Cost-Effectiveness of Empagliflozin in Combination with Standard Care versus Standard Care Only in the Treatment of Heart Failure Patients in Finland.

Purpose: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor empagliflozin has recently been shown to improve the outcomes of heart failure (HF) patients regardless of patient's left ventricular ejection fraction by reducing the combined risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for worsening HF. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of adding empagliflozin to the standard care (SC) in comparison to SC only in the treatment of HF in Finland. Patients and Methods: The assessment was performed in the cost-utility framework using two Markov cohort state-transition models, one for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and one for HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The models have been primarily developed based on the EMPEROR-Reduced and EMPEROR-Preserved trials which informed the modelled patient characteristics, efficacy of treatments in terms of associated risks for heart failure hospitalizations, cardiovascular (CV) and non-CV death, treatment related adverse events (AE), and state- and event-specific health-related quality of life weights (EQ-5D). Direct health care costs were estimated from Finnish published references. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from health care payer perspective based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; cost per quality adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) and probability of cost-effectiveness (at willingness-to-pay [WTP] of 35,000 euros/QALY). The ICER was reported as the weighted (HFrEF, 43.5%; HFpEF, 56.5%) average result of the two models. Results: Empagliflozin + SC treatment increased the average quality-adjusted life-expectancy, and treatment costs of HF patients by 0.15 QALYs and 1,594 euros, respectively, when compared to SC. An additional QALY with empagliflozin was thus gained at a cost of 10,621 euros. The probability of empagliflozin + SC being cost-effective compared to placebo + SC was 77.6% and 83.5% with WTP of 35,000 and 100,000 euros/QALY, respectively. Conclusion: Empagliflozin is a cost-effective treatment for patients with HF in the Finnish health care setting.

Advantages in Management and Remote Monitoring of Intravenous Therapy: Exploratory Survey and Economic Evaluation of Gravity-Based Infusions in Finland.

INTRODUCTION: Intravenous infusion therapy is a common and challenging invasive treatment procedure in hospital wards. Administration mistakes can have serious, even life-threatening, consequences. The Monidor solution was developed to help nurses administer gravity-based infusions and monitor them remotely, to avoid complications and reduce workload. Its real-world effects and economic consequences were unknown. METHODS: An exploratory survey was carried out to estimate the potential impact of the Monidor solution on events and nurse time use. At the end of their shift, nurses estimated effects in terms of routine room visits avoided, prevention of complications, and impact on nurse time requirements. Linear regression was applied to estimate predictors of time freed. A health economic model was developed to evaluate economic consequences and to calculate the net return on investment for a hypothetical hospital ward. A 1-month time horizon was used, and discounting was not applied. RESULTS: A total of 216 responses were obtained from 6 Finnish hospitals, from a total of 15 wards, and 56.3% of nurses found that the Monidor solution freed nurse time, while < 3.5% experienced additional time requirements. Per nurse shift, the Monidor solution avoided on average 2.064 routine room visits, helped detect end of infusion 1.340 times, and led to 5.045 min of time freed. One routine visit avoided was associated with 2.453 min of time freed in the linear regression. In the conservative setting, the freed monthly capacity in the hypothetical ward amounted to €1270.90 per month (year 2021), yielding a return on investment of 2.63. Uncertainty of linear regression coefficient values was identified as a driver of uncertainty in sensitivity analysis, with return on investment ranging from 1.55 to 3.71. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated that management and remote monitoring with the Monidor solution frees nurse time and reduces routine activities associated with gravity-based intravenous infusions. These findings could be confirmed in a comparative empirical study.

In hospitals, patients often receive fluids intravenously. These fluids enter the blood circulation directly, and their incorrect administration (too much or too little, too slow or too fast) can have serious and potentially life-threatening consequences. The Monidor solution aims to improve administration of intravenous fluids. It consists of two components: a mobile app for remote monitoring and a meter for bedside management. This study aimed to estimate the impact of the Monidor solution on administration of intravenous fluids and to assess how the Monidor solution would affect costs. Among the factors considered were the price of the devices, nurse time freed, and prevention of complications with the intravenous therapies. The data were collected via questionnaires from nurses from 15 wards in 6 Finnish hospitals. According to the responses and a health economic model designed for this study, the Monidor solution freed capacity with a value of €1270.90 per month. When considering the local cost of the Monidor solution, the return on investment was positive. In summary, the Monidor solution is cost-effective; routine room visits by nurses were avoided, problems with infusions were detected earlier, and nurse time was freed. These findings could be confirmed in a larger study.

Guselkumab Treatment Outcomes and Persistence in a Nationwide Real-world Cohort of Patients with Plaque Psoriasis.

