A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Emicizumab Treatment in Non-Severe Haemophilia A Patients
By Staff Writer
April 17, 2024
Introduction: The Future of Haemophilia A Treatment
When it comes to rare blood diseases, the introduction of Emicizumab, a bispecific monoclonal antibody, has been a significant milestone in the treatment of haemophilia A. The drug, produced by Roche, mimics activated factor VIII (FVIII) and is administered via subcutaneous injection, offering a more convenient alternative to intravenous treatment options mostly used. However, the cost-effectiveness of Emicizumab in non-severe haemophilia A patients remains uncertain. This article aims to shed light on this issue.
The HAVEN 6 Trial: A Closer Look at Emicizumab’s Effectiveness
The HAVEN 6 trial demonstrated that patients with non-severe haemophilia A on prophylactic Emicizumab experienced a significant decrease in treated bleeding monthly probability. However, Emicizumab’s high cost, roughly $47,000 per month in the United States, raises questions about its cost-effectiveness.
Cost-effectiveness Analysis: Emicizumab vs Standard Recombinant FVIII
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Emicizumab compared to standard recombinant FVIII, a recent study developed a Markov model. The model evaluated the quality-adjusted life expectancy and costs for these patients, using a lifetime time horizon with a 1-month Markov cycle. The annual discount rate for cost and health outcomes is 3%, and the perspective is from the United States payer. The willingness-to-pay level (WTP) is set at $150,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).
Findings: The Financial Implication of Emicizumab Treatment
The analysis revealed that Emicizumab prophylaxis resulted in 62% fewer treated bleed events over patients’ lifetimes than recombinant FVIII prophylaxis. However, the cost of Emicizumab prophylaxis accrued to $17,400,000, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 14.5 million USD/QALY, making it cost-ineffective compared to standard of care. The two secondary outcome threshold analyses showed that (1) a 100% reduction in chronic arthropathy prevalence (i.e., 0% chronic arthropathy) decreased the ICER to $1 160 000/QALY and (2) 1 mg of emicizumab must decrease by 35% to $64.60 to be cost-effective at $150 000/QALY.
Figure 1. State transition diagram and cost-effectiveness acceptability curve at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000/QALY,
Global Perspective: Comparing Cost-Effectiveness Across Borders
Studies conducted in countries like Canada and reports from the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review suggest that Emicizumab prophylaxis can be cost-saving for patients with severe haemophilia A. However, this cost-saving benefit does not extend to patients with moderate or mild haemophilia A due to the lower prevalence of bleeding events and other related complications in this population. This discrepancy highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to pricing that takes into account the severity of the disease.
The Road Ahead: Pricing and Market Access
These findings underscore the need for careful consideration of indication-based pricing of novel therapies like Emicizumab. With the goal of value-based healthcare transformation in mind in the United States, indication-based pricing could improve patient outcomes at costs commensurate with clinical improvement.
Conclusion: Balancing Cost-Effectiveness and Therapeutic Innovation
In conclusion, the introduction of Emicizumab has undoubtedly shaken up the treatment landscape for haemophilia A, offering a more convenient and effective treatment option. However, the high cost of this novel therapy raises significant concerns about its cost-effectiveness, particularly for patients with non-severe haemophilia A. While Emicizumab prophylaxis has demonstrated significant clinical benefits in reducing bleeding events, its cost-effectiveness compared to standard recombinant FVIII remains unfavourable. Furthermore, the discrepancy in cost-effectiveness across different countries and patient populations underscores the need for a more nuanced approach to drug pricing, which considers the severity of the disease and the specific patient population. As the healthcare landscape continues to evolve towards a value-based model, it is crucial for stakeholders to balance the need for therapeutic innovation with cost-effectiveness. We must maintain a balance that makes new treatments like Emicizumab both affordable and accessible. This approach shouldn’t compromise the sustainability of healthcare systems. Future research should explore strategies to maximise the cost-effectiveness of these new therapies. One possible strategy is indication-based pricing. This way, we can ensure that we financially sustain the benefits of therapeutic innovation.
🚨 *What does the U.S. withdrawing from the WHO mean for global health?*
President Trump’s executive order to begin the withdrawal process raises serious concerns about the future of global health security. From financial disparities to a shift in international partnerships, the implications could reshape our collective ability to combat pandemics and health crises.
Dive into our article to understand the potential impacts on health outcomes and the quest for new alliances.
The European Medicines Agency’s PRAC is currently reviewing the potential risk of non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION) associated with semaglutide-containing medicines, including popular treatments like Ozempic and Wegovy. With recent studies yielding conflicting evidence, this review is crucial for patient safety and the future of these therapies.
Read the full article to understand the implications and what this could mean for healthcare providers and patients alike!
💡 *Are single-visit cervical cancer screenings the key to better health outcomes in high HIV prevalence areas?*
A recent study from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa reveals that repeat single-visit cervical cancer screening using HPV DNA testing is not only the most effective but also the most cost-effective approach for women living with HIV. This aligns with WHO recommendations for comprehensive cervical cancer elimination strategies.
Explore the insights and implications of this vital research that could transform cervical cancer prevention in resource-limited settings.
When you partner with Syenza, it’s like a Nuclear Fusion.
Our expertise are combined with yours, and we contribute clinical expertise and advanced degrees in
health policy, health economics, systems analysis, public finance, business, and project management.
You’ll also feel our high-impact global and local perspectives with cultural intelligence.
