Skip Navigation


Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on June 11, 2007
Rheumatology 2007 46(8):1345-1354; doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kem115
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
46/8/1345    most recent
kem115v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Brennan, A.
Right arrow Articles by Symmons, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Brennan, A.
Right arrow Articles by Symmons, D.
Related Collections
Right arrow Health Economics
Right arrow Rheumatoid Arthritis
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Modelling the cost effectiveness of TNF-{alpha} antagonists in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registry

A. Brennan1,4, N. Bansback1,2,4, R. Nixon3,4, J. Madan1, M. Harrison4, K. Watson4 and D. Symmons4

1Health Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), The University of Sheffield, UK, 2Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, St Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 3MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, University Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 2SR and 4Arthritis Research Campaign Epidemiology Unit, The University of Manchester Medical School, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.

Correspondence to: Alan Brennan, Director of Health Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), The University of Sheffield, UK. E-mail: a.brennan{at}sheffield.ac.uk


   Abstract

Objective. To evaluate the cost effectiveness of TNF-{alpha} antagonist therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the United Kingdom using data from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registry (BSRBR).

Methods. A simulation model is constructed to quantify the cost effectiveness of the TNF-{alpha} antagonist therapies (infliximab, etanercept and adalimumab) as a group versus traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, with a time horizon over the full patient lifetime. Participants are UK NHS patients in the BSRBR with RA who have failed at least two traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. The BSRBR aims to recruit all RA patients starting on a TNF-{alpha} antagonist agent and follows them 6 monthly via consultant and patient administered questionnaires. Data collected include disease activity scores (DAS28), the Health Assessment Questionnaire and the SF-36. Costs include drug, monitoring and hospitalisations. Benefits are measured in disability and quality of life improvements. The main outcome measure is the incremental cost per quality adjusted life-year gained (discounted).

Results. The basecase cost per quality adjusted life-year gained by using TNF-{alpha} antagonist therapies is estimated at £23 882, with probabilistic uncertainty analysis suggesting that the probability that treatments are below £30 000 per QALY is around 84%. The results are most sensitive to assumptions concerning long-term disability progression, discount rates and the validity or otherwise of SF6D derived utility measures. Subgroup analysis, monotherapy versus combination with methotrexate, and a limited analysis of sequential therapy with two TNF-{alpha} antagonist agents, suggest cost-effectiveness ratios around £20 000 to £30 000.

Conclusions. The BSRBR data provide valuable evidence for estimating cost-effectiveness. The analysis concludes that current policies and practice for the use of TNF-{alpha} antagonist therapies, after RA patients have failed at least two traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, appear cost-effective in the context of the NICE re-appraisal of 2006 for England and Wales, thus supporting their decision to continue their reimbursement. Decision-makers worldwide might adapt this analysis because differential costs, discount rates and other factors could affect results. There remains uncertainty, particularly on long-term disease progression. Further data collection using the BSRBR is recommended, together with a revision to this analysis when data become available.

KEY WORDS: Anti-TNF, cost, cost-effectiveness, rheumatoid arthritis

Submitted 18 September 2006; revised version accepted 26 March 2007.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
R. F. van Vollenhoven
Comment on: Modelling the cost effectiveness of TNF antagonists in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registry
Rheumatology, July 1, 2008; 47(7): 1106 - 1107.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
N. Bansback, A. Brennan, D. Symmons, R. Nixon, J. Madan, M. Harrison, and K. Watson
Comment on: Modelling the cost effectiveness of TNF-{alpha} antagonists in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registry: reply
Rheumatology, July 1, 2008; 47(7): 1107 - 1107.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.