Guselkumab treatment outcomes and persistence were assessed in a real-world cohort of Finnish patients with difficult-to-treat plaque psoriasis over a median follow-up of 1 year. Data on 181 patients who initiated guselkumab at the 15 study centres were collected retrospectively from the patient charts. Prior exposure to biologic therapies was common, with 56% and 35% having used at least 1 and 2 biologics, respectively. Median guselkumab treatment duration was 11 months with 21 patients (12%) discontinuing treatment during follow-up. Of 85 patients with a follow-up duration of at least 1 year, 73 (86%) were still on guselkumab at 1 year. Significant improvements during follow-up were seen in the absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scores with 32 patients (80%) having absolute PASI ≤ 2 after a 9-14-month treatment. Guselkumab treatment was effective and treatment persistence was high in the nationwide Finnish real-life setting.

Cost-effectiveness of the fixed-dose combination tiotropium/olodaterol versus tiotropium monotherapy or a fixed-dose combination of long-acting ß2-agonist/inhaled corticosteroid for COPD in Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands: a model-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines advocate treatment with combinations of long-acting bronchodilators for patients with COPD who have persistent symptoms or continue to have exacerbations while using a single bronchodilator. This study assessed the cost-utility of the fixed dose combination of the bronchodilators tiotropium and olodaterol versus two comparators, tiotropium monotherapy and long-acting ß2 agonist/inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) combinations, in three European countries: Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands. METHODS: A previously published COPD patient-level discrete event simulation model was updated with most recent evidence to estimate lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs for COPD patients receiving either tiotropium/olodaterol, tiotropium monotherapy or LABA/ICS. Treatment efficacy covered impact on trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), total and severe exacerbations and pneumonias. The unit costs of medication, maintenance treatment, exacerbations and pneumonias were obtained for each country. The country-specific analyses adhered to the Finnish, Swedish and Dutch pharmacoeconomic guidelines, respectively. RESULTS: Treatment with tiotropium/olodaterol gained QALYs ranging from 0.09 (Finland and Sweden) to 0.11 (the Netherlands) versus tiotropium and 0.23 (Finland and Sweden) to 0.28 (the Netherlands) versus LABA/ICS. The Finnish payer's incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of tiotropium/olodaterol was €11 000/QALY versus tiotropium and dominant versus LABA/ICS. The Swedish ICERs were €6200/QALY and dominant, respectively (societal perspective). The Dutch ICERs were €14 400 and €9200, respectively (societal perspective). The probability that tiotropium/olodaterol was cost-effective compared with tiotropium at the country-specific (unofficial) threshold values for the maximum willingness to pay for a QALY was 84% for Finland, 98% for Sweden and 99% for the Netherlands. Compared with LABA/ICS, this probability was 100% for all three countries. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the simulations, tiotropium/olodaterol is a cost-effective treatment option versus tiotropium or LABA/ICS in all three countries. In both Finland and Sweden, tiotropium/olodaterol is more effective and cost saving (ie, dominant) in comparison with LABA/ICS.

Cost-Effectiveness of Apixaban versus Other Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin in the Prevention of Thromboembolic Complications Among Finnish Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation.

PURPOSE: Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use for the prevention of thromboembolic complications in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) has increased steadily in Finland. DOACs have been shown to be cost-effective in comparison to warfarin, but published evidence of relative cost-effectiveness between DOACs is still scarce and mostly based on indirect comparisons of clinical trial evidence. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of apixaban to dabigatran, rivaroxaban and warfarin in a Finnish setting using real-life evidence where available. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A lifetime Markov simulation model used previously in a published Finnish assessment comparing apixaban and warfarin was modified and updated with the relative effectiveness and safety data available from the real-world NAXOS-study and representative Finnish input data for patient characteristics, event risks, mortality, resource use, costs, and quality of life. Apixaban's cost-effectiveness was assessed from health care payer perspective (using 3% per year discount rate) based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER, cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] gained), probability of cost-effectiveness (at willingness-to-pay [WTP] of 35,000 euros/QALY), and net monetary benefit (NMB). RESULTS: Apixaban increased the average modelled quality-adjusted life-expectancy and reduced the average total health care costs of AF patients when compared to warfarin (+0.14 QALYs, -3691 euros), dabigatran (+0.11 QALYs, -404 euros), and rivaroxaban (+0.03 QALYs, -43 euros). The resulting NMB of apixaban versus warfarin, dabigatran and rivaroxaban was 8723, 4168, and 1129 euros, respectively. The respective probabilities of apixaban being cost-effective against each comparator were 100%, 92.7%, and 64.0%. CONCLUSION: In this modelling study, apixaban dominated other anticoagulants in the Finnish real-life setting.

