Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
PharmacoEconomics
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 9/2013

01-09-2013 | Original Research Article

Cost Effectiveness of Moderate to Severe Psoriasis Therapy with Etanercept and Ustekinumab in the United States

Authors: Reginald Villacorta, Joel W. Hay, Andrew Messali

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 9/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Limited information is available on the cost effectiveness of ustekinumab and alternative biologic treatments in a United States (US) setting. Given the recent head-to-head clinical trial study of ustekinumab and etanercept, an economic model comparing the two treatments can be constructed. Etanercept and ustekinumab are indicated for the treatment of chronic moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in adult patients who are candidates for phototherapy or systemic therapy.

Objective

Clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy of ustekinumab, an anti-cytokine biologic, for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of ustekinumab compared with etanercept from a US societal perspective.

Methods

A Markov model was constructed to simulate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained every 12 weeks over a base-case 3-year time horizon. A hypothetical patient cohort was based on the characteristics of the phase III Active Comparator Psoriasis Trial (ACCEPT). The main outcome measures were costs and QALYs, which were estimated from the US societal perspective. Costs, utilities, treatment strategy, and resource use estimates were obtained from relevant literature. All costs were adjusted to 2011 US dollars. A 3 % annual discount rate was applied to costs and QALYs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were in US dollars per QALY gained.

Results

For the base-case 3-year time horizon, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing ustekinumab 90 mg with etanercept 50 mg was US$384,401 per QALY gained. Ustekinumab 45 mg dominates etanercept 50 mg for the same time horizon. These results were robust to sensitivity analyses involving treatment strategy, transition probabilities, valuing outcomes, and resource use and costs. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests ustekinumab 90 mg has a minimal (4 %) chance of being cost effective compared with etanercept 50 mg at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$150,000 per QALY improvement. For the same threshold, ustekinumab 45 mg has a high (88 %) chance of being cost effective compared with etanercept 50 mg.

