ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs and benefits of alternative combination strategies of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) and DMARD monotherapy in patients with early, active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Data were drawn from randomized controlled trials that compared DMARD monotherapy or any DMARD combination strategy, with or without combined steroid therapy. Mixed treatment comparison methods were used to estimate the relative effectiveness of the different strategies. A mathematical model was developed to compare the longterm costs and benefits of the alternative strategies, combining data from a variety of sources. Costs were considered from a health sector viewpoint and benefits were expressed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). RESULTS: If decision makers use a threshold of £20,000 (US$29,000) per QALY, then the strategies most likely to be cost-effective are either DMARD combination therapy with downward titration (probability of being optimal = 0.50) or intensive, triple DMARD combination therapy (probability of being optimal = 0.43). The intensive DMARD strategy generated an additional cost of £27,392 per additional QALY gained compared to the downward titration strategy. Other combination strategies were unlikely to be considered cost-effective compared to DMARD monotherapy. Results were robust to a range of scenario sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Combination DMARD therapy is likely to be cost-effective compared to DMARD monotherapy where treatment entails rapid downward dose titration or intensive, triple DMARD therapy.