A nationwide real-world study on dynamic ustekinumab dosing and concomitant medication use among Crohn's disease patients in Finland.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence to support optimal ustekinumab dosing for refractory Crohn's disease (CD) patients remains limited. Data from a retrospective nationwide chart review study was utilized to explore ustekinumab dosing dynamics and optimization, identify possible clinical predictors of dose intensification, and to evaluate ustekinumab trough concentrations (TCs) and concomitant medication use in Finland. METHODS: Information gathered from17 Finnish hospitals included clinical chart data from 155 adult CD patients who received intravenous ustekinumab induction during 2017-2018. Data on ustekinumab dosing and TCs, concomitant corticosteroid and immunosuppressant use, and antiustekinumab antibodies were analyzed in a two-year follow-up, subject to availability. RESULTS: Among 140 patients onustekinumab maintenance therapy, dose optimization was required in 55(39%) of the patients, and 41/47 dose-intensified patients (87%) persisted on ustekinumab. At baseline, dose-intensified patient group had significantly higher C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, and at week 16, significantly lower ustekinumab TCs than in patients without dose intensification. Irrespective of dose optimization, a statistically significant reduction in the use of corticosteroids was observed at both 16 weeks and one year, coupled with an increased proportion of patients on ustekinumab monotherapy. Antiustekinumab antibodies were undetectable in all 28 samples from 25 patients collected throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly a third of all CD patients on ustekinumab maintenance therapy, with a history of treatment-refractory and long-standing disease, required dose intensification. These patients persisted on ustekinumab and had significant reduction of corticosteroid use. Increased baseline CRP was identified as the sole indicator of dose intensification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EUPAS30920.

Objectively assessed disease activity and drug persistence during ustekinumab treatment in a nationwide real-world Crohn's disease cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Long-term evidence on ustekinumab treatment response and persistence in patients with Crohn's disease in a real-world setting is scarce. We performed a retrospective nationwide chart review study of long-term clinical outcomes in Crohn's disease patients treated with ustekinumab. METHODS: The study was conducted in 17 Finnish hospitals and included adult Crohn's disease patients who received an initial intravenous dose of ustekinumab during 2017-2018. Disease activity data were collected at baseline, 16 weeks, and 1 year from health records. RESULTS: The study included 155 patients. The disease was stricturing or penetrating in 69 and 59% had prior Crohn's disease-related surgeries, and 97% had a treatment history of at least one biologic agent. Of 93 patients with ≥1 year of follow-up, 77 (83%) were still on ustekinumab at 1 year. In patients with data available, from baseline to the 1-year follow-up the simple endoscopic score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD) decreased from 10 to 3 (P = 0.033), C-reactive protein from 7 to 5 mg/L, (P < 0.001) and faecal calprotectin from 776 to 305 µg/g (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab treatment in patients with highly refractory Crohn's disease resulted in high long-term treatment persistence and significantly reduced disease activity, assessed with objective markers for intestinal inflammatory activity.

Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary and Peripheral Artery Disease Antithrombotic Treatments in Finland.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, 15-20% of individuals with coronary artery disease (chronic coronary syndrome [CCS]) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) receiving routine treatment experience cardiovascular events (CVEs) within 3-4 years. Using PICOSTEPS (Patients-Intervention-Comparators-Outcomes-Setting-Time-Effects-Perspective-Sensitivity analysis) reporting, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of recently approved rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily in combination with acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg daily (RIV + ASA) for the prevention of CVEs among Finns with CCS or symptomatic PAD. METHODS: Myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, acute limb ischemia, amputations, major extracranial bleeding, venous thromboembolism, and cardiovascular deaths were modeled in a Markov model examining a cohort of patients with CCS or symptomatic PAD. Relative effects of the intervention (RIV + ASA) and comparator (ASA) were based on the COMPASS trial. The primary outcome was 3%/year discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as cost (2019 euros) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in the Finnish setting over a lifetime horizon. In addition to nonfatal and fatal CVEs, the effects factored Finnish non-CVE mortality, quality of life, and direct costs from a public payer perspective. Disaggregated costs and QALYs, costs per life year gained (LYG), and ischemic strokes avoided, net monetary benefit (NMB), expected value of perfect information (EVPI), economic value-added (EVA), cost-effectiveness table, and acceptability frontier were examined. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In the deterministic comparison with ASA over a lifetime horizon, RIV + ASA resulted in a benefit of 0.404 QALYs and 0.474 LYGs for an additional cost of €3241, resulting in an ICER of €8031/QALY. The probabilistic ICER was €4313/QALY (EVPI €1829/patient). RIV + ASA had positive NMB (€8791/patient), low EVPI (€88/patient), high EVA (€8703/patient), and 91% probability of cost-effectiveness using the willingness-to-pay of €25,254/QALY. The primary result was conservative and robust for RIV + ASA. CONCLUSION: RIV + ASA was a cost-effective treatment alternative compared with ASA in patients with CCS or symptomatic PAD in Finland.

