口服 CGRP 拮抗剂 Atogepant 和 Rimegepant 预防性治疗发作性偏头痛的成本效益评估:美国社会视角模型的结果。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Clinical Drug Investigation Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-21 DOI:10.1007/s40261-024-01345-3
Ryan Thaliffdeen, Anthony Yu, Karen Rascati
{"title":"口服 CGRP 拮抗剂 Atogepant 和 Rimegepant 预防性治疗发作性偏头痛的成本效益评估:美国社会视角模型的结果。","authors":"Ryan Thaliffdeen, Anthony Yu, Karen Rascati","doi":"10.1007/s40261-024-01345-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Two oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists, atogepant and rimegepant, were approved in 2021 for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine (EM), yet no formal cost-effectiveness analysis has been published. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atogepant 60 mg and rimegepant 75 mg compared with placebo.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A decision tree model was constructed over a 1-year time horizon from a US societal perspective. Patient cohorts were simulated using baseline and change from baseline monthly migraine days (MMDs) reported in the trials to incorporate responder rates and within patient response into the model. Due to heterogeneity between the trial populations, each medication was compared with its respective trial's placebo group. Direct healthcare resource costs, productivity costs, acute medication costs, and quality-of-life values were obtained from the literature.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The atogepant cohort experienced an incremental increase in healthcare plus productivity costs of $11,978 when compared with placebo, with a gain of 0.026 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of more than $450,000/QALY. The rimegepant cohort experienced an incremental increase of $21,692 when compared with placebo, with a gain of 0.024 QALYs. This yields an ICER of more than $890,000/QALY when comparing rimegepant with placebo. Cost savings between atogepant and atogepant placebo were greatest with respect to acute medication costs at $735 of savings over 1 year, followed by savings of $135 for healthcare resource utilization and $34 for productivity costs. A similar relationship was seen between rimegepant and rimegepant placebo. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis found that monthly acquisition costs of atogepant and rimegepant had the largest impact on the ICER, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Atogepant and rimegepant were both unable to meet generally accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds < 150,0000/QALY. Additional studies are needed to better guide decision making regarding oral CGRPs' place in therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":10402,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Drug Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"209-217"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Oral CGRP Antagonists, Atogepant and Rimegepant, for the Preventative Treatment of Episodic Migraine: Results from a US Societal Perspective Model.\",\"authors\":\"Ryan Thaliffdeen, Anthony Yu, Karen Rascati\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40261-024-01345-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Two oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists, atogepant and rimegepant, were approved in 2021 for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine (EM), yet no formal cost-effectiveness analysis has been published. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atogepant 60 mg and rimegepant 75 mg compared with placebo.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A decision tree model was constructed over a 1-year time horizon from a US societal perspective. Patient cohorts were simulated using baseline and change from baseline monthly migraine days (MMDs) reported in the trials to incorporate responder rates and within patient response into the model. Due to heterogeneity between the trial populations, each medication was compared with its respective trial's placebo group. Direct healthcare resource costs, productivity costs, acute medication costs, and quality-of-life values were obtained from the literature.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The atogepant cohort experienced an incremental increase in healthcare plus productivity costs of $11,978 when compared with placebo, with a gain of 0.026 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of more than $450,000/QALY. The rimegepant cohort experienced an incremental increase of $21,692 when compared with placebo, with a gain of 0.024 QALYs. This yields an ICER of more than $890,000/QALY when comparing rimegepant with placebo. Cost savings between atogepant and atogepant placebo were greatest with respect to acute medication costs at $735 of savings over 1 year, followed by savings of $135 for healthcare resource utilization and $34 for productivity costs. A similar relationship was seen between rimegepant and rimegepant placebo. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis found that monthly acquisition costs of atogepant and rimegepant had the largest impact on the ICER, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Atogepant and rimegepant were both unable to meet generally accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds < 150,0000/QALY. Additional studies are needed to better guide decision making regarding oral CGRPs' place in therapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10402,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Drug Investigation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"209-217\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Drug Investigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-024-01345-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Drug Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-024-01345-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:2021年,两种口服降钙素基因相关肽(CGRP)拮抗剂--阿托格潘和瑞美潘--被批准用于发作性偏头痛(EM)的预防性治疗,但尚未公布正式的成本效益分析。本研究旨在评估阿托格潘 60 毫克和利美君 75 毫克与安慰剂相比的成本效益:方法:从美国社会角度出发,构建了一个为期 1 年的决策树模型。使用试验报告中的基线和每月偏头痛天数(MMDs)变化模拟患者队列,将应答率和患者内部应答纳入模型。由于试验人群之间存在异质性,因此每种药物都与各自试验的安慰剂组进行了比较。直接医疗资源成本、生产成本、急性用药成本和生活质量值均来自文献:结果:与安慰剂组相比,阿托格班组的医疗保健和生产成本增加了 11,978 美元,质量调整生命年(QALYs)增加了 0.026。由此得出的增量成本效益比 (ICER) 超过了 450,000 美元/QALY。与安慰剂相比,利眠宁队列的增量增加了 21,692 美元,收益为 0.024 QALYs。与安慰剂相比,瑞格潘的 ICER 超过 890,000 美元/QALY。阿托吉潘与阿托吉潘安慰剂相比,在急性药物治疗费用方面节省的费用最多,1 年可节省 735 美元,其次是在医疗资源利用方面节省 135 美元,在生产成本方面节省 34 美元。利美昔班和利美昔班安慰剂之间也存在类似的关系。单向确定性敏感性分析发现,阿托吉潘和利美昔班的每月购置成本分别对ICER影响最大:结论:阿托格潘和利美昔班均无法达到公认的成本效益阈值<150,000/QALY。需要进行更多的研究,以更好地指导有关口服 CGRP 在治疗中的地位的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Oral CGRP Antagonists, Atogepant and Rimegepant, for the Preventative Treatment of Episodic Migraine: Results from a US Societal Perspective Model.

