PharmacoEconomics
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Biological therapies for the treatment of severe psoriasis in patients with previous exposure to biological therapy: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Biologic therapies have revolutionised the care of patients with psoriasis, although they come at significant extra cost. Guidance on their use in the UK National Health Service (NHS) has so far focused on patients who are "biologic naive", yet a minority of patients have poor response and require further treatment. ⋯ Further biologic therapy for patients with psoriasis who have previously been treated with biologic therapy may be cost effective, although there is considerable uncertainty in the results. Future studies should be designed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of biologic therapies in this subgroup with particular attention given to short-term and longer-term responses.
-
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of eribulin (Eisai Ltd) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of eribulin as treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (LABC/MBC) pre-treated with at least two chemotherapy regimens. This article summarizes the review of evidence by the Evidence Review Group (ERG) and provides a summary of the NICE Appraisal Committee's (AC's) decision. The clinical evidence was derived from a multi-centred, open-label, randomized, phase III study comparing eribulin with treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in 762 patients with LABC/MBC. ⋯ The manufacturer's economic evaluation using Patient Access Scheme costs reported a base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for eribulin versus TPC (Region 1) of £46,050 per quality-adjusted life year gained (corrected to £45,106 when an erroneous data entry was removed). The ERG's revised ICERs were £61,804 for Region 1 and £76,110 for the overall population. The AC concluded that the evidence had not demonstrated sufficient benefit in OS, cost effectiveness or HRQoL and that eribulin was not recommended for use in this patient group.