Finland lacks published evidence on the cost-effectiveness of approved interventions for the prevention of cardiovascular events among individuals with chronic coronary syndrome (stable coronary artery disease) or symptomatic peripheral artery disease at risk of cardiovascular complications. Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg once daily is indicated and reimbursed in Finland for the prevention of cardiovascular events for patients with stable coronary artery disease or symptomatic peripheral artery disease. We assessed the effectiveness and costs of treatment with rivaroxaban plus acetylsalicylic acid in comparison with treatment with acetylsalicylic acid. That is, we examined whether rivaroxaban is cost-effective when prescribed in combination with acetylsalicylic acid.Cardiovascular events with their associated costs and impact on quality of life were modeled over the lifetime of patients. The main effectiveness outcome was quality-adjusted life years (modeled survival multiplied by the expected quality of life), and costs included those relevant to the Finnish public payer in 2019. Extensive sensitivity analyses were carried out to evaluate the impacts of different model inputs and rationale.Rivaroxaban plus acetylsalicylic acid had high probability of being cost-effective, compared with acetylsalicylic acid. By valuing quality-of-life benefit with a plausible willingness-to-pay, net cost savings of €8791 per patient could be gained or economic value added by €8703 per patient if rivaroxaban was used.

Economic Value of Adjunctive Brivaracetam Treatment Strategy for Focal Onset Seizures in Finland.

INTRODUCTION: There is an unmet need for well-tolerated antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) that effectively control focal onset seizures. This study aimed to evaluate the economic value of new AEDs in the treatment of focal onset seizure, with or without secondary generalization, in Finnish adults and adolescents with epilepsy, comparing brivaracetam with perampanel as adjunctive AEDs. METHODS: Economic value was assessed using cost-utility analysis. Periods of AED initiation, titration, response assessment (seizure freedom, ≥ 50% reduction, no response), switching in no response or treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and death were simulated using a discrete-event simulation model. Responses and switching were simulated based on a comprehensive Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary modeled outcome was the 3%/year discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), payer costs (year 2017 Euro) per patient, and net monetary benefit (NMB) were secondary outcomes. Probabilistic and comprehensive deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Brivaracetam was more efficacious and had fewer TEAEs than perampanel and other AEDs. Modeled average 5-year QALYs and costs were 3.671 and €28,297 for brivaracetam and 3.611 and €27,979 for perampanel, respectively. The resulting ICER for brivaracetam versus perampanel was only €5345/QALY gained in a deterministic base case scenario. Brivaracetam had a positive NMB and high probability of cost-effectiveness of €1190 and 71% or €1944 and 80% with the assumed willingness to pay of €25,358 or €38,036/QALY gained, respectively. The primary result was robust, with a positive NMB persistent in all sensitivity analysis scenarios. When switching from brivaracetam to perampanel was excluded from the modeling or switching from perampanel to brivaracetam was included, brivaracetam was cost-saving and more effective than perampanel (dominant). CONCLUSION: These simulated comparisons demonstrated that brivaracetam was more effective and potentially also more affordable than perampanel. Thus, brivaracetam is likely a cost-effective and net beneficial alternative to perampanel for treatment of focal onset seizures. Plain language summary available for this article.

Cost Assessment Modelling of Treatments for Highly Active Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis.

INTRODUCTION: Cost assessment modelling (CAM) of treatments in highly active relapsing multiple sclerosis was conducted. METHODS: The CAM was developed using the R programming language. The PICOSTEPS health technology assessment framework was applied in the CAM. Modelled patients were 280 adults with highly active relapsing multiple sclerosis eligible for disease-modifying treatment. Intervention was cladribine tablets, a new and reimbursed oral treatment for highly active relapsing multiple sclerosis in Finland. Comparators included fingolimod, the most used oral reimbursed treatment for the highly active disease, and natalizumab, the most used intravenous treatment, and a treatment mix (80% use fingolimod, 20% use natalizumab) in Finland. Outcomes presented expected annual and cumulative drug-associated costs in the overall population and per patient. Setting was modelled public specialist care in Finland. Time was set to 4 years, without discounting. Effects covered expected drug-associated costs (screening, acquisition, administration, monitoring, adverse events, travelling, productivity). Perspective was a limited societal perspective. Sensitivity analyses regarding all PICOSTEPS components were conducted. RESULTS: Cladribine tablets were projected to be cost saving in comparison to fingolimod, natalizumab and treatment mix. The respective modelled savings were €4,598,742, €16,249,701 and €6,928,934 in the overall population, and €16,424, €58,035 and €24,746 per patient, respectively, during the 4 years. The most important cost driver was drug costs, representing 96.3%, 96.0% and 83.4% of modelled costs associated with cladribine tablets, fingolimod and natalizumab, respectively. Cladribine tablets sustained their affordability in the sensitivity analyses. From the perspective of health care payer, cladribine tablets' savings were projected to be €4,514,509, €15,145,366 and €6,640,680 in the overall population, and €16,123, €54,091 and €23,717 per patient in comparison to fingolimod, natalizumab and treatment mix, respectively. CONCLUSION: Based on the CAM, cladribine tablets were projected to robustly save modelled drug-associated costs in comparison to fingolimod, natalizumab and their mix in Finland.

