The quality of economic evaluations of ultra-orphan drugs in Europe – a systematic review

Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases

M. Biegstraaten¹  C. E. M. Hollak¹  Y. Schuller¹ 

[1] Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, F5-166, Amsterdam, 1100 DD, The Netherlands

关键词: Costs and cost analysis;    Economic evaluation;    Cost-effectiveness;    Orphan drugs;    Rare diseases;   

Others  :  1221689
DOI  :  10.1186/s13023-015-0305-y

 received in 2015-06-08, accepted in 2015-07-17,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

An orphan disease is defined in the EU as a disorder affecting less than 1 in 2 000 individuals. The concept of ultra-orphan has been proposed for diseases with a prevalence of less than 1:50 000. Drugs for ultra-orphan diseases are amongst the most expensive medicines on a cost-per-patient basis. The extremely high prices have prompted initiatives to evaluate cost-effectiveness and cost-utility in EU-member states. The objective of this review was to evaluate the quality of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility studies on ultra-orphan drugs. We searched 2 databases and the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. Studies reporting on full economic evaluations, or at least aiming at such evaluation, were eligible for inclusion. Quality was assessed with the use of the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC)-list. Two-hundred-fifty-one studies were identified. Of these, 16 fitted our inclusion criteria. A study on enzyme replacement and substrate reduction therapies for lysosomal storage disorders did not perform a full economic evaluation due to the high drug costs and the lack of a measurable effect on either clinical or health-related quality of life outcomes. Likewise, a cost-effectiveness analysis of laronidase for mucopolysaccharidosis type 1 was considered unfeasible due to lack of clinical effectiveness data, while in the same study a crude model was used to estimate cost-utility of enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) for Fabry disease. Three additional studies, one on ERT for Fabry disease, one on ERT for Gaucher disease and one on eculizumab for paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria, used an approach that was too simplistic to lead to a realistic estimate of the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) or cost-utility ratio (ICUR). In all other studies (N = 11) more sophisticated pharmacoeconomic models were used to estimate cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the specific drug, mostly ERT or drugs indicated for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Seven studies used a Markov-state-transition model. Other models used were patient-level simulation models (N = 3) and decision trees (N = 1). Only 4 studies adopted a societal perspective. All but 2 studies discounted costs and effects appropriately. Drugs for metabolic diseases appeared to be significantly less cost-effective than drugs indicated for PAH, with ICERs ranging from €43 532 (Gaucher disease) to €3 282 252 (Fabry disease). Quality of studies using a Markov-state-transition or patient-level simulation model is in general good with 14–19 points on the CHEC-list. We therefore conclude that economic evaluations of ultra-orphan drugs are feasible if pharmacoeconomic modelling is used. Considering the need for modelling of several disease states and the small patient groups, a Markov-state-transition model seems to be most suitable type of model. However, it should be realised that ultra-orphan drugs will usually not meet the conventional criteria for cost-effectiveness. Nevertheless, ultra-orphan drugs are often reimbursed. Further discussion on the use of economic evaluations and their consequences in case of ultra-orphan drugs is therefore warranted.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Schuller et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Rinaldi A. Adopting an orphan. EMBO Rep. 2005; 6:507-10.
• [2]OrphaNet. http://www.orpha.net/consor/cgi-bin/index.php?lng=EN. Accessed May 2015.
• [3]Excellence NIfC. NICE Citizens Council Report on Ultra Orphan Drugs. London 2004.
• [4]Orphan incentives. European Medicines Agency. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/general/general_content_000393.jsp. Accessed May 2015.
• [5]Simoens S. Pricing and reimbursement of orphan drugs: the need for more transparency. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011; 6:42. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Herder M. When everyone is an orphan: against adopting a U.S.-styled orphan drug policy in Canada. Account Res. 2013; 20:227-69.