Background and objectives: Two oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists, atogepant and rimegepant, were approved in 2021 for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine (EM), yet no formal cost-effectiveness analysis has been published. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atogepant 60 mg and rimegepant 75 mg compared with placebo.

Methods: A decision tree model was constructed over a 1-year time horizon from a US societal perspective. Patient cohorts were simulated using baseline and change from baseline monthly migraine days (MMDs) reported in the trials to incorporate responder rates and within patient response into the model. Due to heterogeneity between the trial populations, each medication was compared with its respective trial's placebo group. Direct healthcare resource costs, productivity costs, acute medication costs, and quality-of-life values were obtained from the literature.

Results: The atogepant cohort experienced an incremental increase in healthcare plus productivity costs of $11,978 when compared with placebo, with a gain of 0.026 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of more than $450,000/QALY. The rimegepant cohort experienced an incremental increase of $21,692 when compared with placebo, with a gain of 0.024 QALYs. This yields an ICER of more than $890,000/QALY when comparing rimegepant with placebo. Cost savings between atogepant and atogepant placebo were greatest with respect to acute medication costs at $735 of savings over 1 year, followed by savings of $135 for healthcare resource utilization and $34 for productivity costs. A similar relationship was seen between rimegepant and rimegepant placebo. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis found that monthly acquisition costs of atogepant and rimegepant had the largest impact on the ICER, respectively.

Conclusions: Atogepant and rimegepant were both unable to meet generally accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds < 150,0000/QALY. Additional studies are needed to better guide decision making regarding oral CGRPs' place in therapy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
108
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Drug Investigation provides rapid publication of original research covering all phases of clinical drug development and therapeutic use of drugs. The Journal includes: -Clinical trials, outcomes research, clinical pharmacoeconomic studies and pharmacoepidemiology studies with a strong link to optimum prescribing practice for a drug or group of drugs. -Clinical pharmacodynamic and clinical pharmacokinetic studies with a strong link to clinical practice. -Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies in healthy volunteers in which significant implications for clinical prescribing are discussed. -Studies focusing on the application of drug delivery technology in healthcare. -Short communications and case study reports that meet the above criteria will also be considered. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Clinical Drug Investigation may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge, but non in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
期刊最新文献
A Network Meta-Analysis of Vasodilator Therapies in Pulmonary Hypertension Patients Undergoing Mitral Valve Replacement Surgery: Insights for Optimizing Hemodynamics. A Phase I Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Bioequivalence of an Adalimumab Biosimilar Adalimumab-WIBP and Humira®. A Single-Dose Study to Evaluate the Relative Bioavailability, Safety, and Tolerability of Monthly Extended-Release Buprenorphine at Alternative Injection Locations in Adult Participants with Opioid Use Disorder. Efficacy of Intravenous Ferric Carboxymaltose in Heart Failure Patients with Iron Deficiency Anemia: A Meta-analysis of 6271 Patients. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Adjuvant Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Early Breast Cancer in Japan.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1