The Journal of dermatological treatment · 2024
Cost per response analysis of deucravacitinib versus apremilast and first-line biologics among patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in the United States.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Park Sang Hee, Lambton Mark, Schmier Jordana, Hovland Sara, Wittstock Keith, Patel Vardhaman
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Understanding the economic value of deucravacitinib and apremilast could assist treatment decision-making for patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.
OBJECTIVE: This study compared the cost per response (CPR) for US patients initiating deucravacitinib versus apremilast for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.
METHODS: A CPR model using pharmacy and administration costs was developed from a US payer perspective. Response was defined as a 75% reduction from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at weeks 16 and 24. Long-term response was defined as the cumulative benefit over 52 weeks, measured as area under the curve; subsequent treatment was included. Scenario analyses explored varying the efficacy measure or choices of subsequent treatments and limiting discontinuation.
RESULTS: The CPR for deucravacitinib versus apremilast was lower at 16 weeks (difference: -$3796 [95% confidence interval (CI): -$6140 to -$1659]) and 24 weeks (difference: -$12,784 [95% CI: -$16,674 to -$9369]). At 52 weeks, the cost per cumulative benefit was lower for patients who initiated deucravacitinib, regardless of initial treatment period duration (16 or 24 weeks).
CONCLUSIONS: Scenario analyses found mainly consistent results. This study showed that the CPR is lower when initiating deucravacitinib versus apremilast in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.
OBJECTIVE: This study compared the cost per response (CPR) for US patients initiating deucravacitinib versus apremilast for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.
METHODS: A CPR model using pharmacy and administration costs was developed from a US payer perspective. Response was defined as a 75% reduction from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at weeks 16 and 24. Long-term response was defined as the cumulative benefit over 52 weeks, measured as area under the curve; subsequent treatment was included. Scenario analyses explored varying the efficacy measure or choices of subsequent treatments and limiting discontinuation.
RESULTS: The CPR for deucravacitinib versus apremilast was lower at 16 weeks (difference: -$3796 [95% confidence interval (CI): -$6140 to -$1659]) and 24 weeks (difference: -$12,784 [95% CI: -$16,674 to -$9369]). At 52 weeks, the cost per cumulative benefit was lower for patients who initiated deucravacitinib, regardless of initial treatment period duration (16 or 24 weeks).
CONCLUSIONS: Scenario analyses found mainly consistent results. This study showed that the CPR is lower when initiating deucravacitinib versus apremilast in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.