Cost‐Effectiveness Comparison of Ustekinumab, Infliximab, or Adalimumab for the Treatment of Moderate‐Severe Crohn's Disease in Biologic‐Naïve Patients

Abstract

Study ObjectiveUstekinumab was recently approved by the United States U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of Crohn's disease. In this analysis, we aimed to compare the cost‐effectiveness of ustekinumab, infliximab, or adalimumab for the treatment of moderate‐severe Crohn's disease in patients who failed conventional therapy (i.e., corticosteroids and immunomodulators) but were naïve to tumor necrosis factor antagonists (i.e., biologic drugs).DesignCost‐effectiveness analysis using a hybrid model structure (decision tree and Markov model).Measurements and Main ResultsA decision tree simulated biologic induction, and a Markov model simulated biologic and conventional therapy maintenance. Cycle length was 2 weeks with a discounted 5‐year time horizon and a limited U.S. societal perspective in the base case; results from a payer perspective are also reported. Transition probabilities, direct costs, indirect costs, and utilities were obtained from the literature. To measure relative treatment value (i.e., order of treatment cost‐effectiveness), net monetary benefits were reported for a $150,000 willingness‐to‐pay threshold per quality‐adjusted life‐year in the base case. Infliximab dominated both adalimumab and ustekinumab, with a net monetary benefit (NMB) of $9943 and $29,798, respectively, in the base case. Adalimumab dominated ustekinumab, with an NMB of $19,855. All biologics yielded similar quality‐adjusted life‐years (~3.5), whereas costs varied substantially ($50,510, $54,985, and $72,921 for infliximab, adalimumab, and ustekinumab, respectively). The payer perspective, alternate time horizons, and scenario analyses consistently showed infliximab dominance. One‐way, threshold, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results with respect to all parameters. Although biosimilars were not explicitly modeled as comparators, one‐way sensitivity analysis showed that drug acquisition costs could alter relative treatment value but would have to be varied by at least 50%.ConclusionFor moderate‐severe Crohn's disease, infliximab yields significantly more NMBs compared with both adalimumab and ustekinumab. Additional clinical (e.g., empiric dosing, biologic cycling) and quality‐of‐life (e.g., lost productivity, disutility of home injections) research is needed to allow for model frameworks and parameters that more accurately reflect the nuances of Crohn's disease treatment.

Adalimumab vs Infliximab in Pediatric Patients With Crohn's Disease: A Propensity Score Analysis and Predictors of Treatment Escalation

“…In addition to efficacy and safety, cost may be an important factor when selecting an appropriate first-line anti-TNF therapy. In some studies, ADA seems to be less costly than IFX; in others, the opposite seems to be true (65)(66)(67)(68). Moreover, biosimilars coming to the market have changed the scenario significantly (69,70).…”

New and Old Therapeutic Options for Luminal Crohn's Disease - An Overview of Current Literature

“…With lack of direct comparative or combination studies the choice of initial or subsequent therapies can be challenging. Anti-TNF therapy remains an important treatment option with the most clinical evidence and analysis of cost-effectiveness shows infliximab domination over both adalimumab and ustekinumab in terms of net monetary benefit [112]. The addition of selective JAK inhibition, targeted interleukin-23 blockage and potential bispecific antibodies are exciting prospective therapies for future clinical therapy.…”

The cost-effectiveness of biologic versus non-biologic treatments and the health-related quality of life among a sample of patients with inflammatory bowel disease in a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia

“…A USA-based investigation of the cost-effectiveness of infliximab, adalimumab, and ustekinumab in the management of moderate to severe CD reported that infliximab produced the most significant net monetary benefit with similar HRQoL outcomes 29 . In the United Kingdom, adalimumab was found to be associated with significantly lower costs than infliximab, a difference believed to be largely due to higher medication and administration costs 30 .…”