Finckh A, Bansback N, Marra CA, Anis AH, Michaud K, Lubin S, White M, Sizto S, Liang MH

BACKGROUND: Long-term control or remission of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may be possible with very early treatment. However, no optimal first therapeutic strategy has been determined. OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential cost-effectiveness of major therapeutic strategies for very early RA. DESIGN: Decision analytic model with probabilistic sensitivity analyses. DATA SOURCES: Published data, the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases, and actual 2007 hospital costs. TARGET POPULATION: U.S. adults with very early RA (symptom duration <or=3 months). TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care provider and societal. INTERVENTION: 3 management strategies were compared: a symptomatic or “pyramid” strategy with initial nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, patient education, pain management, and low-dose glucocorticoids, and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) at 1 year for nonresponders; early DMARD therapy with methotrexate; and early therapy with biologics and methotrexate. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: By reducing the progression of joint erosions and subsequent functional disability, both early intervention strategies increase quality-adjusted life more than the pyramid strategy and save long-term costs. When the cost of very early intervention is factored in, the cost-effectiveness ratio of the early DMARD strategy is $4849 per QALY (95% CI, $0 to $16 354 per QALY) compared with the pyramid strategy, whereas the benefits gained through the early biologic strategy come at a substantial incremental cost. The early DMARD strategy maximizes the effectiveness of early DMARDs and reserves the use of biologics for patients with more treatment-resistant disease of longer duration, for which the incremental benefit of biologics is greater.Results of Sensitivity Analysis:The early biologic strategy becomes more cost-effective if drug prices are reduced, risk for death is permanently lowered through biologic therapy, patients experience drug-free remission, responders can be selected before therapy initiation, or effective alternative antirheumatic agents are available for patients for whom several biologics have failed. LIMITATIONS: Data on the long-term effect of very early therapeutic interventions on the natural progression in disability and joint erosions are limited. The study considered only tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and not the newer biologics. CONCLUSION: According to the most objective measures of RA progression, very early intervention with conventional DMARDs is cost-effective. The cost-effectiveness of very early intervention with biologics remains uncertain.

Ann Intern Med. 2009 Nov 3;151(9):612-21

Bansback N, Ara R, Ward S, Anis A, Choi HK

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are potentially excellent candidate agents for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). They reduce both cardiovascular risks and RA disease activity. To evaluate the potential long-term effects of statin therapy among patients with RA, and to determine their associated cost effectiveness by incorporating both the cardiovascular and the anti-rheumatic benefits. A Markov decision-analytic model was developed to simulate cardiovascular and RA disease profiles over time. The impact of statin therapy was estimated by adjusting the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) events and changes in the RA Disease Activity Score (DAS28), based on the results of a randomized trial. The benefits (QALYs) and costs (in year 2005 values) were evaluated from a US payer perspective. A full uncertainty analysis, including a value-of-information (VOI) analysis, was undertaken to evaluate the importance of individual parameters. Using a 10-year time horizon, the additional cost and QALYs of statin therapy were estimated to be USD4690 and 0.44 QALYs, respectively, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD10 650 per QALY (95% CI 1525, 156 565). The QALY gain associated with statin therapy depended more on the anti-rheumatic effects of statin therapy than on its cardiovascular prevention effect. The VOI analysis found the long-term benefit of statin therapy (i.e. >or=12 months) and the consequent impact on quality of life to be the most uncertain and, therefore, influential parameters. Our analysis indicates that the dual anti-inflammatory/cardiovascular benefits of statins could make this therapy highly cost effective in RA. However, uncertainties remain in the available data, warranting further research on refining the precise RA disease-activity benefits and health-utility changes associated with statin therapy, at least over a 12-month period.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(1):25-37. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200927010-00004