Ustekinumab for Crohn's disease: a nationwide real-life cohort study from Finland (FINUSTE).

Background: Ustekinumab (UST), a human anti-IL12/23p40 monoclonal antibody, has been approved for treatment of Crohn's Disease (CD) since the end of 2016. This nationwide noninterventional, retrospective chart review explored real-life data in patients receiving UST to provide guidance in UST treatment in the era of increasing prevalence of CD. Methods: The study assessed UST treatment patterns such as dosing frequency, concomitant medication and persistence in 48 CD patients commencing UST therapy in 12 Finnish hospitals during 2017. Clinical remission and response rates were explored using a modified Harvey-Bradshaw index (mHBI) and endoscopic response via the simple endoscopic score for Crohn's disease (SES-CD) as proportions of patients at week 16 and at the end of follow-up. Results: Forty patients (83%) continued UST-treatment at the end of follow-up. At week 16, clinical response and endoscopic healing was observed, where data were available; mHBI decreased from 9 to 3 (p = .0001) and SES-CD from 12 to 3 (p = .009). Clinical benefit was achieved by 83% (19/23) at week 16 and by 76% (16/21) at the end of follow-up. The proportion of patients using corticosteroids decreased from 48% to 25% at week 16 and to 13% at the end of the follow-up. Conclusion: UST showed to be effective and persistent, inducing short-term clinical benefit and endoscopic response in this real-life nationwide study of CD patients. Significant corticosteroid tapering in patients with highly treatment refractory and long-standing CD was observed.

Costs of administration, travelling, and productivity losses associated with hospital administration of multiple myeloma drugs in Finland.

AIM: To estimate the drug administration, travelling, and productivity costs associated with infusion or subcutaneous proteasome inhibitor (PI) treatments (specifically carfilzomib and bortezomib) for multiple myeloma (MM) patients in Finland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Price tariffs of Finnish hospital districts are used as the basis of invoicing sent to healthcare service payers. A review of these price tariff lists was conducted and obtained data analysed to estimate the mean unit cost of PI administration visit. Travelling costs stratified by areas with different population densities were assessed, based on the national travelling reimbursement register data maintained by the Social Insurance Institution of Finland. Productivity costs due to time spent on administration visits and travelling were estimated based on an expert interview and a spatial healthcare accessibility analysis. RESULTS: Nineteen (95%) of the Finnish hospital districts were included in the review. Relevant unit cost information was found for 15 (75%) of the districts. The mean PI administration cost alone was 270€ (95% CI = 189€-351€) per administration and increased to 371€ when travelling costs were included. Productivity costs added, the mean PI administration costs totalled 405€ for bortezomib and 437€ for carfilzomib. LIMITATIONS: The costing rationale of price tariffs may vary between hospital districts. Productivity costs were estimated conservatively, due to lack of data. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of intravenous or subcutaneous PIs to treat MM in healthcare facilities causes significant and potentially avoidable healthcare, travelling, and indirect costs, and they should be included in all health economic evaluations (HEEs). As the cost estimates utilized in this study represent most of central hospitals in the country, they provide useful information for future HEEs. A broader conclusion is that novel oral medications, such as the first oral PI, have a significant potential for reducing administration-related costs of subcutaneous or intravenous PIs.

Cost-effectiveness of pulse-echo ultrasonometry in osteoporosis management.

PURPOSE: Osteoporosis is asymptomatic morbidity of the elderly which develops slowly over several years. Osteoporosis diagnosis has typically involved Fracture Risk Assessment (FRAX) followed by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in specialist care. Point-of-care pulse-echo ultrasound (PEUS) was developed to overcome DXA-related access issues and to enable faster fracture prevention treatment (FPT) initiation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two proposed osteoporosis management (POMs: FRAX→PEUS-if-needed→DXA-if-needed→FPT-if-needed) pathways including PEUS compared with the current osteoporosis management (FRAX→DXA-if-needed→FPT-if-needed). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Event-based probabilistic cost-utility model with 10-year duration for osteoporosis management was developed. The model consists of a decision tree for the screening, testing, and diagnosis phase and is followed by a Markov model for the estimation of incidence of four fracture types and mortality. Five clinically relevant patient cohorts (potential primary FPT in women aged 75 or 85 years, secondary FPT in women aged 65, 75, or 85 years) were modeled in the Finnish setting. Generic alendronate FPT was used for those diagnosed with osteoporosis, including persistence overtime. Discounted (3%/year) incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was the primary outcome. Discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), payer costs (year 2016 value) at per patient and population level, and cost-effectiveness acceptability frontiers were modeled as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: POMs were cost-effective in all patient subgroups with noteworthy mean per patient cost savings of €121/76 (ranges €107-132/52-96) depending on the scope of PEUS result interpretation (test and diagnose/test only, respectively) and negligible differences in QALYs gained in comparison with current osteoporosis management. In the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontiers, POMs had 95%-100% probability of cost-effectiveness with willingness to pay €24,406/QALY gained. The results were robust in sensitivity analyses. Even when assuming a high cost of PEUS (up to €110/test), POMs were cost-effective in all cohorts. CONCLUSION: The inclusion of PEUS to osteoporosis management pathway was cost-effective.

