RESUMO
Objective: The study assessed cost-effectiveness of follitropin alfa biosimilar versus the originator in terms of cost per cumulative live-birth (CLB) for the French healthcare system based on real-world evidence. Follitropin alfa biosimilars have been shown to have comparable clinical outcomes to the originator, in both clinical studies and real-world settings, in terms of oocyte retrieval and cumulative live-birth rate (CLBR). Previous health economic studies comparing the cost-effectiveness of follitropin alfa biosimilars against the originator utilised clinical trial data, leaving ambiguity over cost-effectiveness in real-world settings. Additionally, previous cost-effectiveness analysis has been performed for live-births following only fresh embryo transfers, whereas, fresh and frozen transfers are common in clinical practice. This study investigates the cost per CLB, which more closely models clinical practice. Study design: A decision-tree cost-effectiveness model was developed based on the total costs and CLBR per ovarian stimulation (OS) for a follitropin alfa biosimilar (Bemfola®, Gedeon Richter Plc, Budapest, Hungary) and the originator (Gonal-f®, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). A time horizon of one year from oocyte retrieval to embryo transfer was used but costs from resulting transfers were also included. Clinical inputs were taken from the REOLA real-world study or clinician insights, while acquisition costs were taken from French public databases. The output was cost per CLB following one OS. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the largest model drivers. Results: Cost per CLB was 18,147 with follitropin alfa biosimilar and 18,834 with the originator, saving 687 per CLB following OS with the biosimilar. When wastage estimates were considered the biosimilar cost saving is estimated to be between 796 and 1155 per CLB further increasing cost savings. Irrespective of wastage, if used ubiquitously throughout France for ART, the biosimilar could save the French health system 13,994,190 or lead to 771 more births when compared to its higher-cost originator. Sensitivity analysis showed that the originator's relative CLBR had the greatest impact on the model. Conclusion: This analysis demonstrates that the follitropin alfa biosimilar, Bemfola®, is a more cost-effective option for OS compared with the originator from a French healthcare payer perspective, in terms of cost per CLB.
RESUMO
There are limited treatment options available for women with moderate to severe symptoms of uterine fibroids (UFs) who wish to avoid surgery. For these women, treatment with standard pharmaceuticals such as contraceptives is often insufficient to relieve symptoms, and patients may require surgery despite their wish to avoid it. Clinical trials demonstrate that ulipristal acetate 5 mg (UPA) is an effective treatment for this patient group, but its cost-effectiveness has not been assessed in this population. A decision-analytic model was developed to simulate a cohort of patients in this population under treatment with UPA followed by surgery as needed compared to treatment with iron and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) followed by surgery as needed (best supportive care, BSC). The analysis took the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in England, UK, and was based on the published UPA clinical trials. Results were calculated for the long-term costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each treatment arm and combined into an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) as the primary outcome. The impact of parameter uncertainty on the results was assessed using scenario, deterministic, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. The results show that treating patients with the UPA strategy, instead of the BSC strategy, results in an additional cost of £1,115 and a gain of 0.087 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of £12,850. Given commonly accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds in England, the use of UPA as a repeated, intermittent treatment for women with moderate to severe symptoms of UF wishing to avoid surgery is likely to be a cost-effective intervention when compared to BSC.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the budget impact of using ulipristal acetate (UPA) 5 mg to treat women with uterine fibroids (UF) causing moderate to severe symptoms. DESIGN: We modelled trends in the number of surgical procedures for symptomatic UF, with and without the use of UPA for preoperative or intermittent treatment and assessed the budget impact of UPA use from the French national healthcare insurance system perspective. SETTING: A French national hospital database (PMSI) that records admissions and relative procedures to public and private hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Women eligible for surgical procedures for uterine fibroids. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Economic impact of UPA treatment. RESULTS: This study based on observational retrospective data shows that the current use of UPA in its preoperative indication was associated with 5645 fewer surgeries from 2013 to 2015. Extrapolation suggests 17 885 fewer surgeries from 2016 to 2019. Overall, preoperative use of UPA results in substantial cost savings for the French national healthcare insurance system, with a cumulated budget impact estimated at -5 million from 2013 to 2015 and -13.5 million from 2016 to 2019. In addition, treating women nearing the menopause (≥48 years old) with intermittent treatment from 2017 to 2019 could produce an incremental cost saving of 19 million. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the use of UPA in women eligible for surgical procedures for UF is associated with considerable savings for the French national healthcare insurance system in both preoperative and intermittent indications by decreasing the need to perform surgeries.
