贝伐珠单抗生物仿制药与原研贝伐珠单抗治疗转移性结直肠癌的成本效益分析:一项使用真实世界数据的比较研究。

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Value in Health Pub Date : 2024-08-09 DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.018
Brandon Lu, Erind Dvorani, Lena Nguyen, Jaclyn M Beca, Rebecca E Mercer, Andrea Adamic, Caroline Muñoz, Kelvin K W Chan
{"title":"贝伐珠单抗生物仿制药与原研贝伐珠单抗治疗转移性结直肠癌的成本效益分析:一项使用真实世界数据的比较研究。","authors":"Brandon Lu, Erind Dvorani, Lena Nguyen, Jaclyn M Beca, Rebecca E Mercer, Andrea Adamic, Caroline Muñoz, Kelvin K W Chan","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>MVASI (Amgen) and Zirabev (Pfizer) are 2 of the earliest bevacizumab biosimilars approved for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to confirm and quantify the real-world cost savings and cost-effectiveness of MVASI and Zirabev relative to originator bevacizumab for patients with mCRC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, where originator and biosimilar bevacizumab are universally publicly funded. All mCRC patients who received originator bevacizumab between January 2008 and August 2019 or biosimilar bevacizumab between August 2019 and March 2021 were propensity score matched (1:4) to adjust for baseline differences. Total 1-year patient-level costs (CAD) and effects (life years [LY] and quality-adjusted LYs) were calculated from the public health payer's perspective. Primary outcomes included incremental net monetary benefit and incremental net health benefit (INHB). Sensitivity analyses included a subgroup analysis by biosimilar type (MVASI/Zirabev) and a 2-year analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The matched cohort included 747 biosimilar cases and 2945 comparators. Bevacizumab biosimilars were associated with an incremental cost of -$6379 (95%CI: -9417, -3537) (ie, cost saving) and incremental effect of 0.0 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.02) LY and -0.01 (95% CI: -0.03, 0) quality-adjusted LYs gained. Incremental net monetary benefit and INHB estimates were $6331 (95% CI: 6245, 6417) and 0.127 LY (95% CI: 0.125, 0.128), respectively, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/life year gained, with all estimates indicating the cost-effectiveness of biosimilar bevacizumab. Cost-effectiveness remained consistent across biosimilar brand subgroups and 2-year sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bevacizumab biosimilars demonstrated real-world cost savings while providing similar survival benefit as originator bevacizumab, confirming the initial expectations of their implementation and supporting health system sustainability.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Bevacizumab Biosimilars Versus Originator Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Comparative Study Using Real-World Data.\",\"authors\":\"Brandon Lu, Erind Dvorani, Lena Nguyen, Jaclyn M Beca, Rebecca E Mercer, Andrea Adamic, Caroline Muñoz, Kelvin K W Chan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>MVASI (Amgen) and Zirabev (Pfizer) are 2 of the earliest bevacizumab biosimilars approved for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to confirm and quantify the real-world cost savings and cost-effectiveness of MVASI and Zirabev relative to originator bevacizumab for patients with mCRC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, where originator and biosimilar bevacizumab are universally publicly funded. All mCRC patients who received originator bevacizumab between January 2008 and August 2019 or biosimilar bevacizumab between August 2019 and March 2021 were propensity score matched (1:4) to adjust for baseline differences. Total 1-year patient-level costs (CAD) and effects (life years [LY] and quality-adjusted LYs) were calculated from the public health payer's perspective. Primary outcomes included incremental net monetary benefit and incremental net health benefit (INHB). Sensitivity analyses included a subgroup analysis by biosimilar type (MVASI/Zirabev) and a 2-year analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The matched cohort included 747 biosimilar cases and 2945 comparators. Bevacizumab biosimilars were associated with an incremental cost of -$6379 (95%CI: -9417, -3537) (ie, cost saving) and incremental effect of 0.0 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.02) LY and -0.01 (95% CI: -0.03, 0) quality-adjusted LYs gained. Incremental net monetary benefit and INHB estimates were $6331 (95% CI: 6245, 6417) and 0.127 LY (95% CI: 0.125, 0.128), respectively, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/life year gained, with all estimates indicating the cost-effectiveness of biosimilar bevacizumab. Cost-effectiveness remained consistent across biosimilar brand subgroups and 2-year sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bevacizumab biosimilars demonstrated real-world cost savings while providing similar survival benefit as originator bevacizumab, confirming the initial expectations of their implementation and supporting health system sustainability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Value in Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Value in Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.018\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.07.018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:MVASI(安进公司)和Zirabev(辉瑞公司)是最早获准用于转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)一线治疗的两种贝伐珠单抗生物仿制药。我们的目的是确认和量化 MVASI 和 Zirabev 相对于原研贝伐珠单抗治疗 mCRC 患者的实际成本节约和成本效益:我们在加拿大安大略省开展了一项基于人群的回顾性队列研究,该省的原研药和生物仿制药贝伐珠单抗均由政府资助。对 2008 年 1 月至 2019 年 8 月期间接受原研贝伐珠单抗治疗或 2019 年 8 月至 2021 年 3 月期间接受生物类似物贝伐珠单抗治疗的所有 mCRC 患者进行倾向评分匹配(1:4),以调整基线差异。从公共卫生支付方的角度计算了1年患者层面的总成本(CAD)和效果(生命年(LY)和质量调整生命年(QALY))。主要结果包括增量净货币效益(INMB)和增量净健康效益(INHB)。敏感性分析包括按生物类似药类型(MVASI/Zirabev)进行的亚组分析和两年分析:匹配队列包括 747 个生物类似药病例和 2,945 个比较者。贝伐珠单抗生物仿制药的增量成本为-6,379美元(95%CI:-9,417, -3,537)(即节省成本),增量效果为0.0(95%CI:-0.02, 0.02)LY和-0.01(95%CI:-0.03, 0)QALY。在 50,000 美元/LYG 的支付意愿阈值下,INMB 和 INHB 的估计值分别为 6,331 美元(95% CI:6,245, 6,417)和 0.127 LY(95% CI:0.125, 0.128),所有估计值均表明生物类似药贝伐珠单抗具有成本效益。在生物类似药品牌亚组和2年敏感性分析中,成本效益保持一致:贝伐珠单抗生物仿制药在提供与原研药贝伐珠单抗相似的生存获益的同时,还显示出了实际的成本节约效果,证实了最初对其实施的预期,并支持了医疗系统的可持续性。
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 Analysis of Bevacizumab Biosimilars Versus Originator Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Comparative Study Using Real-World Data.