Sizto S, Bansback N, Feldman SR, Willian MK, Anis AH

BACKGROUND: New biologics have dramatically changed therapeutic options for psoriasis, albeit at additional cost. OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness and optimal treatment sequence for moderate to severe psoriasis. METHODS: Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response rates from 22 randomized controlled trials evaluating biologic (adalimumab, efalizumab, etanercept, infliximab) and nonbiologic systemic (methotrexate, ciclosporin) agents were considered. Short-term efficacy was based on relative probabilities of achieving PASI response (50/75/90) in a meta-analysis of trials. Published evidence and assumptions were used to predict long-term efficacy. Treatment benefits were determined by the relationship between PASI response and the EuroQOL 5D health utility measure. Costs included therapy, administration, monitoring and hospitalization. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and treatments ranked relative to supportive care. RESULTS: Infliximab provided the most incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) vs. supportive care (0.18 QALYs; 95% confidence interval, CI 0.13-0.24), followed by adalimumab (0.16 QALYs; 95% CI 0.11-0.22). Methotrexate and ciclosporin were less beneficial (0.13 and 0.08 QALYs, respectively) but were cost saving and considered the first two treatments in the optimal sequence. Comparing biologics, adalimumab was most cost effective (ICER pound30 000 per QALY), followed by etanercept ( pound37 000 per QALY), efalizumab ( pound40 000 per QALY) and infliximab ( pound42 000 per QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Methotrexate and ciclosporin are cost effective but require monitoring for toxicities. Of the biologics, adalimumab was most cost effective following conventional systemic treatment failure or inadequate response. Payers and policymakers will have to decide how to utilize their budgets effectively for treating patients with moderate to severe psoriasis.

Br J Dermatol. 2009 Jun;160(6):1264-72

Bansback N, Ara R, Ward S, Anis A, Choi HK.

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are potentially excellent candidate agents for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). They reduce both cardiovascular risks and RA disease activity. To evaluate the potential long-term effects of statin therapy among patients with RA, and to determine their associated cost effectiveness by incorporating both the cardiovascular and the anti-rheumatic benefits. A Markov decision-analytic model was developed to simulate cardiovascular and RA disease profiles over time. The impact of statin therapy was estimated by adjusting the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) events and changes in the RA Disease Activity Score (DAS28), based on the results of a randomized trial. The benefits (QALYs) and costs (in year 2005 values) were evaluated from a US payer perspective. A full uncertainty analysis, including a value-of-information (VOI) analysis, was undertaken to evaluate the importance of individual parameters. Using a 10-year time horizon, the additional cost and QALYs of statin therapy were estimated to be USD4690 and 0.44 QALYs, respectively, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of USD10 650 per QALY (95% CI 1525, 156 565). The QALY gain associated with statin therapy depended more on the anti-rheumatic effects of statin therapy than on its cardiovascular prevention effect. The VOI analysis found the long-term benefit of statin therapy (i.e. >or=12 months) and the consequent impact on quality of life to be the most uncertain and, therefore, influential parameters. Our analysis indicates that the dual anti-inflammatory/cardiovascular benefits of statins could make this therapy highly cost effective in RA. However, uncertainties remain in the available data, warranting further research on refining the precise RA disease-activity benefits and health-utility changes associated with statin therapy, at least over a 12-month period.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27(1):25-37

Nixon RM, O’Hagan A, Oakley J, Madan J, Stevens JW, Bansback N, Brennan A

The development of a new drug is a major undertaking and it is important to consider carefully the key decisions in the development process. Decisions are made in the presence of uncertainty and outcomes such as the probability of successful drug registration depend on the clinical development programmme.The Rheumatoid Arthritis Drug Development Model was developed to support key decisions for drugs in development for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. It is configured to simulate Phase 2b and 3 trials based on the efficacy of new drugs at the end of Phase 2a, evidence about the efficacy of existing treatments, and expert opinion regarding key safety criteria.The model evaluates the performance of different development programmes with respect to the duration of disease of the target population, Phase 2b and 3 sample sizes, the dose(s) of the experimental treatment, the choice of comparator, the duration of the Phase 2b clinical trial, the primary efficacy outcome and decision criteria for successfully passing Phases 2b and 3. It uses Bayesian clinical trial simulation to calculate the probability of successful drug registration based on the uncertainty about parameters of interest, thereby providing a more realistic assessment of the likely outcomes of individual trials and sequences of trials for the purpose of decision making.In this case study, the results show that, depending on the trial design, the new treatment has assurances of successful drug registration in the range 0.044-0.142 for an ACR20 outcome and 0.057-0.213 for an ACR50 outcome. Copyright (c) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Pharm Stat. 2009 Apr 1

Bansback N, Marra CA, Finckh A, Anis A

Recent years have witnessed a shift in the therapeutic approach for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The focus of interest has been the improved outcomes achieved through the use of early aggressive disease-modifying therapy, including the use of biologic agents. Such strategies have acquisition costs which typically exceed those of older anti-rheumatic strategies. However, improved outcomes might lead to fewer hospitalizations and physician visits and improved employability, leading to future cost savings. This is in addition to the health benefits which patients value as improvements in quality of life. With many services competing to spend often limited health-care budgets, information on the relative benefits and costs of new approaches for treating RA can be useful in deciding on efficient allocation and treatment decisions.

Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2009 Feb;23(1):83-92

Bansback N, Ara R, Karnon J, Anis A

We reviewed the clinical measures used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) economic evaluations with respect to their relevance and sensitivity to changes in survival, health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and costs. We compared the measures from the economic perspective and discussed the validity of methods used to extrapolate beyond the trial data. Cost-effectiveness evaluations of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in RA were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Econlit and NHS EED databases. Studies were retained if they extrapolated beyond randomized controlled trial evidence using relationships between clinical measures, costs and utilities. In the 22 studies identified, clinical severity was measured using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Disability Index, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, the Disease Activity Score (DAS) or a combination of the HAQ and DAS. The HAQ is correlated with mortality, costs and HR-QOL instruments, and several studies used linear relationships to model these associations. However, a polynomial relationship or discrete states may be more appropriate for patients at the extremes of the disease spectrum, and numerous HAQ health states may be required to capture differences in mortality risk. While the ACR response criteria is a more comprehensive measure than the HAQ, it is a relative measure, which creates difficulties when estimating absolute changes in HR-QOL, costs and mortality risk. The evidence base linking DAS scores with HR-QOL instruments, costs and mortality is less robust, possibly due to the comparatively recent development of the measure and the limited number of possible scores (mild/moderate/severe). While there is some evidence of a relationship between DAS scores and costs, the DAS does not capture all aspects of HR-QOL, and no significant relationship has been established with mortality risk. Evidence suggests the HAQ to be the primary clinical measure for use in economic evaluations as it is measured in almost all clinical studies, and is closely correlated to health utilities, mortality and costs. While new developments suggest the sensitivity of health states may be improved by combining the HAQ with measures such as the DAS, further research is required in this area. Further research is also required to explore the advantages in using either continuous or discrete health states.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(5):395-408

Karnon J, Czoski-Murray C, Smith K, Brand C, Chakravarthy U, Davis S, Bansback N, Beverley C, Bird A, Harding S, Chisholm I, Yang YC.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of screening for age-related macular degeneration (AMD) by developing a decision analytic model that incorporated and assessed all of the National Screening Committee criteria. A further objective was to identify the major areas of uncertainty in the model, and so inform future research priorities in this disease area. DATA SOURCES: Major databases were searched in March 2004 and updated in January 2005. REVIEW METHODS: Systematic literature reviews covered the epidemiology and natural history of AMD, the screening and treatment effectiveness and health-related quality of life relating to AMD. A hybrid cohort-individual sampling model was implemented to describe the range of pathways between the incidence of age-related maculopathy (ARM) and death via clinical presentation and treatment at different stages of the disease. As significant shortfalls in the data available from the literature were apparent, so a range of primary data sources were also used to populate the model. To obtain estimates for the value of parameters deemed to be within an expert’s remit, data describing some parameters were elicited from relevant experts. The data identified informed probability distributions describing the uncertainty around the model parameters. To incorporate joint parameter uncertainty (i.e. correlations between parameters), the AMD natural history model was calibrated probabilistically. Randomly sampled sets of input parameters were assigned weights representing the accuracy of their predictions of a set of observed model outputs. The analysis of the AMD screening model estimated the costs, numbers of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cases of blindness in a general population sample of 50-year-olds over the remainder of their lifetime, for 16 alternative screening options (including no screening). The reference case analysis incorporated current treatment options of laser photocoagulation and photodynamic therapy. Sensitivity analyses describing six alternative sets of intervention strategies, based on horizon scanning of potential future treatments for AMD, were also undertaken. RESULTS: There remains significant uncertainty about whether any form of screening for AMD is cost-effective. However, annual screening from age 60 years seems to provide the highest mean net benefits, but this is based on a cost-effectiveness estimate that has very poor precision (high levels of uncertainty). The probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows that the 95% credible interval for annual screening from age 60 years ranges from this option dominating the previous option to an incremental cost per QALY of over 0.5 million pounds sterling. Plotting a cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier shows that although annual screening from age 60 years has the highest net benefits at a value of QALY of 30,000 pounds sterling, the associated probability of this option being the most cost-effective option is only around 20%. The sensitivity analyses around potential future treatment options indicate that screening may become more cost-effective with the new treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The conclusions focus on the interpretation of the results from the perspective of defining the major areas of uncertainty, which were defined as disease progression, rates of clinical presentation, screening test and optician effectiveness, treatment effectiveness, and costs of blindness. Future research may be best targeted at assessing how routine data may be used to describe clinical presentation rates of ARM. Other potential studies include a pilot study of the effectiveness of screening and opticians’ referral patterns for AMD and a costing study of blindness as a continuum of association with deterioration in vision.

