Total amount: € 0,00
Official Journal of the Italian Society of Dermatology and Sexually Transmitted Diseases
Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,014
Online ISSN 1827-1820
Terranova L. 1, Mattozzi C. 2, Richetta A. G. 2, Mantuano M. 3, Cardosi L. 3, Teruzzi C. 3
1 4 Health Innovation Norge AS; OsloMedTech;
2 Department of Dermatology and Venereology Policlinico Umberto I of Rome University of Rome Sapienza, Rome, Italy;
3 Temas-Quintiles HEMAR-Health economics Market Access and Reimbursement, Milan, Italy
Aim: Biologics were introduced as innovative and effective therapies for the treatment of moderate-to severe psoriasis. However, in the Italian context there are no comparative cost-effectiveness analyses of all biologics currently approved for psoriasis by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). This study estimates whether the cost of ustekinumab (meant as cost of drug therapies and monitoring) is lower, similar to or higher than that of anti-TNF-α.
Methods: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) in terms of cost for patients achieving 75% improvement in PASI (PASI 75) were calculated. The analysis, both during the first 52 weeks, including induction and in maintenance period is based on efficacy data taken from single studies. The costs, based on official source, are calculated in the perspective of National Health Service (SSN).
Results: Ustekinumab has the lowest cost for responder, resulting always cost-effective and, in some case, cost saving in the baseline scenario at 52 weeks and in maintenance period.
Conclusion: Ustekinumab seems to be the most favorable biologic in term of cost per PASI 75 responder for the treatment of psoriasis and it is cost-effective in all scenarios analyzed. Further cost-effectiveness evaluations based on data of use of long-term treatment with biologics in clinical practice, are necessary to support this results.