Cost-minimization analysis comparing eltrombopag vs romiplostim for adults with chronic immune thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Promacta (eltrombopag; EPAG) and Nplate (romiplostim; ROMI) have not been compared in head-to-head trials for treatment of chronic immune thrombocytopenia (cITP); however, indirect treatment comparisons have indicated similar efficacy and safety outcomes, and the drugs are generally accepted as therapeutic alternatives. OBJECTIVE: To determine which of the 2 therapies would result in the lowest overall cost from a US health plan perspective, under the assumption of equivalent clinical efficacy and safety. METHODS: A cost-minimization model was developed in Microsoft Excel. The model incorporated only costs that differ between the treatments, including drug acquisition, administration, and monitoring costs, over a 52-week horizon. Average dosing for EPAG and ROMI was taken from the long-term EXTEND trial and from a published metaanalysis of 14 clinical trials, respectively. ROMI is injectable and EPAG is oral, so only ROMI had administration costs. The model assumed patients used 25 mg EPAG tablets and the 250 µg vial size of ROMI. ROMI wastage was included in drug acquisition costs by rounding up average dose to the nearest whole vial. Monitoring requirements were determined from US prescribing information, with platelet monitoring assumed equal, and hepatic panel testing every 4 weeks for EPAG. The model was adjustable to commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid plan perspectives, with optional inclusion of drug wastage, monitoring, or administration costs. RESULTS: The base case used a commercial plan perspective, with average dosing of 51.5 mg/day for EPAG and 4.20 µg/kg/week for ROMI. The analysis found a cost difference per treated patient of $64,770 in favor of EPAG on an annual basis. Breakdown by unique costs for EPAG included drug-acquisition cost of $123,135 and monitoring cost of $705. Breakdown by unique costs for ROMI included drug-acquisition cost of $183,234, with wastage of $63,179 and administration cost of $5,377. Based on a hypothetical commercial plan with 1 million members and an estimated 11 patients with cITP receiving ROMI, potential annual savings for switching all patients from ROMI to EPAG is $712,473 or $0.06 per member per month. EPAG remained the less costly option for all plan types and assumptions. A sensitivity analysis found that the result was most sensitive to drug pricing and wastage inputs. CONCLUSIONS: Because of lower drug-acquisition costs (including drug wastage) and administration costs, treatment of cITP with EPAG is associated with a lower net cost per patient than ROMI. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Proudman, Lucas, and Nellesen are employees of Analysis Group, Inc., which received funding from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation to conduct this study. Patwardhan was employed by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation at the time of this study; Allen is an employee of Novartis. This research was presented as an e-poster at the AMCP 2020 Virtual, April 2020.

The Cost-effectiveness of Eltrombopag for the Treatment of Immune Thrombocytopenia in the United States.

PURPOSE: Eltrombopag was evaluated as a second-line treatment for adult chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in the 2006 Phase III RAISE (Eltrombopag for Management of Chronic Immune Thrombocytopenia) randomized, placebo-controlled trial. More than 80% of patients reached satisfactory platelet counts within 2 weeks. However, the economic value of eltrombopag as a second-line treatment for ITP remains to be formally assessed. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of treating ITP with a comparable thrombopoietin receptor agonist (eltrombopag vs romiplostim). METHODS: A Markov model was implemented over a lifetime time horizon to estimate the benefits and costs of each treatment. The model featured 3 health states based on current guidelines: (1) on treatment; (2) treatment failure/discontinuation; and (3) mortality. In line with therapeutic goals in ITP, model patients could experience 3 events: no bleeding, mild/moderate bleeding, or severe bleeding. Data on eltrombopag use were obtained from an open-label extension of previous Phase II/III trials, including RAISE. Romiplostim data were obtained from Phase III trials and an extension study. Lifetime overall survival was extrapolated by using treatment-specific mortality rates derived from severe bleeding and natural mortality rates. The costs of drugs, routine care, bleeding episodes, adverse events, and mortality were represented in the model. FINDINGS: Eltrombopag-treated patients gained 17.58 life years and 14.68 quality-adjusted life years, whereas romiplostim-treated patients gained 17.52 life years and 14.67 quality-adjusted life years. The total lifetime cost of eltrombopag treatment was estimated at $1.58 million versus $2.13 million for romiplostim. Sensitivity analyses supported base case findings. Deterministic sensitivity analysis predicted the greatest sensitivity to the rates of severe bleeding, discontinuation, and natural mortality. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that eltrombopag would be an efficient use of resources at a $50,000 threshold in 52.8% of cases. In all probabilistic iterations, the total cost of eltrombopag treatment was lower than with romiplostim, primarily because of lower drug costs. IMPLICATIONS: Clinical data were applied in an economic analysis, and eltrombopag exhibited economic dominance compared with romiplostim, driven largely by the reduced costs of primary therapy. This model was limited by a lack of specific patient-level data and robust data on the duration of secondary therapy, as well as by the fact that utilization values are likely conservative estimates for routine care use.