Modeled Health Economic Impact of a Hypothetical Certolizumab Pegol Risk-Sharing Scheme for Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis in Finland.

PURPOSE: To model the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact of certolizumab pegol (CZP) (with and without a hypothetical risk-sharing scheme at treatment initiation for biologic-naïve patients) versus the current mix of reimbursed biologics for treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Finland. METHODS: A probabilistic model with 12-week cycles and a societal approach was developed for the years 2015-2019, accounting for differences in ACR responses (meta-analysis), mortality, and persistence. The risk-sharing scheme included a treatment switch and refund of the costs associated with CZP acquisition if patients failed to achieve ACR20 response at week 12. For the current treatment mix, ACR20 at week 24 determined treatment continuation. Quality-adjusted life years were derived on the basis of the Health Utilities Index. RESULTS: In the Finnish target population, CZP treatment with a risk-sharing scheme led to a estimated annual net expenditure decrease ranging from 1.7% in 2015 to 5.6% in 2019 compared with the current treatment mix. Per patient over the 5 years, CZP risk sharing was estimated to decrease the time without ACR response by 5%-units, decrease work absenteeism by 24 days, and increase the time with ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 responses by 5%-, 6%-, and 1%-units, respectively, with a gain of 0.03 quality-adjusted life years. The modeled risk-sharing scheme showed reduced costs of €7866 per patient, with a more than 95% probability of cost-effectiveness when compared with the current treatment mix. CONCLUSION: The present analysis estimated that CZP, with or without the risk-sharing scheme, is a cost-effective alternative treatment for RA patients in Finland. The surplus provided by the CZP risk-sharing scheme could fund treatment for 6% more Finnish RA patients. FUNDING: UCB Pharma.

Budget impact of intravenous iron therapy with ferric carboxymaltose in patients with chronic heart failure and iron deficiency in Germany.

AIMS: Treatment of iron deficiency (ID) in patients with heart failure (HF) with intravenous iron substitution [ferric carboxymaltose (FCM)] has previously shown significant improvements in exercise capacity, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, quality of life, and reduction of hospitalization. The aim of this study was to estimate the budget impact of FCM treatment for patients with HF and ID. METHODS AND RESULTS: Individual patient data from four double-blind randomized controlled trials were pooled for this analysis. Expected outcomes were modelled for a treatment period of 1 year, using multivariate statistical methods. Associated unit costs were derived from claims data. Budget impact was calculated from the perspective of the Statutory Health Insurance. Multiple deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. The annual budget impact for therapy with FCM vs. no-iron therapy was €2 735 505 and €2 695 474 for 1000 patients, respectively, resulting in additional annual costs of €40.03 for each treated patient. Main costs drivers are the FCM treatment cost and cost of hospitalizations due to HF worsening. FCM therapy compared with no-iron therapy resulted in reduced cost per 1000 patients: for reduced hospitalization due to HF worsening (52 vs. 129 hospitalizations amounting to €230 591 vs. €597 078), for reduced other medication (€1 611 007 vs. €1 679 908), fewer outpatient visits (€332 523 vs. €378 019), and home visits (€29 627 vs. €40 469). Sensitivity analyses showed robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: Therapy with FCM has a minimal budget impact of €40 031 per 1000 patients per year. This budget impact translates into reduced and shorter hospitalizations and improved symptomatic status of the patients.

