» Articles » PMID: 34268704

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of RFVIIIFc Versus Contemporary RFVIII Treatments for Patients with Severe Hemophilia A Without Inhibitors in the United States

Overview
Date 2021 Jul 16
PMID 34268704
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: A range of treatments for patients with severe hemophilia A (HA) have been developed over the last decade, allowing for reduced frequency of administration and improved outcomes (joint health and breakthrough bleeding rates). While clinically effective, the cost effectiveness of these treatments has not been established.

Objective: This study presents a cost-effectiveness analysis of contemporary rFVIII treatments for severe HA patients without inhibitors.

Methods: A published semi-Markov model was used to compare three different prophylaxis regimens: (1) extended half-life (EHL) recombinant Factor VIII (rFVIII) Fc-fusion protein (rFVIIIFc, Eloctate, Sanofi), (2) EHL PEGylated rFVIII (PEG-rFVIII, Adynovate, Takeda), and (3) standard half-life (SHL) rFVIII (antihemophilic factor [recombinant], Advate, Takeda), used as a proxy for all SHL rFVIII treatments. Acquisition costs were included based on published dosing and weight data. Benefits were incorporated through published annualized bleeding rates, rates of target joint development/resolution, and improvements in the modified hemophilia joint health score. Results were presented as total, discounted costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

Results: rFVIIIFc was shown to provide the most QALYs (27.922) compared with both PEG-rFVIII (27.454) and SHL rFVIII (27.071), at lower costs. Discounted lifetime costs were estimated at US$18.235m (rFVIIIFc), US$20.198m (PEG-rFVIII), and US$18.285m (SHL rFVIII), and were predominantly affected by model settings related to acquisition costs, patient weight, and dosing.

Conclusions: rFVIIIFc may offer a cost-effective option for severe HA patients. Uncertainties owing to the limited evidence base is the main limitation of the study.

Citing Articles

Efmoroctocog Alfa: A Review in Haemophilia A.

Frampton J Drugs. 2021; 81(17):2035-2046.

PMID: 34743314 PMC: 8636404. DOI: 10.1007/s40265-021-01615-w.

References
1.
Valentino L, Mamonov V, Hellmann A, Quon D, Chybicka A, Schroth P . A randomized comparison of two prophylaxis regimens and a paired comparison of on-demand and prophylaxis treatments in hemophilia A management. J Thromb Haemost. 2012; 10(3):359-67. PMC: 3488301. DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2011.04611.x. View

2.
Srivastava A, Brewer A, Mauser-Bunschoten E, Key N, Kitchen S, Llinas A . Guidelines for the management of hemophilia. Haemophilia. 2012; 19(1):e1-47. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2012.02909.x. View

3.
Nolan B, Mahlangu J, Pabinger I, Young G, Konkle B, Barnes C . Recombinant factor VIII Fc fusion protein for the treatment of severe haemophilia A: Final results from the ASPIRE extension study. Haemophilia. 2020; 26(3):494-502. PMC: 7384031. DOI: 10.1111/hae.13953. View

4.
Henry N, Jovanovic J, Schlueter M, Kritikou P, Wilson K, Myren K . Cost-utility analysis of life-long prophylaxis with recombinant factor VIIIFc vs recombinant factor VIII for the management of severe hemophilia A in Sweden. J Med Econ. 2017; 21(4):318-325. DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2017.1405816. View

5.
Knobe K, Berntorp E . Haemophilia and joint disease: pathophysiology, evaluation, and management. J Comorb. 2017; 1:51-59. PMC: 5556421. DOI: 10.15256/joc.2011.1.2. View