Evaluation of emerging NASH therapies: the impact of treatment efficacy profiles on long-term health outcomes.

Aim: Evaluations of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) treatments require predicting lifetime outcomes from short-term clinical trials. Materials & methods: A Markov model with NASH fibrosis stages F0-F3, NASH resolution, compensated cirrhosis (F4/CC), and liver-related complication (LRC) states was developed using literature-based standard of care (SoC) data. Hypothetical efficacy profiles were defined affecting resolution (100%-increase), fibrosis improvement (100% increase), or fibrosis worsening (50% decrease). Results: For the SoC, 10-year LRC rates increased with baseline fibrosis stage (F1: 3.0%; F2: 9.8%; F3: 27.2%; F4/CC: 64.9%). The fibrosis worsening profile reduced predicted 10-year LRC rates (F1: 1.9%; F2: 6.5%; F3: 19.1%; F4/CC: 55.0%) more than the resolution and fibrosis improvement profiles (F1: 2.6%/2.6%; F2: 8.5%/8.3%; F3: 23.3%/23.0%; F4/CC: NA/59.0%). Scenario analyses considered alternative SoC progression, treatment efficacy and treatment-stopping rules. Conclusion: Potential NASH efficacy profiles have differing impacts on predicted long-term outcomes, providing insights for future stakeholders.

Many new treatments are being investigated for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), a progressive and life-threatening disease often resulting in liver fibrosis (scarring) and advanced liver disease. The clinical value of these treatments and whether they are good value for money will depend on their ability to reduce the risk of advanced liver disease and subsequent liver transplantation. We developed a disease progression model which tracks survival and quality of life for two identical groups of NASH patients over their lifetimes. One group received a new hypothetical treatment for NASH while the other received current standard care. We used the model to estimate the potential health benefits of different hypothetical treatments for NASH. Our results suggest that treatments slowing fibrosis worsening may lead to greater long-term health benefits than treatments that improve NASH or improve existing fibrosis. These findings may provide insights to researchers involved in the development of new treatments for NASH.

The evolution of ICER's review process for new medical interventions and a critical review of economic evaluations (2018-2019): how stakeholders can collaborate with ICER to improve the quality of evidence in ICER's reports.

BACKGROUND: Since its inception in 2006, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) has rapidly gained influence on drug pricing and reimbursement decisions despite historical resistance to the use of cost-effectiveness thresholds in the US health care system. Although patient groups, physicians, and pharmaceutical manufacturers voiced their concerns about the potential negative effects of increased use of ICER's assessments on patient access to innovative medications, there is little guidance and consensus on how the stakeholders should collaborate with ICER to ensure that its reviews reflect the best clinical and economic evidence. OBJECTIVES: To (1) summarize the evolution of ICER's evaluation procedure, scope, and topics; (2) evaluate the effectiveness of stakeholder engagement approaches; and (3) inform stakeholders of their potential role in collaborating with ICER in estimating the cost-effectiveness of new interventions. METHODS: Publicly available ICER evaluations from 2008 to 2019 were systematically reviewed. Changes in evaluation procedures, scope, and topics were summarized. For evaluations that occurred in 2018 (n = 12) and 2019 (n = 8), key characteristics were extracted from 172 letters documenting interactions between ICER and all stakeholders who provided comments to draft reports. Stakeholder suggestions were analyzed in terms of their effectiveness indicated by ICER's reconsideration of its original cost-effectiveness analysis approach. RESULTS: The number of ICER evaluations increased consistently from 2 to 12 per year between 2008 and 2018 but declined to 8 in 2019. Stakeholder opportunity to engage with ICER increased from 1 to 3 per evaluation between 2008 and 2015. ICER initially focused on reviewing general treatment strategies but shifted its focus to specific pharmaceuticals and medical devices in 2014. In 2018 and 2019, 30% of 172 stakeholder letters resulted in a revision in the base-case analysis (49 comments in 2018, 23 in 2019); nearly half of comments in these letters included specific alternative data or a published article to rationalize recommendations. Other common types of suggestions that resulted in ICER's base-case analysis revisions included comments relating to inconsistent methods used to derive model inputs across different treatments (12/49 in 2018, 5/23 in 2019); clinical justifications (12/49 in 2018, 0/23 in 2019); and justifications based on patient perspectives (1/49 in 2018, 5/23 in 2019). These revisions rarely affected ICER's conclusions on the cost-effectiveness of evaluated interventions. Among the 20 assessments that involved 172 stakeholder engagements in 2018 and 2019, only 2% (n = 3) of the engagements (all from 2018) were associated with a change in the cost-effectiveness conclusion. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2018 and 2019, stakeholders leveraged ICER evaluations as opportunities to promote dialogue for better understanding of the value of technologies. Actionable, evidence-based recommendations were accepted more often than other recommendations. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Findings from this study were presented as a poster at Virtual ISPOR, May 17-20, 2021.

