendrik Rheumatology (Oxford) Clinical Science OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the 1-year cost-effectiveness between three different initial treatment strategies in autoantibody-negative RA patients, according to 2010 criteria. METHODS: For this analysis we selected all RA patients within the intermediate probability stratum of the treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort (tREACH) trial. The tREACH had a treat-to-target approach, aiming for low DAS <2.4, and treatment adjustments could occur every 3 months. Initial treatment strategies consisted of MTX 25 mg/week (initial MTX, iMTX), iHCQ 400 mg/day or an oral glucocorticoids tapering scheme without DMARDs (iGCs). Data on quality-adjusted life-years, measured with the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions 3 Levels (EQ-5D-3L), healthcare and productivity costs were used. RESULTS: Average quality-adjusted life-years (s.d.), for iMTX, iHCQ and iGCs were respectively 0.71 (0.14), 0.73 (0.14) and 0.71 (0.15). The average total costs (s.d.) for iMTX, iHCQ and iGCs were, respectively, €10 832 (14.763), €11 208 (12.801) and €10 502 (11.973). Healthcare costs were mainly determined by biological costs, which were significantly lower in the iHCQ group compared with iGCs (P < 0.05). However, costs due to presenteeism were the highest in the iHCQ group (55%) followed by iMTX (27%) and iGCs (18%). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios did not differ between treatment strategies. At a willingness-to-pay level of €50 000, the Dutch threshold for reimbursement of medical care, iHCQ had the highest probability (38.7%) of being cost-effective, followed by iGCs (31.1%) and iMTX (30.2%). CONCLUSION: iHCQ had the lowest healthcare and highest productivity costs, resulting in a non-significant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. However, iHCQ had the highest chance of being cost-effective at the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold for healthcare reimbursement. Therefore, we believe that iHCQ is a good alternative to iMTX in autoantibody-negative RA patients, but validation is needed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26791028 Oxford University Press 2021-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8645278/ /pubmed/33725091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keab251 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Clinical Science
Nathalie, Luurssen-Masurel
Mulligen, Van Elise
Maria, Weel Angelique Elisabeth Adriana
Wilhelmina, Hazes Johanna Maria
Pieter, de Jong Pascal Hendrik
Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients
title Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients
title_full Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients
title_fullStr Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients
title_full_unstemmed Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients
title_short Comparing cost-utility of DMARDs in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients
title_sort comparing cost-utility of dmards in autoantibody-negative rheumatoid arthritis patients
topic Clinical Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8645278/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33725091
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keab251
work_keys_str_mv AT nathalieluurssenmasurel comparingcostutilityofdmardsinautoantibodynegativerheumatoidarthritispatients
AT mulligenvanelise comparingcostutilityofdmardsinautoantibodynegativerheumatoidarthritispatients
AT mariaweelangeliqueelisabethadriana comparingcostutilityofdmardsinautoantibodynegativerheumatoidarthritispatients
AT wilhelminahazesjohannamaria comparingcostutilityofdmardsinautoantibodynegativerheumatoidarthritispatients
AT pieterdejongpascalhendrik comparingcostutilityofdmardsinautoantibodynegativerheumatoidarthritispatients