Objectives: MVASI (Amgen) and Zirabev (Pfizer) are 2 of the earliest bevacizumab biosimilars approved for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to confirm and quantify the real-world cost savings and cost-effectiveness of MVASI and Zirabev relative to originator bevacizumab for patients with mCRC.

Methods: We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, where originator and biosimilar bevacizumab are universally publicly funded. All mCRC patients who received originator bevacizumab between January 2008 and August 2019 or biosimilar bevacizumab between August 2019 and March 2021 were propensity score matched (1:4) to adjust for baseline differences. Total 1-year patient-level costs (CAD) and effects (life years [LY] and quality-adjusted LYs) were calculated from the public health payer's perspective. Primary outcomes included incremental net monetary benefit and incremental net health benefit (INHB). Sensitivity analyses included a subgroup analysis by biosimilar type (MVASI/Zirabev) and a 2-year analysis.

Results: The matched cohort included 747 biosimilar cases and 2945 comparators. Bevacizumab biosimilars were associated with an incremental cost of -$6379 (95%CI: -9417, -3537) (ie, cost saving) and incremental effect of 0.0 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.02) LY and -0.01 (95% CI: -0.03, 0) quality-adjusted LYs gained. Incremental net monetary benefit and INHB estimates were $6331 (95% CI: 6245, 6417) and 0.127 LY (95% CI: 0.125, 0.128), respectively, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/life year gained, with all estimates indicating the cost-effectiveness of biosimilar bevacizumab. Cost-effectiveness remained consistent across biosimilar brand subgroups and 2-year sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion: Bevacizumab biosimilars demonstrated real-world cost savings while providing similar survival benefit as originator bevacizumab, confirming the initial expectations of their implementation and supporting health system sustainability.

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
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
期刊最新文献
Value Attribution for Combination Treatments: Two Potential Solutions for an Insoluble Problem. Evaluating the health and economic impacts of return-to-work interventions: a modelling study. Exploring social preferences for health and wellbeing across the digital divide. A qualitative investigation based on tasks taken from an online discrete choice experiment. Quantifying low-value care in Germany: An observational study using statutory health insurance data from 2018 to 2021. Indirect Costs of Alzheimer's Disease: Unpaid Caregiver Burden and Patient Productivity Loss.
×
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