RESUMO
Objectives: Biosimilars improve patient access by providing cost-effective treatment options. This study assessed the potential savings and expanded patient access with increased use of two biosimilar disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs): a) approved adalimumab biosimilars and b) the first tocilizumab biosimilar, representing an established biosimilar field and a recent biosimilar entrant in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom (UK).Methods: Separate ex-ante analyses were conducted for each country, parameterized using country-specific list prices, unit volumes annually, and market shares for each therapy. Discounting scenarios of 10%, 20%, and 30% were tested for tocilizumab. Outputs included direct cost-savings associated with drug acquisition or the incremental number of patients that could be treated if savings were redirected. Two biosimilar conversion scenarios were tested.Results: Savings associated with a 100% conversion to adalimumab biosimilar ranged from 10.5 to 187 million (UK and Germany, respectively), or an additional 1,096 to 19,454 patients that could be treated using the cost-savings. Introduction of a tocilizumab biosimilar provided savings up to 29.3 million in the most conservative scenario. Exclusive use of tocilizumab biosimilars (at a 30% discount) could increase savings to 28.8 to 113 million or expand access to an additional 43% of existing tocilizumab users across countries.Conclusion: This study demonstrates the benefits that can be realized through increased biosimilar adoption, not only in an untapped tocilizumab market, but also through incremental increases in well-established markets such as adalimumab. As healthcare budgets continue to face downwards pressure globally, strategies to increase biosimilar market share could prove useful to help manage financial constraints.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing microwave ablation (MWA) and cryoablation for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: The systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Studies published in English from January 2006 to February 2022 that assessed adults with primary RCC who received MWA or cryoablation were included. Study arms from RCTs, comparative observational, and single-arm studies were eligible. The outcomes included local tumor recurrence (LTR), overall survival, disease-free survival, overall/major complications, procedure/ablation time, 1- to 3-month primary technique efficacy, and technical success. Single-arm meta-analyses were performed using the random effects model. Sensitivity analyses excluding low-quality studies assessed using the MINORs scale were performed. Univariable and multivariable examined the effects of prognostic factors. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups and mean tumor size for MWA and cryoablation were 2.74 and 2.69 cm. Single-arm meta-analyses were similar for LTR and secondary outcomes between cryoablation and MWA. Ablation time was significantly shorter with MWA than with cryoablation (meta-regression weighted mean difference 24.55 minutes, 95% confidence interval -31.71, -17.38, P < .0001). One-year LTR was significantly lower with MWA than cryoablation (odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.10-0.93, P = .04). There were no significant differences for other outcomes. CONCLUSION: MWA provides significantly improved 1-year LTR and ablation time compared with cryoablation for patients with RCC. Other outcomes appeared similar or favorable for MWA; however, results were not statistically significant. MWA of primary RCC is as safe and effective as cryoablation, which should be confirmed with future comparative studies.
