A cost-effectiveness analysis of reslizumab in the treatment of poorly controlled eosinophilic asthma

Abstract

The improvement in QoL and exacerbation rates with reslizumab are associated with high costs, making reslizumab unlikely to be cost-effective at the $200 000 WTP threshold.

Cost-effectiveness and comparative effectiveness of biologic therapy for asthma

“…24 The cost-effectiveness of reslizumab in this study was most affected by improvement in quality-of-life scores, with models finding that a 20% improvement in quality of life would decrease the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to $154,352 per QALY gained. 24 Reslizumab approached cost-effectiveness if the direct cost was decreased by 70%. 24 The authors concluded that the improvement in quality of life and exacerbation rates with reslizumab are associated with high costs, making reslizumab unlikely to be cost-effective.…”

“…2 Consistent throughout these studies, the individual biologics examined did not meet established cost-effectiveness ratios. 21,23,24 Lower incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates have been associated with higher asthma-related mortality and increased risk of hospitalization in the population, improved health-related quality of life in those treated with a biologic, decreased acquisition prices, longer time horizons, and targeting therapy only to responders. 21 Most studies recommended carefully targeting biological therapy to responders or discounting acquisition price to further improve value.…”

“…21 Most studies recommended carefully targeting biological therapy to responders or discounting acquisition price to further improve value. 2,21,23,24 Omalizumab A systematic review identified 19 studies from 2000 to 2018 that analyzed the cost-effectiveness of omalizumab in patients with moderate to severe allergic asthma. 21 Most of these studies focused on adults, with 1 being exclusively pediatrics and 2 including children and adults.…”

“…23 Reslizumab A single study modeled the cost-effectiveness of reslizumab in adult patients with moderate to severe eosinophilic asthma from a US societal perspective, with direct costs that included the costs for reslizumab treatment and management that included adverse events, whereas indirect costs included infusion time, postinfusion surveillance time, and time to travel to clinic. 24 Base-case results suggested a potential gain of 0.04 QALYs per patient per year taking reslizumab, but this was counterbalanced by an increase of $24,404 (2017 dollars) in direct and indirect costs, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $697,403 (2017 dollars) per QALY gained. 24 The cost-effectiveness of reslizumab in this study was most affected by improvement in quality-of-life scores, with models finding that a 20% improvement in quality of life would decrease the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to $154,352 per QALY gained.…”

“…24 Base-case results suggested a potential gain of 0.04 QALYs per patient per year taking reslizumab, but this was counterbalanced by an increase of $24,404 (2017 dollars) in direct and indirect costs, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $697,403 (2017 dollars) per QALY gained. 24 The cost-effectiveness of reslizumab in this study was most affected by improvement in quality-of-life scores, with models finding that a 20% improvement in quality of life would decrease the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to $154,352 per QALY gained. 24 Reslizumab approached cost-effectiveness if the direct cost was decreased by 70%.…”