Cost per response analysis of strategies for chronic immune thrombocytopenia.

OBJECTIVES: This analysis estimated the cost per response and the incremental cost per additional responder of romplostim, eltrombopag, and the "watch-and-rescue" (monitoring until rescue therapies are required) strategy in adults with chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). STUDY DESIGN: The decision tree is designed to estimate the total cost per response for romiplostim, eltrombopag, and watch and rescue over a 24-week time horizon; cost-effectiveness was evaluated in terms of incremental cost per additional responder. METHODS: Model inputs including response rates, bleeding-related episode (BRE) rates, and costs were estimated from registrational trial data, an independent Bayesian indirect comparison, database analyses, and peer-reviewed publications. Costs were applied to the proportions of patients with treatment response and nonresponse (based on platelet count). The total cost per response and the incremental cost per additional responder for each treatment were calculated. Sensitivity analyses and alternative analyses were performed. RESULTS: With higher total costs and greater treatment efficacy, romiplostim and eltrombopag had a lower 24-week cost per response and a lower average number of BREs than watch and rescue. Eltrombopag was weakly dominated by romiplostim. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of romiplostim versus watch and rescue was $46,000 per additional responder. The model results are most sensitive to response rates of romiplostim and watch and rescue and the BRE rate for splenectomized nonresponders. Alternative analyses results were similar to the base case. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with chronic ITP, romiplostim represents an efficient way to achieve response, with lower costs per response than eltrombopag; both romiplostim and eltrombopag had lower costs per response than watch and rescue.

A decision framework for treating chronic immune thrombocytopenia with thrombopoietin receptor agonists.

Aim: Eltrombopag and romiplostim are comparable second-line therapies in chronic immune thrombocytopenia. Treatment decisions are made in different contexts. A framework was created to outline decision pathways for physicians and payers. Materials & methods: The costs of drugs, administration, routine care, bleeding, other adverse events and mortality were included in the year-long calculation of total costs from a US private payer perspective. Treatment parameters and outcome data were obtained from relevant clinical trials. Results: The total cost per year, per patient of eltrombopag was US$51,000 versus US$76,000 for romiplostim. Drug costs and costs associated with bleeding-related events were the main drivers of cost difference. Conclusion: This framework facilitates decision-making in the management of chronic immune thrombocytopenia with eltrombopag and romiplostim.

Comparative treatment-related adverse event cost burden in immune thrombocytopenic purpura.

AIMS: Real-world evidence on the safety profile and costs associated with immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) treatment in adults is lacking. This study quantifies and compares adverse event (AE) crude rates and costs associated with ITP treatments as found in claims data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective claims-based analysis was conducted using IMS Pharmetrics Plus database. Included patients were ≥18 years old, with a diagnosis of ITP (2007-2012); an ITP-related claim for anti-D, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), rituximab, romiplostim, or eltrombopag; and 1-year continuous enrollment (3-years for rituximab) during follow-up. AEs and event costs were identified during active treatment, defined from the first claim of each drug to a pre-defined treatment gap or end of study period. Descriptive statistics were reported with Wilcoxon rank-sum significance tests. RESULTS: A total of 2,518 patients were identified (mean age = 50.8 (±16.3 years); 55.8% male). Of all patients, 22.8% experienced any AE. Significantly fewer anti-D patients had any AE (13.8% vs IVIG: 21.1%, rituximab: 29.4%, romiplostim: 28.1%, eltrombopag: 22.4%). Nausea/vomiting and arthralgia/musculoskeletal pain were most common across treatments, and hemolytic events did not differ significantly across treatments. Most costly AEs were urinary tract infection, aseptic meningitis, and fever ($5000+/case); headache, nasal congestion, and hemolytic event were $4,000-5,000/case. Cost per AE did not differ by treatment. LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Although lower than trial-based AE rates, claims for ITP treatment-related AEs are common, with higher numbers for rituximab and lower numbers for anti-D. This disparity suggests a possible differential cost burden overall that future analysis should explore.

