Background: Relapses are common among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) despite treatment with disease-modifying therapies. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI, Acthar ® Gel), plasmapheresis (PMP), and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) are alternative therapies for MS relapse. There is a dearth of economic assessments of these therapies for the acute exacerbations of MS. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of RCI compared to PMP or IVIg. Methods: A Markov state-transition model compared outcomes (costs, relapses, remission, and utilities) with RCI versus PMP or IVIg for the acute exacerbations in MS. The model was developed from the United States (US) payer and societal perspectives over one to three years. Patients initiated on alternative therapies were evaluated in one-day increments for the first 30 days during treatment. The model assumes the natural history of MS after treatment in the first month, adjusting for the effect of treatment. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The uncertainty in model parameters was evaluated in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: In the base case, RCI has an ICER of USD 42,078 per QALY compared to PMP over one year from the payer perspective and is dominant over two and three years; RCI is dominant compared to PMP from the societal perspective over all three years. Compared to IVIg, RCI is a dominant strategy from both payer and societal perspectives over all three years. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis supports the base case findings, suggesting that RCI may be cost-effective versus PMP and IVIg for acute exacerbations in MS. Conclusion: RCI is a cost-effective alternative treatment for MS relapses compared to PMP and IVIg from the US payer and societal perspectives.
Background: Sarcoidosis, an inflammatory systemic granulomatous disease, affects multiple organs and has a diverse clinical course. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) is an effective treatment for advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis. Since sarcoidosis affects patients differently, treatment response may vary by patient demographic, clinical, and treatment-related characteristics and physician specialty. However, there is a paucity of literature regarding predictors of sarcoidosis treatment response. Objectives: This study investigated predictors of response to RCI treatment. Methods: Post-hoc analysis was conducted using data from a previously published retrospective cross-sectional chart review study among symptomatic sarcoidosis patients ≥18 years of age previously treated with RCI. Outcome improvement 3 months post-RCI treatment was based on the clinician’s subjective evaluation and analyzed using adjusted logistic regression. The most influential predictors for each outcome were based on statistical significance (P<.05) and the strength of the relationship assessed by the standardized β coefficients. Results: The top predictors of outcome improvements were as follows. Global health assessment: (1) improvement in current health status influenced by complete RCI compliance, moderate overall symptom severity, and presence of extrapulmonary sites; and (2) improvement in overall symptoms influenced by age, shorter duration since sarcoidosis diagnosis, and complete RCI compliance. Clinical outcomes: (1) lung function improvement influenced by mild weight loss, mild wheezing/coughing, and non–African American race; (2) reduction in pulmonary fibrosis influenced by moderate overall symptom severity, mild wheezing/coughing, and mild weight loss; and (3) reduction in inflammation influenced by physician specialty, completing a course of RCI treatment, and moderate-to-severe night sweats. Patient-related outcomes: (1) reduction in fatigue influenced by physician specialty and moderate-to-severe fatigue; and (2) improvement in quality-of-life influenced by shorter duration since sarcoidosis diagnosis, moderate-to-severe wheezing/coughing, and complete RCI compliance. Corticosteroid discontinuation/reduction was influenced by physician specialty, moderate-to-severe shortness of breath, and comedication use before RCI. Conclusions: RCI may be a better treatment option for patients with more severe disease, primarily those presenting with symptoms. Complete compliance with RCI treatment may improve patients’ health and quality of life. Understanding factors that influence RCI effectiveness across different treatment outcomes in real-world clinical practice is important for designing optimal sarcoidosis treatment strategies.
Introduction Despite current standard of care (SoC), there is an unmet need for the treatment of active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The study assessed the cost-effectiveness of Acthar ® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) versus SoC treatment in patients with active, moderate-to-severe SLE from the US payer and societal perspectives over 2 and 3 years. Methods Cost-effectiveness model was developed using a probabilistic cohort-level state-transition approach. Patients received Acthar Gel in an exacerbation state, and the outcomes were assessed at the end of a 3-month cycle for response achievement based on the probability of treatment success with Acthar Gel. Patients may sustain the response or experience an exacerbation. For the base case scenario, moderate-to-severe SLE was defined as British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-2004 ≥ 20 or SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) ≥ 10 and clinical response was based on SLE responder index (SRI)-4. Clinical response, productivity loss, and utility were derived from a phase 4 SLE trial; cost and disutility estimates were sourced from the literature. Results From a payer perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $133,110 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and $94,818 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. From a societal perspective, Acthar Gel versus SoC results in an ICER of $70,827 per QALY and $32,525 per QALY over 2 and 3 years, respectively. Results from the sensitivity and scenario analyses are consistent with those of the base case model. Conclusions Acthar Gel is a cost-effective, value-based treatment option for appropriate patients with moderate-to-severe SLE at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 over 2–3 years from the US payer and societal perspectives. Acthar Gel results in the reduction of direct medical and indirect costs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.