Cost-effectiveness modeling of abatacept versus other biologic agents in DMARDS and anti-TNF inadequate responders for the management of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis

Clin Rheumatol. 2009 Apr;28(4):403-12. doi: 10.1007/s10067-008-1060-4. Epub 2008 Dec 17.

Abstract

To assess the cost-effectiveness of abatacept compared to different biologic treatment strategies for moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis based on current medical practices in Canada. A model was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of various biologic treatments over a 2-year time horizon, using two effectiveness endpoints: "low disease activity state" (LDAS) and "remission". Abatacept, as first biologic agent after an inadequate response to DMARDs, provides greater treatment success rate for achieving LDAS (29.4% versus 15.6%) and remission (14.8% versus 5.2%), and appears significantly more cost-effective compared to the sequential use of anti-TNF agents (p<0.001). Abatacept, as second biologic agent after an inadequate response to one anti-TNF agent, provides greater treatment success rate for achieving LDAS (17.1% versus 10.2%) and remission (7.4% versus 3.9%) and appears significantly more cost-effective compared to the sequential use of anti-TNF agents (p<0.001). Abatacept is a cost-effective strategy in patients with an inadequate response to DMARDs or to one anti-TNF agent.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Abatacept
  • Antirheumatic Agents / economics*
  • Antirheumatic Agents / pharmacology*
  • Arthritis, Rheumatoid / drug therapy*
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Drug Costs
  • Humans
  • Immunoconjugates / economics*
  • Immunoconjugates / pharmacology*
  • Middle Aged
  • Models, Theoretical
  • Remission Induction
  • Time Factors
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha / metabolism*

Substances

  • Antirheumatic Agents
  • Immunoconjugates
  • Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
  • Abatacept