Cost-Effectiveness of Eltrombopag versus Romiplostim for the Treatment of Chronic Immune Thrombocytopenia in England and Wales.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of eltrombopag compared with romiplostim to be used in the treatment of chronic immune thrombocytopenia in patients in England and Wales who are splenectomized or ineligible for splenectomy and are refractory to other treatments. METHODS: A Markov cohort model in which patients were administered a sequence of treatments was used to predict long-term outcomes associated with each treatment. The model was informed by data from the eltrombopag clinical trial program and the available literature. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the UK National Health Service, and a lifetime time horizon was used. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Eltrombopag dominated romiplostim (i.e., eltrombopag was as effective as but less costly than romiplostim) in both splenectomized and nonsplenectomized patients, assuming a class effect for the two treatments. Eltrombopag also dominated romiplostim in most deterministic sensitivity analyses with the exception of when indirect efficacy estimates were incorporated into the model. In this analysis, eltrombopag no longer dominated romiplostim but remained cost-effective versus romiplostim at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that there was a 99% and 92% chance of eltrombopag being cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year in splenectomized and nonsplenectomized patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study demonstrate that eltrombopag is cost-effective when compared with romiplostim to be used in the treatment of chronic immune thrombocytopenia, representing good value for the UK National Health Service.

Cost-effectiveness of adding rituximab to splenectomy and romiplostim for treating steroid-resistant idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura in adults.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is an autoimmune disease in which the platelet count falls to <100 × 10(9)/L. Corticosteroids are recommended as the first-line treatment, splenectomy is recommended as the second-line treatment, and thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs) and rituximab are recommended as the third-line treatments for ITP in Japanese ITP treatment guidelines. However, in Japan, rituximab is not eligible for reimbursement for the treatment of ITP. The cost-effectiveness of ITP treatment has not been investigated in Japan. Therefore, in this study, the cost-effectiveness of adding rituximab treatment to the existing treatments indicated for ITP in Japan, namely splenectomy and the TPO-RA romiplostim, was investigated based on the scenario that rituximab is eligible for reimbursement in Japan as a treatment for ITP. METHODS: The efficacy endpoint was set as the number of years with a platelet count ≥30 × 10(9)/L. The analysis was conducted from the healthcare payer's perspective. If the first treatment is ineffective or relapse occurs, then the patient is given the following treatment. The analyzed treatment order consisted of three patterns: splenectomy-romiplostim (sequence 1), splenectomy-romiplostim-rituximab (sequence 2), and splenectomy-rituximab-romiplostim (sequence 3). A Markov model was built for ITP, and the analysis period was set as 2 years. The discount rate was an annual rate of 2%. Sensitivity analyses of the efficacy of splenectomy, romiplostim, and rituximab; treatment cost; and romiplostim dose were performed. RESULTS: The expected costs per patient over a 2-year period for sequences 1, 2, and 3 were USD 40,980, USD 39,822, and USD 33,551, respectively. The expected years with a platelet count ≥30 × 10(9)/L for the three sequences were 1.75, 1.79, and 1.78 years, respectively. The sensitivity analyses illustrated that the results of the base case analysis were robust. CONCLUSIONS: Adding rituximab to standard treatment for ITP (sequences 2-3) is less costly and marginally more effective than standard therapy in adults. According to the study results, if rituximab is reimbursed for the treatment of ITP in Japan, medical expenses are expected to decline.

