tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Adv Ther
. 2021 Nov 22.
doi: 10.1007/s12325-021-01982-6. Online ahead of print.
Cost-Effectiveness of Combination of Baricitinib and Remdesivir in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 in the United States: A Modelling Study
Kari Kelton[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tim Klein[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Dan Murphy[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Mark Belger[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Erik Hille[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Patrick L McCollam[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Theodore Spiro[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Russel Burge[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Introduction: Baricitinib-remdesivir (BARI-REM) combination is superior to remdesivir (REM) in reducing recovery time and accelerating clinical improvement among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), specifically those receiving high-flow oxygen/noninvasive ventilation. Here we assessed the cost-effectiveness of BARI-REM versus REM in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the USA.
Methods: A three-state model was developed addressing costs and patient utility associated with COVID-19 hospitalization, immediate post hospital care, and subsequent lifetime medical care. Analysis was performed from the perspective of a payer and a hospital. Both perspectives evaluated two subgroups: all patients and patients who required oxygen. The primary measures of benefit in the model were patient quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) accrued during and after hospitalization, cost per life years gained, cost per death avoided, and cost per use of mechanical ventilation avoided.
Results: In the base-case payer perspective with a lifetime horizon, treatment with BARI-REM versus REM resulted in an incremental total cost of $7962, a gain of 0.446 life years and gain of 0.3565 QALYs over REM. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of using BARI-REM were estimated as $22,334 per QALY and $17,858 per life year. The base-case and sensitivity analyses showed that the total incremental cost per QALY falls within the reduced willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY applied under health emergencies. In all hospitalized patients, treatment with BARI-REM versus REM reduced total hospital expenditures per patient by $1778 and total reimbursement payments by $1526, resulting in a $252 reduction in net costs per patient; it also resulted in a net gain of 0.0018 QALYs and increased survival of COVID-19 hospitalizations by 2.7%.
Conclusion: Our study showed that BARI-REM is cost-effective compared to using REM for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The base-case results of this cost-effectiveness model were most sensitive to average annual medical costs for recovered patients.
Keywords: Baricitinib; COVID-19; Cost-effectiveness; Hospital; Mechanical ventilation; Remdesivir.
. 2021 Nov 22.
doi: 10.1007/s12325-021-01982-6. Online ahead of print.
Cost-Effectiveness of Combination of Baricitinib and Remdesivir in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 in the United States: A Modelling Study
Kari Kelton[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Tim Klein[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Dan Murphy[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Mark Belger[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Erik Hille[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Patrick L McCollam[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Theodore Spiro[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Russel Burge[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 34807369
- DOI: 10.1007/s12325-021-01982-6
Abstract
Introduction: Baricitinib-remdesivir (BARI-REM) combination is superior to remdesivir (REM) in reducing recovery time and accelerating clinical improvement among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), specifically those receiving high-flow oxygen/noninvasive ventilation. Here we assessed the cost-effectiveness of BARI-REM versus REM in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the USA.
Methods: A three-state model was developed addressing costs and patient utility associated with COVID-19 hospitalization, immediate post hospital care, and subsequent lifetime medical care. Analysis was performed from the perspective of a payer and a hospital. Both perspectives evaluated two subgroups: all patients and patients who required oxygen. The primary measures of benefit in the model were patient quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) accrued during and after hospitalization, cost per life years gained, cost per death avoided, and cost per use of mechanical ventilation avoided.
Results: In the base-case payer perspective with a lifetime horizon, treatment with BARI-REM versus REM resulted in an incremental total cost of $7962, a gain of 0.446 life years and gain of 0.3565 QALYs over REM. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of using BARI-REM were estimated as $22,334 per QALY and $17,858 per life year. The base-case and sensitivity analyses showed that the total incremental cost per QALY falls within the reduced willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY applied under health emergencies. In all hospitalized patients, treatment with BARI-REM versus REM reduced total hospital expenditures per patient by $1778 and total reimbursement payments by $1526, resulting in a $252 reduction in net costs per patient; it also resulted in a net gain of 0.0018 QALYs and increased survival of COVID-19 hospitalizations by 2.7%.
Conclusion: Our study showed that BARI-REM is cost-effective compared to using REM for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The base-case results of this cost-effectiveness model were most sensitive to average annual medical costs for recovered patients.
Keywords: Baricitinib; COVID-19; Cost-effectiveness; Hospital; Mechanical ventilation; Remdesivir.