May 22, 2013
1 min read
Save

Biologic sequences with abatacept more cost effective than rituximab in treating RA patients

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Biologic sequences that included abatacept appeared more efficient and cost effective compared with those using rituximab as treatment for rheumatoid arthritis patients who responded insufficiently to anti-tumor necrosis factor, according to study results.

Based on local rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment strategies, European researchers developed a cost-effectiveness model that used Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) results for dichotomous effectiveness endpoints. Patients either achieved remission (RS) or no RS, or they reached a low disease activity state (LDAS) or no LDAS. Cost estimates were determined by resource utilization data obtained from a large observational German cohort.

For patients with moderate-to-severe RA and insufficient response (IR) to at least one anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent, cost-effectiveness during 2 years of four sequential biologic strategies was assessed. Three biologic agents, including anti-TNF agents, abatacept or rituximab, were analyzed by using advanced simulations.

A biological sequence including abatacept after an IR to one anti-TNF agent appeared to be the most efficient and cost-effective therapy compared with use after two anti-TNF agents (€633 vs. €1,067 per day in LDAS; €1,222 vs. €3,592 daily in RS). Researchers determined similar results when abatacept was compared with a like sequence using rituximab (€633 vs. €728 daily in LDAS; €1,222 vs. €1,812 daily in RS). When a third anti-TNF agent was used in the sequence, it was neither as effective nor cost effective as the same sequence using abatacept (€2,000 vs. €1,067 daily in LDAS; €6,623 vs. €3,592 daily in RS; all differences, P<.01).

“Future modeling approaches should confirm these results as further comparative data of biological treatment strategies in RA and long-term evidence become available,” the researchers concluded.

Disclosure: See the study for a full list of relevant disclosures.