Health Technol Assess. 2008 Jun;12(27):iii-iv, ix-124

Karnon J, Czoski-Murray C, Smith K, Brand C, Chakravarthy U, Davis S, Bansback N, Beverley C, Bird A, Harding S, Chisholm I, Yang YC

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of screening for age-related macular degeneration (AMD) by developing a decision analytic model that incorporated and assessed all of the National Screening Committee criteria. A further objective was to identify the major areas of uncertainty in the model, and so inform future research priorities in this disease area. DATA SOURCES: Major databases were searched in March 2004 and updated in January 2005. REVIEW METHODS: Systematic literature reviews covered the epidemiology and natural history of AMD, the screening and treatment effectiveness and health-related quality of life relating to AMD. A hybrid cohort-individual sampling model was implemented to describe the range of pathways between the incidence of age-related maculopathy (ARM) and death via clinical presentation and treatment at different stages of the disease. As significant shortfalls in the data available from the literature were apparent, so a range of primary data sources were also used to populate the model. To obtain estimates for the value of parameters deemed to be within an expert’s remit, data describing some parameters were elicited from relevant experts. The data identified informed probability distributions describing the uncertainty around the model parameters. To incorporate joint parameter uncertainty (i.e. correlations between parameters), the AMD natural history model was calibrated probabilistically. Randomly sampled sets of input parameters were assigned weights representing the accuracy of their predictions of a set of observed model outputs. The analysis of the AMD screening model estimated the costs, numbers of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cases of blindness in a general population sample of 50-year-olds over the remainder of their lifetime, for 16 alternative screening options (including no screening). The reference case analysis incorporated current treatment options of laser photocoagulation and photodynamic therapy. Sensitivity analyses describing six alternative sets of intervention strategies, based on horizon scanning of potential future treatments for AMD, were also undertaken. RESULTS: There remains significant uncertainty about whether any form of screening for AMD is cost-effective. However, annual screening from age 60 years seems to provide the highest mean net benefits, but this is based on a cost-effectiveness estimate that has very poor precision (high levels of uncertainty). The probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows that the 95% credible interval for annual screening from age 60 years ranges from this option dominating the previous option to an incremental cost per QALY of over 0.5 million pounds sterling. Plotting a cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier shows that although annual screening from age 60 years has the highest net benefits at a value of QALY of 30,000 pounds sterling, the associated probability of this option being the most cost-effective option is only around 20%. The sensitivity analyses around potential future treatment options indicate that screening may become more cost-effective with the new treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The conclusions focus on the interpretation of the results from the perspective of defining the major areas of uncertainty, which were defined as disease progression, rates of clinical presentation, screening test and optician effectiveness, treatment effectiveness, and costs of blindness. Future research may be best targeted at assessing how routine data may be used to describe clinical presentation rates of ARM. Other potential studies include a pilot study of the effectiveness of screening and opticians’ referral patterns for AMD and a costing study of blindness as a continuum of association with deterioration in vision.