Conclusion

Under typical US willingness-to-pay cutoffs, ustekinumab 90 mg is not cost effective compared with etanercept 50 mg therapy in moderate to severe psoriasis patients for the base-case 3-year time horizon. Ustekinumab 45 mg dominates etanercept 50 mg therapy for an equivalent patient psoriasis severity and time horizon.
Literature
1.
2.
Menter A, Gottlieb A, Feldman S, Van Voorhees A, Leonardi C, Gordon K, et al. Guidelines of care for the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis Section 1. Overview of psoriasis and guidelines of care for the treatment of psoriasis with biologics. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;58:826–50.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Menter A, Korman NJ, Elmets C, Feldman SR, Gelfand JM, Gordon KB, et al. Guidelines of care for the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis Section 6. Guidelines of care for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: case-based presentations and evidence-based conclusions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:137–74.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Frankel A, Lebwohl M. Treatment options for psoriasis patients who have failed at least one biological therapy. Adv Psor Inflamm Skin Dis 2010;1(4):119–24.
5.
Leonardi C, Kimball A, Papp K, et al. Efficacy and safety of ustekinumab, a human interleukin-12/23 monoclonal antibody, in patients with psoriasis: 76-week results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (PHOENIX 1). Lancet. 2008;371:1665–74.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Papp K, Langley R, Lebwohl M, et al. Efficacy and safety of ustekinumab, a human interleukin-12/23 monoclonal antibody, in patients with psoriasis: 52-week results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (PHOENIX 2). Lancet. 2008;371:1675–84.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Griffiths C, Strober B, van de Kerkhof P, et al. Comparison of ustekinumab and etanercept for moderate to severe psoriasis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:118–28.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Miller DW, Feldman SR. Cost-effectiveness of moderate to severe psoriasis treatment. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2006;7(2):157–67.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Gold M, Siegel J, Russell L, et al., editors. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
10.
Neumann PJ, Rosen AB, Weinstein MC. Medicare and cost-effectiveness analysis. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1516–22.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Detsky AS, Laupacis A. Relevance of cost-effectiveness analysis to clinicians and policy makers. JAMA. 2007;298:221–4.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Martin S, Feldman SR, Augustin M, Szapary P, Schenkel B. Cost per responder analysis of ustekinumab and etanercept for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. J Dermatol Treat. 2011;22:138–43.CrossRef
13.
Pan F, Brazier N, Shear N, et al. Cost utility analysis based on a head-to-head phase 3 clinical trial comparing ustekinumab and etanercept in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: a Canadian perspective. Value Health. 2011;14:652–6.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon JA, et al., editors. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007.
15.
Report of the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health, Macroeconomics and Health: Investing in Health for Economic Development, World Health Organization. 2001.
16.
17.
Carlin CS, Feldman SR, Krueger JG, Menter A, Krueger GG. A 50% reduction in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 50) is a clinically significant endpoint in the assessment of psoriasis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50:859–66.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Gelfand J, Troxel A, Lewis J, et al. The risk of mortality in patients with psoriasis. Arch Dermatol. 2007;143(12):1493–9.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Woolacott N, Hawkins N, Mason A, Kainth A, Khadjesari Z, Bravo Vergel Y, et al. Etanercept and efalizumab for the treatment of psoriasis: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess. 2006;10(46):1–233, i–iv.
20.
Sterry W, Barker J, Boehncke WH, Bos JD, Chimenti S, Christophers E, et al. Biological therapies in the systemic management of psoriasis: International Consensus Conference. Br J Dermatol. 2004;69:3–17.CrossRef
21.
Griffiths CE, Dubertret L, Ellis CN, Finlay AY, Finzi AF, Ho VC, et al. Ciclosporin in psoriasis clinical practice: an international consensus statement. Br J Dermatol. 2004;150:11–23.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Pariser DM, et al. Integrated safety analysis: short- and long-term safety profiles of etanercept in patients with psoriasis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67(2):245–56.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Reich K, et al. An update on long-term safety experience of ustekinumab: results from the psoriasis clinical development program with up to four years of follow-up. J Drugs Dermatol. 2012;11(3):300–12.PubMed
24.
25.
26.
Schmitt J, Meurer M, Klon M, et al. Assessment of health states utilities of controlled and uncontrolled psoriasis and atopic eczema: a population-based study. Br J Dermatol. 2008;158:351–9.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Currie C, Conway P. Evaluation of the association between EQ5D utility and dermatology life quality index (DLQI) score in patients with psoriasis. Value Health. 2007;10(6):A470–1.CrossRef
28.