[Cost-per-responder analysis comparing romiplostim to rituximab in the treatment of adult primary immune thrombocytopenia in Spain]. / Coste por paciente con respuesta a romiplostim y rituximab en el tratamiento de la trombocitopenia inmune primaria en España.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Romiplostim, a thrombopoietin-receptor agonist, is approved for second-line use in idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) patients where surgery is contraindicated. Anti-CD20 rituximab, an immunosuppressant, is currently used off-label. This analysis compared the cost per responder for romiplostim versus rituximab in Spain. MATERIALS AND METHOD: A decision analytic model was constructed to estimate the 6-month cost per responding patient (achieving a platelet count≥50×10(9)/l) according to the most robust published data. A systematic literature review was performed to extract response rates from phase 3 randomized controlled trials. Romiplostim patients received weekly injections; rituximab patients received 4 weekly intravenous infusions. Medical resource costs were obtained from Spanish reimbursement lists. Treatment non-responders incurred bleeding-related event (BRE) management costs as reported in clinical trials. Medical resource utilization and clinical practice were based on Spanish treatment guidelines and validated by local clinical experts. RESULTS: The literature review identified phase 3 romiplostim trials with a response rate of 83%. Due to a lack of phase 3 controlled rituximab trials, a systematic review of studies was selected as the best source, reporting a response rate of 62.5%. The mean cost per patient for romiplostim was €16,289 and €13,459 for rituximab. Rituximab resulted in a 10% higher cost per responder (€21,535 versus €19,625 for romiplostim). Romiplostim use reduced drug administration, intravenous immunoglobulin, and bleeding-related costs compared to rituximab. CONCLUSIONS: Due to its high level of efficacy leading to lower BRE costs, romiplostim represents an efficient use of resources for adult ITP patients in the Spanish Healthcare System.

[Cost per responder associated with romiplostim and rituximab treatment for adult primary immune thrombocytopenia in France]. / Coût par patient répondeur associé au traitement du purpura thrombopénique immunologique primaire par romiplostim et rituximab chez l'adulte en France.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: This analysis compared the response rates and cost per responder associated with romiplostim and rituximab in adult immune thrombocytopenia from the French National Health System payer perspective. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the cost per patient and per responder of treating adult immune thrombocytopenia patients with romiplostim versus rituximab over 6 months. A systematic literature review identified phase 3 randomized controlled trials. Published response rates were extracted (response definition: ≥50×10(9) platelets/liter). Resource utilization was based on French and international treatment guidelines, and clinical expert opinion. Unit costs were derived from literature and French reimbursement lists, and included the costs of routine physician visits, treatment administration, and emergency care. Non-responders incurred bleeding-related event costs. RESULTS: The literature review identified a phase 3 randomized controlled trial for romiplostim with a response rate of 83%. Due to a lack of phase 3 randomized controlled trials for rituximab, a systematic review of studies was selected as the best source, reporting a response rate of 62.5%. Romiplostim and rituximab were associated with similar treatment costs, with an estimated cost per patient for romiplostim of €17,456 and €17,068 for rituximab. Rituximab resulted in a 30% higher cost per responder (€27,308 for rituximab versus €21,031 for romiplostim). Romiplostim use reduced drug administration, intravenous immunoglobulin, and bleeding-related hospitalization costs compared to rituximab. CONCLUSIONS: Due to its high efficacy leading to lower bleeding-related costs, romiplostim represents an efficient use of resources for adult immune thrombocytopenia patients in the French healthcare system.

Cost effectiveness of romiplostim for the treatment of chronic immune thrombocytopenia in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Romiplostim, a thrombopoietin receptor agonist (TPOra), is a second-line medical treatment option for adults with chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Clinical trials have shown that romiplostim increases platelet counts, while reducing the risk of bleeding and, in turn, the need for costly rescue medications. AIMS: The objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of romiplostim in the treatment of adult ITP in Ireland, in comparison with eltrombopag and the medical standard of care (SoC). METHODS: A lifetime treatment-sequence cost-utility Markov model with embedded decision tree was developed from an Irish healthcare perspective to compare romiplostim with eltrombopag and SoC. The model was driven by platelet response (platelet count ≥50 × 10(9)/L), which determined effectiveness and progression along the treatment pathway, need for rescue therapy (e.g. intravenous immunoglobulin [IVIg] and steroids) and risk of bleeding. Probability of response, mean treatment duration, average time to initial response and utilities were derived from clinical trials and other published evidence. Treatment sequences and healthcare utilization practice were validated by Irish clinical experts. Costs were assessed in for 2011 and included drug acquisition costs and costs associated with monitoring patients and management of bleeding, as available from published Irish reimbursement lists and other relevant sources. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Romiplostim treatment resulted in an average of 20.2 fewer administrations of rescue medication (IVIg or intravenous steroids) over a patient lifetime than eltrombopag, and 29.3 fewer rescue medication administrations than SoC. Romiplostim was dominant, with cost savings of 13,258 and 22,673 and gains of 0.76 and 1.17 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), compared with eltrombopag and SoC, respectively. Romiplostim remained cost effective throughout a variety of potential scenarios, including short-term TPOra treatment duration (1 year). One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the model was most sensitive to variation in the cost of IVIg and use of romiplostim and IVIg. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that romiplostim was likely to be cost effective in over 90 % of cases compared with eltrombopag, and 96 % compared with SoC at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 30,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Use of romiplostim in the ITP treatment pathway, compared with eltrombopag or SoC, is likely to be cost effective in Ireland. Romiplostim improves clinical outcomes by increasing platelet counts, reducing bleeding events and the use of IVIg and steroids, resulting in both cost savings and additional QALYs when compared with current treatment practices.

