Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2024
A projected cost-utility analysis of avacopan for the treatment of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis in Spain.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Macía Manuel, Díaz-Encarnación Montserrat, Solans-Laqué Roser, Mallol Elisenda Pomares, Castells Alejandra García, Escribano Cristina, de Arellano Antonio Ramírez
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) are rare autoimmune diseases characterized by inflammation of blood vessels. This study aimed to assess the cost-utility of avacopan in combination with rituximab (RTX) or cyclophosphamide (CYC) compared with glucocorticoids (GC) for the treatment of severe, active AAV in Spain.
METHODS: A 9-state Markov model was designed to reflect the induction of remission and sustained remission of AAV over a lifetime horizon. Clinical data and utility values were mainly obtained from the ADVOCATE trial, and costs (€ 2022) were sourced from national databases. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were evaluated. An annual discount rate of 3% was applied. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the results.
RESULTS: Avacopan yielded an increase in effectiveness (6.52 vs. 6.17 QALYs) and costs (€16,009) compared to GC, resulting in an ICUR of €45,638 per additional QALY gained. Avacopan was associated with a lower incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), relapse and hospitalization-related adverse events. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the model outputs were robust and that the progression to ESRD was a driver of ICUR.
CONCLUSIONS: Avacopan is a cost-effective option for patients with severe, active AAV compared to GC in Spain.
METHODS: A 9-state Markov model was designed to reflect the induction of remission and sustained remission of AAV over a lifetime horizon. Clinical data and utility values were mainly obtained from the ADVOCATE trial, and costs (€ 2022) were sourced from national databases. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were evaluated. An annual discount rate of 3% was applied. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the results.
RESULTS: Avacopan yielded an increase in effectiveness (6.52 vs. 6.17 QALYs) and costs (€16,009) compared to GC, resulting in an ICUR of €45,638 per additional QALY gained. Avacopan was associated with a lower incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), relapse and hospitalization-related adverse events. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the model outputs were robust and that the progression to ESRD was a driver of ICUR.
CONCLUSIONS: Avacopan is a cost-effective option for patients with severe, active AAV compared to GC in Spain.