Health Technol Assess. 2008 Jun;12(27):iii-iv, ix-124

Wailoo AJ, Bansback N, Brennan A, Michaud K, Nixon RM, Wolfe F

OBJECTIVE: Since the introduction of the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act and its associated demonstration project, coverage of selected biologic drugs has been expanded for Medicare beneficiaries. For rheumatoid arthritis, coverage was extended to etanercept, adalimumab, and anakinra in addition to the previously covered infliximab. We undertook to develop a model to compare the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) generated by each of the 4 biologic agents. METHODS: Data were drawn from meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and from a large longitudinal outcomes databank. Uncertainty was addressed using probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses. A lifetime horizon and Medicare viewpoint were adopted. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, anakinra was the least effective and least costly strategy. Etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab were similar in terms of effectiveness, but infliximab was more costly. If decision makers are willing to pay a maximum of $50,000/QALY, the probability that infliximab is cost-effective is <1%. Findings were robust to a range of sensitivity analyses. Only if the dose of infliximab remains constant over time is this likely to be a cost-effective strategy. CONCLUSION: Infliximab is unlikely to be cost-effective in the Medicare population compared with either etanercept or adalimumab. Anakinra is substantially less costly but is also less effective than the 3 tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors.

Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Apr;58(4):939-46

Wailoo A, Bansback N, Chilcott J

Rheumatology (Oxford). 2008 Feb;47(2):119-20

Bansback N, Davis S, Brazier J

AIMS: To re-evaluate the cost-effectiveness of photodynamic therapy with verteporfin (Visudyne, Novartis AG, Switzerland) in patients with predominantly classic and classic choroidal neovascularization (CNV) owing to age-related macular degeneration (AMD), using new evidence on the impact of contrast sensitivity on health status. METHOD: A health economic model is used to synthesise the evidence on contrast sensitivity and treatment rates from the TAP Investigation with health state utilities and costs. Impairment of visual function is estimated using a Markov model to predict transitions between states of contrast sensitivity. Each state is associated with costs and a health state utility. Total expected costs and benefits for a cohort of patients over a defined number of cycles are calculated. The expected health state utility for each disease state was estimated using results from a study of 209 patients with AMD in Sheffield. The model includes the costs associated with treatment and monitoring in the verteporfin treatment arm and costs offset by delaying the deterioration of visual function. RESULTS: Beyond 3 years, the annual costs of the verteporfin arm are estimated to be less than the annual costs of the control arm, owing to the cost associated with higher blindness prevalence in the control arm. Over time, the results show that both the incremental utility and cost decreases. By 10 years, the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness is approximately pound20 996 per Quality-Adjusted Life Years. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the verteporfin therapy in the treatment for patients with predominantly classic and classic CNV owing to AMD is encouraging.

Eye (Lond). 2007 Dec;21(12):1455-63

Brennan A, Bansback N, Nixon R, Madan J, Harrison M, Watson K, Symmons D

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of TNF-alpha antagonist therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the United Kingdom using data from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registry (BSRBR). METHODS: A simulation model is constructed to quantify the cost effectiveness of the TNF-alpha antagonist therapies (infliximab, etanercept and adalimumab) as a group versus traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, with a time horizon over the full patient lifetime. Participants are UK NHS patients in the BSRBR with RA who have failed at least two traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. The BSRBR aims to recruit all RA patients starting on a TNF-alpha antagonist agent and follows them 6 monthly via consultant and patient administered questionnaires. Data collected include disease activity scores (DAS28), the Health Assessment Questionnaire and the SF-36. Costs include drug, monitoring and hospitalisations. Benefits are measured in disability and quality of life improvements. The main outcome measure is the incremental cost per quality adjusted life-year gained (discounted). RESULTS: The basecase cost per quality adjusted life-year gained by using TNF-alpha antagonist therapies is estimated at pound23 882, with probabilistic uncertainty analysis suggesting that the probability that treatments are below 30,000 pounds per QALY is around 84%. The results are most sensitive to assumptions concerning long-term disability progression, discount rates and the validity or otherwise of SF6D derived utility measures. Subgroup analysis, monotherapy versus combination with methotrexate, and a limited analysis of sequential therapy with two TNF-alpha antagonist agents, suggest cost-effectiveness ratios around 20,000 pounds to 30,000 pounds. CONCLUSIONS: The BSRBR data provide valuable evidence for estimating cost-effectiveness. The analysis concludes that current policies and practice for the use of TNF-alpha antagonist therapies, after RA patients have failed at least two traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, appear cost-effective in the context of the NICE re-appraisal of 2006 for England and Wales, thus supporting their decision to continue their reimbursement. Decision-makers worldwide might adapt this analysis because differential costs, discount rates and other factors could affect results. There remains uncertainty, particularly on long-term disease progression. Further data collection using the BSRBR is recommended, together with a revision to this analysis when data become available.