Krueger GG, et al. Position paper. Two considerations for patients with psoriasis: What defines mild, moderate, and severe psoriasis? What constitutes a clinically significant improvement when treating psoriasis? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2000;43:281–5.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Katugampola R, Lewis V, Finlay A. The Dermatology Life Quality Index: assessing the efficacy of biological therapies for psoriasis. Br J Dermatol. 2007;156:945–50.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Nelson AA, Pearce DJ, Fleischer AB, Balkrishnan R, Feldman SR. Cost-effectiveness of biologic treatments for psoriasis based on subjective and objective efficacy measures assessed over a 12-week treatment period. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;58:125–35.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Beck J, Kassirer J, Pauker S. A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the “DEALE”) I. Validation of the method. Am J Med. 1982;73:883–8.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Beck J, Pauker S, Gottlieb J, et al. A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the “DEALE”) II. Use in medical decision-making. Am J Med. 1982;73:889–97.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Papp K, Tyring S, Lahfa M, et al. A global phase III randomized controlled trial of etanercept in psoriasis: safety, efficacy, and effect of dose reduction. Br J Dermatol. 2005;152:1304–12.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Tyring S, Gottlieb A, Papp K, Gordon K, Leonardi C, Wang A, et al. Etanercept and clinical outcomes, fatigue, and depression in psoriasis: double-blind placebo-controlled randomized phase III trial. Lancet. 2006;367:29–35.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Elewski B, Leonardi C, Gottlieb AB, Strober BE, Simiens MA, Dunn M, et al. Comparison of clinical and pharmacokinetic profiles of etanercept 25 mg twice weekly and 50 mg once weekly in patients with psoriasis. Br J Dermatol. 2007;156:138–42.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Leonardi CL, Powers JL, Matheson RT, Goffe BS, Zitnik R, Wang A, et al. Etanercept as monotherapy in patients with psoriasis. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2014–22.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Hankin CS, Feldman SR, Szczotka A, Stinger RC, Fish L, Hankin DL. A cost comparison of treatments of moderate to severe psoriasis. Drug Benefit Trends. 2005;17:200–14.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
Kivitz A, Cohen S, Dowd JE, Edwards W, Thakker S, Wellborne FR, et al. Clinical assessment of pain, tolerability, and preference of an autoinjection pen versus a prefilled syringe for patient self-administration of the fully human, monoclonal antibody adalimumab: the TOUCH Trial. Clin Ther. 2007;28(10):1619–29.
44.
Yu A, Tang J, Xie J, et al. Economic burden of psoriasis compared to the general population and stratified by disease severity. Curr Med Res Opin. 2009;25(10):2429–38.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Crown WH, Bresnahan BW, Orsini LS, et al. The burden of illness associated with psoriasis: cost of treatment with systemic therapy and phototherapy in the US. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(12):1929–36.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Kimball AB, Guerin A, Tsaneva M, et al. Economic burden of comorbidities in patients with psoriasis is substantial. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2011;25:157–63.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Fowler JF, Duh MS, Rovba L, et al. The impact of psoriasis in health care costs and patient work loss. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;59(5):772–80.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Krueger GG, Langley RG, Finlay AY, et al. Patient-reported outcomes of psoriasis improvement with etanercept therapy: results of a randomized phase III trial. Br J Dermatol. 2005;153:192–9.CrossRef
49.
Chilton F, et al. Treatment choices, preferences and decision-making by patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Musculoskelet Care. 2008;6(1):1–14.CrossRef
50.
Report: US Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2011. Source: US National Center for Health Statistic. National Vital Statistics Reports, Deaths: Final Data for 2007. Vo. 58, No. 19, May 2010.
51.
Tyring S, Gordon KB, Poulin Y, Langley RG, Gottlieb AB, Dunn M, Jahreis A. Long-term safety and efficacy of 50 mg of etanercept twice weekly in patients with psoriasis. Arch Dermatol. 2007;143:719–26.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Anis AH, Bansback N, Sizto S, Gupta SR, Willian MK, Feldman SR. Economic evaluation of biologic therapies for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in the United States. J Dermatol Treat. 2011;22:65–74.CrossRef
53.
Moore A, Gordon KB, Kang S, Gottlieb A, Freundlich B, Xia A, et al. A randomized, open-label trial of continuous versus interrupted etanercept therapy in the treatment of psoriasis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;56:598–603.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Ortonne JP, Griffiths CEM, Dauden E, Strohal R, Robertson D, Pederson R, et al. Efficacy and safety of continuous versus paused etanercept treatment in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis over 54 weeks: the CRYSTEL study. Expert Rev Dermatol. 2008;3(6):657–65.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Cost Effectiveness of Moderate to Severe Psoriasis Therapy with Etanercept and Ustekinumab in the United States
Authors
Reginald Villacorta
Joel W. Hay
Andrew Messali
Publication date
01-09-2013
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 9/2013
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-013-0078-x

Other articles of this Issue 9/2013

PharmacoEconomics 9/2013 Go to the issue

Original Research Article

Costs of Parkinson’s Disease in a Privately Insured Population

Original Research Article

Cost–Utility Analysis of Deferiprone for the Treatment of β-Thalassaemia Patients with Chronic Iron Overload: A UK Perspective

Original Research Article

Unravelling Drug Reimbursement Outcomes: A Comparative Study of the Role of Pharmacoeconomic Evidence in Dutch and Swedish Reimbursement Decision Making

Review Article

The Economic Burden of Toxicities Associated with Cancer Treatment: Review of the Literature and Analysis of Nausea and Vomiting, Diarrhoea, Oral Mucositis and Fatigue

Original Research Article

Smoking Cessation Treatment and Outcomes Patterns Simulation: A New Framework for Evaluating the Potential Health and Economic Impact of Smoking Cessation Interventions

Leading Article

Navigating Time and Uncertainty in Health Technology Appraisal: Would a Map Help?