[Economic evaluation of Thrombopoietin Receptor Agonists in the treatment of chronic primary immune thrombocytopenia]. / Evaluación económica del tratamiento de la trombocitopenia inmune primaria crónica refractaria con agonistas del receptor de la trombopoyetina.

PURPOSE: To develop a tool to assist the decision-making for selection of Thrombopoyetin Receptor Agonists of adult patients with chronic immune primary thrombocytopenia (PTI). METHODS: Stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis with a 6-Health- States Markov model: stable, bleeding type 2, 3 or 4, post-type 4 bleeding and death. Each simulation analyzes a randomly generated scenario that describes patients characteristics, results measured in quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs (in ?2011). Distributions were obtained from the Spanish data of the European health survey of 2009, the INE estimate of population for 2011 and the 6-months clinical studies for Eltrombopag and Romiplostim. Utility values were obtained from the literature and the costs from Spanish official rates lists. A set of 10.000 random scenarios were generated and the patients evolution of each scenario was simulated during a time horizon of five years (in 2-weeks cycles). National Health System Perspective was used and the annual discount rate was set at 3%. RESULTS: Eltrombopag showed more effectiveness in 9.983 scenarios and there was no difference in 17. In 7.048 scenarios the alternative Eltombopag was dominant. It was cost-effective in another 19 (threshold 30,000 ??/AVAC). CONCLUSIONS: Eltrombopag was the most cost-effective alternative in 70,67% of the simulated scenarios and its use could produce lower costs to the NHS.

Objetivo: Desarrollar una herramienta de apoyo a la decisión en la selección de agonistas del receptor de trombopoyetina en el tratamiento de pacientes adultos con trombocitopenia inmune primaria crónica (PTI) refractaria. Métodos: Análisis coste-efectividad estocástico con un modelo de Markov de seis estados: estable, sangrado tipo 2, 3 ó 4, post-sangrado 4 y muerte. Cada simulación analiza un escenario aleatoriamente generado que describe las características del paciente, los resultados medidos en años de vida ajustados a calidad (AVACs) y los costes (en ?2011). Se obtuvieron distribuciones a partir de los datos para España de la Encuesta Europea de Salud de 2009, de la estimación de población para 2011 del INE, de los estudios a 6 meses de Eltrombopag y Romiplostim, de las utilidades obtenidas de la bibliografía y de las tarifas oficiales en España para procesos y actividad. Se generaron 10.000 escenarios aleatorios y se simuló la evolución de los pacientes de cada escenario durante un horizonte temporal de cinco años (ciclos de dos semanas). Perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud (SNS). Tasa de descuento anual del 3% para costes y efectos. Resultados: En 9.983 escenarios Eltrombopag mostró mayor efectividad y en 17 no hubo diferencias. Eltombopag fue la alternativa dominante en 7.048 escenarios y la más coste efectiva en otros 19 (umbral 30.000 ?/AVAC). Conclusiones: Eltrombopag es la alternativa más coste-efectiva en el 70,67% de los escenarios simulados, por lo que su uso podría producir menores costes al SNS.