Rheumatology (Oxford). 2007 Aug;46(8):1345-54

Bansback N, Maetzel A, Drummond M, Anis A, Marra C, Conway P, Boers M, Tugwell P, Boonen A

Since healthcare resources are scarce, choices have to be made on how they will be allocated. The use of economic evaluations using cost-effectiveness analyses has increased rapidly as policymakers have realized their value in maximizing the population’s benefits (in terms of length of life and health status) within a given budget. Following efforts by OMERACT to create reference case definitions for the conduct of economic evaluation in rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, and osteoarthritis, we review various methodological areas and research decisions that could benefit from a consensus between researchers, clinicians, and drug developers in terms of an ankylosing spondylitis (AS) reference case. Ten methodological issues are presented that will be important for future development of evaluations. Tentative proposals to define the issues in a reference case for AS are made, along with recommendations for further research.

J Rheumatol. 2007 May;34(5):1178-83

Thomas KC, Nosyk B, Fisher CG, Dvorak M, Patchell RA, Regine WF, Loblaw A, Bansback N, Guh D, Sun H, Anis A

PURPOSE: A recent randomized clinical trial has demonstrated that direct decompressive surgery plus radiotherapy was superior to radiotherapy alone for the treatment of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. The current study compared the cost-effectiveness of the two approaches. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In the original clinical trial, clinical effectiveness was measured by ambulation and survival time until death. In this study, an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a societal perspective. Costs related to treatment and posttreatment care were estimated and extended to the lifetime of the cohort. Weibull regression was applied to extrapolate outcomes in the presence of censored clinical effectiveness data. RESULTS: From a societal perspective, the baseline incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was found to be $60 per additional day of ambulation (all costs in 2003 Canadian dollars). Using probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 50% of all generated ICERs were lower than $57, and 95% were lower than $242 per additional day of ambulation. This analysis had a 95% CI of -$72.74 to 309.44, meaning that this intervention ranged from a financial savings of $72.74 to a cost of $309.44 per additional day of ambulation. Using survival as the measure of effectiveness resulted in an ICER of $30,940 per life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence that treatment of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression with surgery in addition to radiotherapy is cost-effective both in terms of cost per additional day of ambulation, and cost per life-year gained.

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Nov 15;66(4):1212-8

Bansback NJ, Ara R, Barkham N, Brennan A, Fraser AD, Conway P, Reynolds A, Emery P

OBJECTIVES: Tumour necrosis factor (TNF) has been shown to improve the outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We estimate the long-term impact on health status of prescribing the TNF antagonist etanercept, and evaluate the cost-effectiveness in a health economic model. METHODS: The relationship between disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire) and health state utility was explored to estimate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained from the TNF antagonist etanercept. A model was then used to compare sequences of treatments for PsA after failure of two conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). One arm commences on etanercept therapy and this is compared with a strategy commencing with combination therapy of methotrexate and ciclosporin and another commencing with leflunomide. Individual patient data from Phase III etanercept trials is used to populate the model supported by published evidence from extensive literature searches. By incorporating a life table specific for a PsA population, and using a number of evidence- and expert opinion-based assumptions for disease progression, the model was extended beyond the trial duration to a 10-yr time horizon. Cost offsets were produced by avoiding surgery through delayed progression; drug and monitoring costs were also modelled. RESULTS: Over the 10 yrs, modelled etanercept treatment gave 0.82 more QALYs when compared with combination therapy with methotrexate and ciclosporin, and 0.65 more QALYs in comparison with leflunomide. This equates to a central estimate for the cost per QALY of pound28 189 and pound28 189 for ciclosporin and leflunomide, respectively. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated this could vary by as much as +/-28%. CONCLUSIONS: With limited data currently available, the potential cost-effectiveness of etanercept in DMARD failures for adults with PsA appears encouraging. The result for other TNF antagonists will depend on how their relative efficacy and drug price compares with etanercept. A number of limitations are described and priorities for further research suggested.

Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006 Aug;45(8):1029-38

Bansback NJ, Regier DA, Ara R, Brennan A, Shojania K, Esdaile JM, Anis AH, Marra CA

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, progressive, inflammatory disease that affects approximately 0.5-1% of the adult population. The introduction of new disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) such as leflunomide, anakinra and the tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha antagonists (infliximab, etanercept and adalimumab) have transformed the management of RA. In particular, the last class of agents has generated substantial controversy. Costing between 16,000 US dollars and 20,000 US dollars per patient-year (2001 values), the potential greater efficacy of treatment with TNFalpha antagonists comes at much higher drug costs, making these agents natural candidates for cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs).A MEDLINE search (until 31 January 2004) identified six original CEAs evaluating TNFalpha antagonists in RA. The aim of a CEA is to facilitate the allocation of scarce health resources and to inform policy decisions. However, to enhance the reliability and relevance of these analyses to policy makers, there must be similarity between the methodologies used. Recently, the OMERACT (Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials) group produced a document to define such a reference case; the OMERACT document was used as a foundation to structure comparisons and highlight discrepancies. The methodologies employed in each analysis differed; in particular, disparate time horizons, comparators, quantities of drug and treatment sequences prohibit the comparison of cost effectiveness between studies. Outcomes also differed between the analyses. Most reported health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The QALYs metric was based on preference scores that were typically derived from linear regressions using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). However, models also used American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, as well as the disease activity score (DAS). Common to all studies was the lack of data from long-term randomised studies where efficacy and resource consumption in comparison with standard care has been investigated. As such, investigators combined short-term randomised control trial data with that of a long-term observational cohort, and modelled cost effectiveness over an appropriate time horizon. In addition, most analyses lacked rigorous sensitivity analysis to examine the impact of uncertainty in the parameters. Those analyses that examined time horizons of 6 months and 1 year published incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of 34,800 US dollars per ACR 70% response criteria (ACR70) weighted response (duration 6 months, 1999 values) and 96,166 US dollars (duration 1 year, 2002 values). Analyses that modelled costs and health outcomes beyond the first year reported ICER estimates ranging between 26,800 US dollars (patients’ lifetime, 1998 values) and 40,308 US dollars (10 years, 2002 values). In terms of HR-QOL, the analyses reported incremental QALYs that ranged from 0.116 (over 19 years) to 1.6 (over 10 years). Discounted costs of therapy ranged from 30,362 US dollars (10 years, 2002 values) to 93,000 US dollars (22 years, 1998 values), and comparator costs ranged from 22,593 US dollars (10 years, 2002 values) to 84,000 US dollars (22 years, 1998 values).

Drugs. 2005;65(4):473-96

Bansback N, Brennan A, Anis AH

The past 10 years has witnessed a major transformation in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, a chronic condition that leads to significant morbidity, impairment in quality of life and mortality. Adalimumab joins a class of biologic response modifiers that prevent joint destruction and maintain functional status. For expensive interventions such as biologic response modifiers to be a valuable use of healthcare resources, they must lower healthcare costs by reducing the prevalence of hospitalizations, assist people with rheumatoid arthiritis in maintaining employment and improve patient quality of life. The rheumatoid artiritis market is competitive and growing quickly. Policy makers are faced with decisions surrounding the value of biologic response modifiers over conventional therapies, and whether one biologic response modifier has an advantage over another.

Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2005 Oct;5(5):519-29

Bansback NJ, Brennan A, Ghatnekar O

BACKGROUND: Societal decision makers increasingly emphasise their need for evidence based economic analyses to make reimbursement decisions. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the cost utility of adalimumab, on both incremental cost and incremental quality adjusted life years (QALYs), versus traditional disease modifying antirheumatic drugs and the other tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists suitable for submission to the Swedish LFN (Pharmaceutical Benefit Board). METHODS: Swedish unit costs and treatment guidelines from a lifetime perspective were implemented. A mathematical model, incorporating data from seven trials, simulated the experiences of 10 000 hypothetical patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The primary outcome measure-QALYs-was derived from utility values calculated from a relationship between the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Disability Index (DI) and Health Utility Index-III (HUI-3) from adalimumab trial results. The model followed the progression of HAQ-DI through a number of treatments in a sequence accounting for mortality, drug and monitoring costs, and other direct costs. RESULTS: When using ACR50 as a response threshold for determining successful treatment, adalimumab plus methotrexate showed the greatest number of QALYs gained (2.3 from one study and 2.1 from the pooled results of two trials). The etanercept plus methotrexate strategy yielded QALY gains similar to the pooled adalimumab results. Except for the infliximab strategy, the costs results were between 35 000 and 42 000, a range normally considered cost effective in other European countries. CONCLUSION: Adalimumab appears to be cost effective for the treatment of moderate to severe RA. The results suggest that adalimumab is at least as cost effective as other TNF antagonists.

Ann Rheum Dis. 2005 Jul;64(7):995-1002

Bansback NJ, Brennan A, Ghatnekar O

BACKGROUND: Societal decision makers increasingly emphasise their need for evidence based economic analyses to make reimbursement decisions. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the cost utility of adalimumab, on both incremental cost and incremental quality adjusted life years (QALYs), versus traditional disease modifying antirheumatic drugs and the other tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists suitable for submission to the Swedish LFN (Pharmaceutical Benefit Board). METHODS: Swedish unit costs and treatment guidelines from a lifetime perspective were implemented. A mathematical model, incorporating data from seven trials, simulated the experiences of 10 000 hypothetical patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The primary outcome measure-QALYs-was derived from utility values calculated from a relationship between the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Disability Index (DI) and Health Utility Index-III (HUI-3) from adalimumab trial results. The model followed the progression of HAQ-DI through a number of treatments in a sequence accounting for mortality, drug and monitoring costs, and other direct costs. RESULTS: When using ACR50 as a response threshold for determining successful treatment, adalimumab plus methotrexate showed the greatest number of QALYs gained (2.3 from one study and 2.1 from the pooled results of two trials). The etanercept plus methotrexate strategy yielded QALY gains similar to the pooled adalimumab results. Except for the infliximab strategy, the costs results were between 35 000 and 42 000, a range normally considered cost effective in other European countries. CONCLUSION: Adalimumab appears to be cost effective for the treatment of moderate to severe RA. The results suggest that adalimumab is at least as cost effective as other TNF antagonists.

Ann Rheum Dis. 2005 Jul;64(7):995-1002

Bansback N, Ward S, Karnon J

Eur J Health Econ. 2004 Jun;5(2):188-9

Brennan A, Bansback N, Reynolds A, Conway P

OBJECTIVES: This model examines the cost-effectiveness of etanercept monotherapy under British Society for Rheumatology guidelines, i.e. adults previously failing two disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). It compares a DMARD sequence with etanercept third line against the same sequence excluding etanercept. METHOD: The 6-monthly trend in Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability score is simulated for 10 000 patients’ lifetimes using clinical trial data and published literature. Switching to the next treatment is triggered by lack of response, loss of efficacy or adverse events. Patient mortality depends on rheumatoid arthritis life-tables and on epidemiological evidence relating reduced risk to HAQ improvement. Regression of HAQ/EuroQol (EQ-5D) utility provides quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. Primary analysis includes drug costs, monitoring and hospitalizations. RESULTS: The central estimate cost per QALY is pound 16 330. Sensitivity analyses ( pound 7800 to pound 42 000) showed long-term HAQ progression (etanercept, DMARDs, non-responders) as most sensitive variables. The inclusion of potential avoided nursing home admissions and indirect costs/lost employment further improves the cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: For adults in the UK, the results suggest that etanercept is cost-effective when compared with non-biologic agents. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence has accepted that etanercept is cost-effective and recommended its availability for use in patients who have failed at least two DMARDs. This model was an important component of that decision. The model is further suitable for use for a wide range of other cost-effectiveness questions in rheumatoid arthritis.

Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004 Jan;43(1):62-72

Ward S, Morris E, Bansback N, Calvert N, Crellin A, Forman D, Larvin M, Radstone D

Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(24):1-70

Lloyd Jones M, Hummel S, Bansback N, Orr B, Seymour M

Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(25):1-128