Cost-utility of First-line Disease-modifying Treatments for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of first-line treatments of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) (dimethyl fumarate [DMF] 240 mg PO BID, teriflunomide 14 mg once daily, glatiramer acetate 20 mg SC once daily, interferon [IFN]-ß1a 44 µg TIW, IFN-ß1b 250 µg EOD, and IFN-ß1a 30 µg IM QW) and best supportive care (BSC) in the health care payer setting in Finland. METHODS: The primary outcome was the modeled incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; €/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained, 3%/y discounting). Markov cohort modeling with a 15-year time horizon was employed. During each 1-year modeling cycle, patients either maintained the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score or experienced progression, developed secondary progressive MS (SPMS) or showed EDSS progression in SPMS, experienced relapse with/without hospitalization, experienced an adverse event (AE), or died. Patients׳ characteristics, RRMS progression probabilities, and standardized mortality ratios were derived from a registry of patients with MS in Finland. A mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) informed the treatment effects. Finnish EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire, Three-Level Version quality-of-life and direct-cost estimates associated with EDSS scores, relapses, and AEs were applied. Four approaches were used to assess the outcomes: cost-effectiveness plane and efficiency frontiers (relative value of efficient treatments); cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier, which demonstrated optimal treatment to maximize net benefit; Bayesian treatment ranking (BTR); and an impact investment assessment (IIA; a cost-benefit assessment), which increased the clinical interpretation and appeal of modeled outcomes in terms of absolute benefit gained with fixed drug-related budget. Robustness of results was tested extensively with sensitivity analyses. FINDINGS: Based on the modeled results, teriflunomide was less costly, with greater QALYs, versus glatiramer acetate and the IFNs. Teriflunomide had the lowest ICER (24,081) versus BSC. DMF brought marginally more QALYs (0.089) than did teriflunomide, with greater costs over the 15 years. The ICER for DMF versus teriflunomide was 75,431. Teriflunomide had >50% cost-effectiveness probabilities with a willingness-to-pay threshold of <€77,416/QALY gained. According to BTR, teriflunomide was first-best among the disease-modifying therapies, with potential willingness-to-pay thresholds of up to €68,000/QALY gained. In the IIA, teriflunomide was associated with the longest incremental quality-adjusted survival and time without cane use. Generally, primary outcomes results were robust, based on the sensitivity analyses. The results were sensitive only to large changes in analysis perspective or mixed-treatment comparison. IMPLICATIONS: The results were sensitive only to large changes in analysis perspective or MTC. Based on the analyses, teriflunomide was cost-effective versus BSC or DMF with the common threshold values, was dominant versus other first-line RRMS treatments, and provided the greatest impact on investment. Teriflunomide is potentially the most cost-effective option among first-line treatments of RRMS in Finland.

Cost-utility analysis of vortioxetine versus agomelatine, bupropion SR, sertraline and venlafaxine XR after treatment switch in major depressive disorder in Finland.

BACKGROUND: To assess the cost-utility of vortioxetine versus relevant comparators (agomelatine, bupropion SR, sertraline, and venlafaxine XR) in the finnish setting in major depressive disorder (MDD) patients with inadequate response to selective serotonin- /serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. METHODS: A one-year analysis was conducted using a decision tree with a Markov state transition component. The health states were remission, relapse and recovery. A Finnish healthcare payer perspective was adopted. RESULTS: Vortioxetine was less costly and more effective versus all comparators in both direct and societal perspectives. Vortioxetine reduced the average annual direct costs by 4% versus venlafaxine XR and 8% versus sertraline. The greater efficacy associated with vortioxetine was translated into a higher percentage of patients in remission and recovery. The model was most sensitive to changes in remission rates at 8 weeks. CONCLUSION: This cost-utility analysis showed vortioxetine to be a good alternative for MDD patients switching therapy in Finland.

Cost-effectiveness of apixaban and warfarin in the prevention of thromboembolic complications among atrial fibrillation patients.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the risk of thromboembolic complications, clinical guidelines recommend anticoagulation treatment for almost all atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Although warfarin has long been the primary treatment alternative, now newer alternatives such as apixaban have proven effective in prevention of the thromboembolic complications of non-valvular AF. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of apixaban when compared with warfarin in the prevention of AF-associated thromboembolic complications in Finland. METHODS: The assessment was performed with a lifetime Markov-model with the following health states: non-valvular AF, ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, other intracranial bleed, other major bleed, clinically relevant non-major bleed, myocardial infarction, and systemic embolism. The treatment efficacies were obtained from the ARISTOTLE trial. Representative Finnish input data were used for the model states, including background mortality, resource use, costs (in 2014 values), and EQ-5D-3L-based quality of life. The results (with 3 % annual discounting) are presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICER, cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained], the expected value of perfect information (EVPI), and the probability of apixaban being cost-effective at various willingness-to-pay levels. RESULTS: Apixaban increased life-expectancy by 0.17 years and quality-adjusted life-expectancy by 0.14 QALYs when compared with warfarin. Additional QALY was gained with apixaban at a cost of 1824 euros based on the deterministic analysis. The maximum EVPI was 649 euros/patient at 1282 euros per QALY gained in the probabilistic analysis. The probability of apixaban being cost-effective reached 80 % when the willingness-to-pay per QALY gained was 14,857 euros. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, ICERs varied from dominance of apixaban to additional QALY being gained at a cost of 12,312 euros. CONCLUSIONS: The ICERs obtained were well below the WHO-CHOICE threshold values for cost-effective interventions, suggesting that apixaban is a very cost-effective treatment alternative for warfarin in Finnish patients with AF.

Cost-effectiveness of First-line Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Treatments When Full-dose Fludarabine Is Unsuitable.

