Baricitinib for Previously Treated Moderate or Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

被引:0
作者
Shijie Ren
Iñigo Bermejo
Emma Simpson
Ruth Wong
David L. Scott
Adam Young
Matt Stevenson
机构
[1] University of Sheffield,School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR)
[2] King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust,Department of Rheumatology
[3] University of Hertfordshire,Center for Lifespan and Chronic Illness Research
来源
PharmacoEconomics | 2018年 / 36卷
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
As part of its single technology appraisal process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence invited the manufacturer (Eli Lilly) of baricitinib (BARI; Olumiant®; a Janus kinase inhibitor that is taken orally) to submit evidence of its clinical and cost effectiveness for the treatment of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after the failure of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group at the University of Sheffield was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a detailed review of the evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of the technology, based on the company’s submission (CS) to NICE. The clinical-effectiveness evidence in the CS for BARI was based predominantly on three randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy of BARI against adalimumab or placebo, as well as one long-term extension study. The clinical-effectiveness review identified no head-to-head evidence on the efficacy of BARI against all the comparators within the scope. Therefore, the company performed network meta-analyses (NMAs) in two different populations: one in patients who had experienced an inadequate response to conventional DMARDs (cDMARD-IR), and the other in patients who had experienced an inadequate response to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR). The company’s NMAs concluded BARI had comparable efficacy as the majority of its comparators in both populations. The company submitted a de novo discrete event simulation model that analysed the incremental cost-effectiveness of BARI versus its comparators for the treatment of RA from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in four different populations: (1) cDMARD-IR patients with moderate RA, defined as a 28-Joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) > 3.2 and no more than 5.1; (2) cDMARD-IR patients with severe RA (defined as a DAS28 > 5.1); (3) TNFi-IR patients with severe RA for whom rituximab (RTX) was eligible; and (4) TNFi-IR patients with severe RA for whom RTX in combination with methotrexate (MTX) is contraindicated or not tolerated. In the cDMARD-IR population with moderate RA, the deterministic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for BARI in combination with MTX compared with intensive cDMARDs was estimated to be £37,420 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. In the cDMARD-IR population with severe RA, BARI in combination with MTX dominated all comparators except for certolizumab pegol (CTZ) in combination with MTX, with the ICER of CTZ in combination with MTX compared with BARI in combination with MTX estimated to be £18,400 per QALY gained. In the TNFi-IR population with severe RA, when RTX in combination with MTX was an option, BARI in combination with MTX was dominated by RTX in combination with MTX. In the TNFi-IR population with severe RA for whom RTX in combination with MTX is contraindicated or not tolerated, BARI in combination with MTX dominated golimumab in combination with MTX and was less effective and less expensive than the remaining comparators. Following a critique of the model, the ERG undertook exploratory analyses after applying corrections to the methods used in the NMAs and two programming errors in the economic model that affected the company’s probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) results. The ERG’s NMA results were broadly comparable with the company’s results. The programming error that affected the PSA of the severe cDMARD-IR population had only a minimal impact on the results, while the error affecting the severe TNFi-IR RTX-ineligible population resulted in markedly higher costs and QALYs gained for the affected comparators but did not substantially modify the conclusions of the analysis. The NICE Appraisal Committee concluded that BARI in combination with MTX or as monotherapy is a cost-effective use of NHS resources in patients with severe RA, except in TNFi-IR patients who are RTX-eligible.
引用
收藏
页码:769 / 778
页数:9
相关论文
共 88 条
[1]  
Scott DL(2007)The course of established rheumatoid arthritis Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 21 943-967
[2]  
Steer S(1998)Early radiographic joint space narrowing and erosion and later malalignment in rheumatoid arthritis: a longitudinal analysis J Rheumatol 25 636-640
[3]  
Pincus T(2000)Radiographic damage of large joints in long-term rheumatoid arthritis and its relation to function Rheumatology 39 998-1003
[4]  
Fuchs HA(2009)Current risk factors for work disability associated with rheumatoid arthritis: recent data from a US national cohort Arthritis Care Res 61 321-328
[5]  
Callahan LF(2007)Mortality in established rheumatoid arthritis Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 21 871-883
[6]  
Nance EP(2013)Mortality in rheumatoid arthritis over the last fifty years: systematic review and meta-analysis Joint Bone Spine 80 29-33
[7]  
Kaye JJ(2009)Trends in cardiovascular mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis over 50 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies Rheumatology 48 1309-1313
[8]  
Drossaers-Bakker KW(1994)The incidence of rheumatoid arthritis in the United Kingdom: results from the Norfolk Arthritis Register Rheumatology 33 735-739
[9]  
Kroon HM(1995)American college of rheumatology preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis Arthritis Rheum 38 727-735
[10]  
Zwinderman AH(1996)Development and validation of the European League Against Rheumatism response criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with the preliminary american college of rheumatology and the world health organization/international league against rheumatism criteria Arthritis Rheum 39 34-40