Risk-benefit Analysis of Adalimumab Versus Traditional Non-Biologic Therapies for Patients with Crohn's Disease

Background: Adalimumab is indicated for the treatment of moderately to severely active Crohn's disease (CD). A systematic analysis of risks and benefits of adalimumab versus traditional non-biologic therapies for patients refractory to non-biologic therapy is lacking. Methods: A base-case analysis compared expected benefits of adalimumab therapy with a 12-week stopping rule for non-responders versus non-biologic therapies using data from clinical trials (CHARM, CLASSIC I). Adverse events (AEs) recorded in clinical trials (CHARM, CLASSIC I, CLASSIC II, GAIN, open-label extensions) were compiled. Sensitivity analyses incorporated all observed benefits of adalimumab and placebo (CHARM, CLASSIC I, GAIN) and observed AEs from a systematic literature review of non-biologic therapies (MEDLINE search of randomized trials 1990-2007). Distributional information from maintenance clinical trial observations and benefit model predictions were used in a probabilistic simulation. Incremental net benefits were estimated based on utility estimates from the literature. Results: Average time in remission (i.e., CDAI <150) over 1 year of therapy was 39.9% for adalimumab versus 6.6% for traditional non-biologic therapies. Adalimumab was associated with fewer expected hospitalizations, better fistula closure rates, and lower AE rates. These findings were robust in sensitivity analyses. In the probabilistic simulation, with serious AEs as a composite of risks, adalimumab provided greater benefits with fewer AEs versus non-biologic therapies (P < 0.01). Adalimumab demonstrated greater incremental net quality-adjusted life-years (0.12) versus non-biologic therapies. Conclusions: Adalimumab demonstrated greater benefits and lower rates of AEs versus traditional non-biologic therapies for patients with moderately to severely active CD who were refractory to non-biologic therapies.