PURPOSE: The cost-effectiveness of first-line chronic lymphocytic leukemia treatments was assessed among patients unsuitable for full doses of fludarabine. METHODS: The study's key outcome was the life-time incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (euro/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) with an annual 3% discounting. A probabilistic Markov model with 3 health states (progression-free, progression, and death) was developed. Survival time was modeled based on age-matched clinical data by using appropriate survival distributions. Each health state was assigned an EuroQoL-5D-3L quality-of-life estimate and Finnish payer costs according to treatment received, and Binet stage of disease; severe adverse events and treatment inconvenience were also included. Six approaches considered the risk and value of key outcomes: cost-effectiveness efficiency frontiers; Bayesian treatment ranking (BTR) rated the lowest ICERs and best QALY gains; the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier demonstrated optimal treatment; expected value of perfect information; and the cost-benefit assessment (CBA), a type of clinical value analysis, increased the clinical interpretation and appeal of modeled outcomes by including both relative and absolute (impact investment [benefit obtained with a fixed limited budget]) benefit assessments. FINDINGS: The ICERs compared with chlorambucil varied from €29,334 with obinutuzumab + chlorambucil to €82,159 with ofatumumab + chlorambucil. Based on the BTR of ICERs versus chlorambucil, obinutuzumab + chlorambucil was the most cost-effective with 93% probability; rituximab + chlorambucil was the second most cost-effective (73%); and rituximab + bendamustine was the third most cost-effective (65%). The ICERs of obinutuzumab + chlorambucil were €20,038, €11,556, and €15,586 compared with rituximab + chlorambucil, rituximab + bendamustine, and ofatumumab + chlorambucil. Obinutuzumab + chlorambucil was the most cost-effective treatment, with 54% and 99% probability at €30,000 and €50,000/QALY gained, respectively. The corresponding expected values of perfect information were €1438 and €44 per patient. Based on the BTR of QALYs gained, obinutuzumab + chlorambucil was the most effective, with 100% probability; rituximab + chlorambucil was the second most effective (56%); and rituximab + bendamustine was the third most effective treatment (81%). Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. For obinutuzumab + chlorambucil, the CBA demonstrated the best clinical value-to-cost-effectiveness relation and the longest time progression-free with a limited budget. IMPLICATIONS: The mean results were sensitive to large changes in time horizon, indirect comparison hazard ratios, survival distributions, and discounting; however, obinutuzumab + chlorambucil provided considerable effectiveness and best value for money among chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients unsuitable to receive full doses of fludarabine. In this case, CBA concurred with the key outcome of the study. However, the CBA cannot fully substitute the key outcome, and further cost-effectiveness studies with different cancer types are needed to assess the validity of a limited CBA.

Cost-utility of first-line actinic keratosis treatments in Finland.

INTRODUCTION: Cost-utility assessment of first-line actinic keratosis (AK) treatments for max 25 cm2 AK field. METHODS: A probabilistic, 2-year decision tree model was used to assess costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), cost-effectiveness efficiency frontier, cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), and expected value of perfect information (EVPI) of AK treatments from the Finnish health care payer perspective with 3% discounting per annum. In the model, the first-line AK treatment resulted in complete clearance (CC) or non-CC with or without local skin responses (LSR), or AK recurrence. Non-CC AK was treated with methyl aminolevulinate+photodynamic therapy (MAL+PDT), and AK recurrence was retreated with the previous effective treatment. Costs included primary and secondary health care, outpatient drugs, and LSR management. QALYs were assessed with the EuroQol (EQ-5D-3L). Result robustness was assessed with sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The mean simulated per patient QALYs (costs) were 1.526 (€982) for MAL+PDT, 1.524 (€794) for ingenol mebutate gel (IngMeb) 0.015% (3 days), 1.522 (€869) for IngMeb 0.05% (2 days), 1.520 (€1062) for diclofenac 3% (12 weeks), 1.518 (€885) for imiquimod 3.75% (6 weeks), 1.517 (€781) for imiquimod 5% (4/8 weeks), and 1.514 (€1114) for cryosurgery when treating AK affecting any body part. IngMeb 0.015% was less costly and more effective (dominating) than other AK treatments indicated for face and scalp area with the exception of imiquimod 5% for which the ICER was estimated at €1933/QALY gained and MAL+PDT, which had an ICER of €82,607/QALY gained against IngMeb 0.015%. With willingness-to-pay €2526-18,809/QALY gained, IngMeb 0.015% had >50% probability for cost-effectiveness on the CEAF. IngMeb 0.05% dominated AK treatments indicated for trunk and extremities. EVPIs for face and scalp (trunk and extremities) analyses were €26 (€0), €86 (€58), and €250 (€169) per patient with the willingness-to-pay of €0, €15,000, and €30,000 per QALY gained, respectively. CONCLUSION: IngMebs were cost-effective AK treatments in Finland. FUNDING: LEO Pharma.