Comparative net cost impact of the utilization of romiplostim and intravenous immunoglobulin for the treatment of patients with immune thrombocytopenia in Québec, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by platelet destruction, sub-optimal platelet production, and mild-to-severe bleeding. Nplate® (romiplostim), a thrombopoietin receptor agonist, and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), an expensive and occasionally scarce blood product, are used in the treatment of ITP. The objective of this study was to compare the total cost of treating patients with romiplostim vs IVIg in Québec, Canada. METHODS: A net cost impact model was developed to calculate the annual cost of romiplostim compared with IVIg based on actual practice observations in all patients (n = 95) treated for chronic ITP with IVIg from April 2010 to March 2011 in two participating hospitals. The model included costs of: drug acquisition, drug preparation and administration, patient monitoring, and indirect costs. Healthcare practitioners were consulted regarding romiplostim and IVIg treatment algorithms and the resources involved in patient monitoring. RESULTS: The average annual drug acquisition costs of romiplostim and IVIg were $48,024 and $98,868, respectively. Lower costs for drug preparation and administration ($309 vs $1245) and less time lost from work ($256 vs $2086) were attributed to romiplostim. The cost of follow-up monitoring was the same for both romiplostim and IVIg ($121). The total average annual per patient costs for romiplostim vs IVIg were, respectively, $48,710 and $102,320. The use of romiplostim was projected to save, on average, almost $54,000 per patient per year. LIMITATIONS: The study was conducted in two hospitals in Québec. Romiplostim may show different cost savings in other hospitals and other provincial and national jurisdictions. CONCLUSIONS: Scarce blood products must be used wisely. Romiplostim can allow for improved healthcare resource allocation by reserving IVIg for use in other areas of greater need while also providing cost savings for the overall provincial healthcare budget.

The burden of immune thrombocytopenia in adults: evaluation of the thrombopoietin receptor agonist romiplostim.

BACKGROUND: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease characterized by a transient or long-lasting decrease in platelet counts. ITP is associated with numerous serious clinical consequences. Discussed here are clinical aspects of ITP, the humanistic and economic burden of ITP, and current treatment options with a focus on romiplostim, a thrombopoietin (TPO) receptor agonist. The aim of this review is to provide decision-makers with the background information necessary to evaluate the value of romiplostim. SCOPE: PubMed was searched for relevant, English-language papers published from January 2006 through November 2011 relating to the epidemiology and treatment options of chronic ITP, and, focusing on the TPO mimetic romiplostim, patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and economic burden. Recent select conference abstracts were also reviewed. FINDINGS: The initial clinical management of ITP (e.g., corticosteroids, immunoglobulins) is often associated with adverse events and recommended for short-term use only. Splenectomy, a potentially curative second-line treatment, is associated with increased risks of bleeding and infection, and patients often require additional long-term drug intervention. ITP and its sequelae are associated with a substantial burden on patients' health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and increased medical costs. Use of TPO receptor agonists in ITP patients may represent a more efficient use of healthcare resources than existing therapies. CONCLUSION: While this literature review is not a systematic review, e.g., it considers only approved therapies and published literature written in English, it provides a comprehensive overview of the clinical, humanistic, and economic factors that should be considered in treating ITP, particularly with new agents such as romiplostim. Among the limited number of safe and effective therapies currently available for chronic ITP, highly effective and well-tolerated medications such as romiplostim may reduce the healthcare resource utilization associated with ITP while improving patients' HRQoL.

Analysis of EQ-5D scores from two phase 3 clinical trials of romiplostim in the treatment of immune thrombocytopenia (ITP).

OBJECTIVE: Utility-based measures of quality of life are recommended by some decision makers in health care. No studies have addressed changes in utility in patients with chronic idiopathic thrombocytopenia (ITP). This study sought to assess the health utilities of patients with chronic ITP and to evaluate the association of change in health utility with changes in other variables, including platelet response status and bleeding events. METHODS: We analyzed EQ-5D data from two international, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 24-week trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of romiplostim in adult patients with chronic ITP. RESULTS: A total of 125 subjects participated. Mean change, adjusted for age, gender, splenectomy status, and baseline score using multiple linear regression models was greater for romiplostim versus placebo for the EQ-5D index score (0.05 vs. -0.03, P = 0.015) and the VAS score (6.42 vs. 0.48, P = 0.066); similar for durable platelet responders versus nonresponders; and greater for EQ-5D index scores for subjects who did not have a bleeding event during the study (n = 29) compared to subjects who did have a bleeding event (n = 47) (0.06 vs. 0.005; P = 0.066). CONCLUSIONS: Using romiplostim in cases of chronic ITP was associated with improvement in health-related quality of life as measured by the EQ-5D index score. Health utility scores derived using the EQ-5D in this study may be useful for determining quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in economic evaluations of romiplostim for treatment of chronic ITP.