Predicted Lifetime Health Outcomes for Aducanumab in Patients with Early Alzheimer's Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a chronic and progressive neurodegenerative disease that places a substantial burden on patients and caregivers. Aducanumab is the first AD therapy approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to reduce a defining pathophysiological feature of the disease, brain amyloid plaques. In the phase 3 clinical trial EMERGE (NCT02484547), aducanumab reduced clinical decline in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to AD and mild AD dementia and confirmed amyloid pathology. METHODS: We used a Markov modeling approach to predict the long-term clinical benefits of aducanumab for patients with early AD based on EMERGE efficacy data. In the model, patients could transition between AD severity levels (MCI due to AD; mild, moderate, and severe AD dementia) and care settings (community vs. institution) or transition to death. The intervention was aducanumab added to standard of care (SOC), and the comparator was SOC alone. Data sources for base-case and scenario analyses included EMERGE, published National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center analyses, and other published literature. RESULTS: Per patient over a lifetime horizon, aducanumab treatment corresponded to 0.65 incremental patient quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and 0.09 fewer caregiver QALYs lost compared with patients treated with SOC. Aducanumab treatment translated to a lower lifetime probability of transitioning to AD dementia, a lower lifetime probability of transitioning to institutionalization (25.2% vs. 29.4%), delays in the median time to transition to AD dementia (7.50 vs. 4.92 years from MCI to moderate AD dementia or worse), and an incremental median time in the community of 1.32 years compared with SOC. CONCLUSION: The model predicted long-term benefits of aducanumab treatment in patients with MCI due to AD and mild AD dementia and their caregivers. The predicted outcomes provide a foundation for healthcare decision-makers and policymakers to understand the potential clinical and socioeconomic value of aducanumab.

US Budget Impact Model for Selinexor in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the budgetary impact of adopting selinexor (XPOVIO; Karyopharm Therapeutics, Inc.) for the treatment of adult patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma (MM) from the perspective of a third-party payer in the United States (US). METHODS: A budget impact analysis was conducted in one-year increments for the first 3 years after the introduction of selinexor for a private payer or Medicare Part D. Total annual treatment costs (2018 US dollars) were calculated as the sum of drug costs, costs of adverse events (AEs; grade ≥3), along with ongoing best supportive care costs. The number of eligible patients was derived from national epidemiology statistics, healthcare databases, and published literature. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, selinexor was associated with a per member per month (PMPM) cost of $0.0103 in year 3, assuming a market uptake of 64%, for a hypothetical private payer plan with one million members and four eligible patients. In a scenario analysis with 16 eligible patients with triple-class refractory MM regardless of the line of therapy (this additional scenario analysis was performed with an eligible population that does not fit squarely within the approved label for selinexor but was performed strictly for the purpose of demonstrating the results of the budget impact model when based on a larger pool of eligible patients), the estimated PMPM cost in year 3 was $0.0388. The model showed comparable sensitivity to treatment duration, wholesale acquisition cost for selinexor, and year 1 uptake. The base-case analysis conducted from the perspective of Medicare Part D was associated with a PMPM cost of $0.0078 in year 3 with 159 eligible patients. CONCLUSIONS: The model estimates a small and manageable budget impact of adopting selinexor into a third-party US payer plan, given the low prevalence of penta-refractory MM.

The capillary bed offers the largest hemodynamic resistance to the cortical blood supply.

The cortical angioarchitecture is a key factor in controlling cerebral blood flow and oxygen metabolism. Difficulties in imaging the complex microanatomy of the cortex have so far restricted insight about blood flow distribution in the microcirculation. A new methodology combining advanced microscopy data with large scale hemodynamic simulations enabled us to quantify the effect of the angioarchitecture on the cerebral microcirculation. High-resolution images of the mouse primary somatosensory cortex were input into with a comprehensive computational model of cerebral perfusion and oxygen supply ranging from the pial vessels to individual brain cells. Simulations of blood flow, hematocrit and oxygen tension show that the wide variation of hemodynamic states in the tortuous, randomly organized capillary bed is responsible for relatively uniform cortical tissue perfusion and oxygenation. Computational analysis of microcirculatory blood flow and pressure drops further indicates that the capillary bed, including capillaries adjacent to feeding arterioles (d < 10 µm), are the largest contributors to hydraulic resistance.