Measurement of utility values in the UK for health states related to immune thrombocytopenic purpura.

OBJECTIVE: To measure utility values associated with immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), as perceived by the United Kingdom (UK) general public. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A multi-step process, including clinical trial data, literature review, and patient focus group, was used to develop ITP health states valued in a web survey. Six ITP health states were defined based on platelet levels, risk of bleeding and key adverse events/disease complications. Clinical trial data on bleeding and ITP-specific quality of life data were key sources for developing health-state descriptions. 359 respondents, randomly selected from a managed web panel in the UK, completed the web-based Time Trade-Off survey. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare differences between each pair of health states. RESULTS: Sample characteristics (mean age: 47.9 +/- 16.9 years; 54% female) were comparable to the UK general population. ITP health states were valued as significantly worse than perfect health. Experiencing bleeding episodes was a more important driver than low platelet levels in valuing a health state to be worse. Substantial disutilities were associated with surviving an intracranial haemorrhage. Mean (SD) utility values for each ITP health state are: HS1: platelets >or=50 x 10(9)/L, no outpatient bleed: 0.863 +/- 0.15; HS2: platelets >or=50 x 10(9)/L, outpatient bleed: 0.734 +/- 0.19; HS3: platelets <50 x 10(9)/L, no outpatient bleed: 0.841 +/- 0.19; HS4: platelets <50 x 10(9)/L, outpatient bleed: 0.732 +/- 0.19; HS5: intracranial haemorrhage (2-6 months): 0.038 +/- 0.46; HS6: steroid treatment adverse events: 0.758 +/- 0.20. Potential limitations relate to web user population characteristics and lack of comparative testing of web-based TTO methods. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide evidence that the UK general population associate substantial loss of value living with ITP, suggesting an important role for new ITP treatments. Utility values based on these health states may be useful in future cost-effectiveness studies of existing and/or new ITP treatments.

Romiplostim for the treatment of chronic immune or idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura: a single technology appraisal.

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical and cost-effectiveness of romiplostim for the treatment of adults with chronic immune or idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) based upon a review of the manufacturer's submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. The submission's evidence came from two relatively high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The ERG found no evidence that any important data were missed or that data extraction was inaccurate. In both RCTs more patients in the romiplostim than in the placebo group achieved a durable platelet response [non-splenectomised patients: romiplostim 25/41 (61%), placebo 1/21 (5%), odds ratio (OR) 24.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.34 to 179.18; splenectomised patients: romiplostim 16/42 (38%), placebo 0/21 (0%), OR 8.5 (95% CI 1.15 to 372)] and an overall platelet response [non-splenectomised patients: romiplostim 36/41 (88%), placebo 3/21 (14%), OR 34.74, 95% CI 7.77 to 155.38; splenectomised patients: romiplostim 33/42 (79%), placebo 0/21 (0%), OR 16.6 (95% CI 2.37 to 706]. The difference in mean period with a platelet response was 13.9 weeks (95% CI 10.5 to 17.4) in favour of romiplostim in the RCT of non-splectomised patients and 12.1 weeks (95% CI 8.7 to 15.6) in favour of romiplostim in the RCT of splectomised patients. The manufacturer's economic model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of romiplostim compared with standard care. The ERG had concerns about the way the decision problem was addressed in the economic model and about the non-adjustment of findings for confounding factors. In non-splenectomised patients, using romiplostim as a first option treatment, the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 14,840 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). In splenectomised patients the ICER was 14,655 pounds per QALY. Additional sensitivity analyses performed by the ERG identified two issues of importance: whether individuals entered the model on watch and rescue or on active therapy in the comparator arm (ICER 21,674 pounds per QALY for non-splenectomised patients, 29,771 pounds per QALY for splenectomised patients); whether it was assumed that any unused medicine would be wasted. Combining all of the separate sensitivity analyses, and assuming that watch and rescue was not the first-line treatment, increased the ICERs further (non-splenectomised 37,290 pounds per QALY; splenectomised 131,017 pounds per QALY). In conclusion, the manufacturer's submission and additional work conducted by the ERG suggest that romiplostim has short-term efficacy for the treatment of ITP, but there is no robust evidence on long-term effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of romiplostim compared with relevant comparators.