• [7]Wastfelt M, Fadeel B, Henter JI. A journey of hope: lessons learned from studies on rare diseases and orphan drugs. J Intern Med. 2006; 260:1-10.
• [8]Devlin N, Parkin D. Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. Health Econ. 2004; 13:437-52.
• [9]Rawlins MD, Culyer AJ. National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ. 2004; 329:224-7.
• [10]Dakin HA, Devlin NJ, Odeyemi IA. “Yes”, “No” or “Yes, but”? Multinomial modelling of NICE decision-making. Health Policy. 2006; 77:352-67.
• [11]Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, van Tulder M, Ament A. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005; 21:240-5.
• [12]Higgins JPT GS. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions vol Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane collaboration; 2011.
• [13]van Dussen L, Biegstraaten M, Hollak CE, Dijkgraaf MG. Cost-effectiveness of enzyme replacement therapy for type 1 Gaucher disease. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014; 9:51. BioMed Central Full Text
• [14]Beutler E, Garber AM. Alglucerase for Gaucher’s disease: dose, costs and benefits. Pharmacoeconomics. 1994; 5:453-9.
• [15]Garin MC, Clark L, Chumney EC, Simpson KN, Highland KB. Cost-utility of treatments for pulmonary arterial hypertension: a Markov state-transition decision analysis model. Clin Drug Investig. 2009; 29:635-46.
• [16]Moore DF, Ries M, Forget EL, Schiffmann R. Enzyme replacement therapy in orphan and ultra-orphan diseases: the limitations of standard economic metrics as exemplified by Fabry-Anderson disease. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007; 25:201-8.
• [17]Soohoo N, Schneider JA, Kaplan RM. A cost-effectiveness analysis of the orphan drug cysteamine in the treatment of infantile cystinosis. Med Decis Making. 1997; 17:193-8.
• [18]Highland KB, Strange C, Mazur J, Simpson KN. Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Preliminary Decision Analysis. Chest. 2003; 124:2087-92.
• [19]Castro-Jaramillo HE. The cost-effectiveness of enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) for the infantile form of Pompe disease: comparing a high-income country’s approach (England) to that of a middle-income one (Colombia). Revista de Salud Publica. 2012; 14:143-55.
• [20]Stevenson MD, Macdonald FC, Langley J, Hunsche E, Akehurst R. The cost-effectiveness of bosentan in the United Kingdom for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension of WHO functional class III. Value Health. 2009; 12:1100-5.
• [21]Connock M, Juarez-Garcia A, Frew E, Mans A, Dretzke J, Fry-Smith A et al.. A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of enzyme replacement therapies for Fabry’s disease and mucopolysaccharidosis type 1. Health Technol Assess. 2006; 10:iii-iv.
• [22]Wyatt K, Henley W, Anderson L, Anderson R, Nikolaou V, Stein K et al.. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of enzyme and substrate replacement therapies: a longitudinal cohort study of people with lysosomal storage disorders. Health Technol Assess. 2012; 16:1-543.
• [23]Connock M, Wang D, Fry-Smith A, Moore D. Prevalence and prognosis of paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria and the clinical and cost-effectiveness of eculizumab. 2008.
• [24]Kanters TA, Hoogenboom-Plug I, Rutten-Van Molken MP, Redekop WK, van der Ploeg AT, Hakkaart L. Cost-effectiveness of enzyme replacement therapy with alglucosidase alfa in classic-infantile patients with Pompe disease. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2014; 9:75. BioMed Central Full Text
• [25]Rombach SM, Hollak CE, Linthorst GE, Dijkgraaf MG. Cost-effectiveness of enzyme replacement therapy for Fabry disease. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2013; 8:29. BioMed Central Full Text
• [26]Roman A, Barbera JA, Escribano P, Sala ML, Febrer L, Oyaguez I et al.. Cost effectiveness of prostacyclins in pulmonary arterial hypertension. Appl Health Econ Health Pol. 2012; 10:175-88.
• [27]Wlodarczyk JH, Cleland LG, Keogh AM, McNeil KD, Perl K, Weintraub RG et al.. Public funding of bosentan for the treatment of pulmonary artery hypertension in Australia: cost effectiveness and risk sharing. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006; 24:903-15.
• [28]Coyle D, Cheung MC, Evans GA. Opportunity cost of funding drugs for rare diseases: the cost-effectiveness of eculizumab in paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria. Med Decis Making. 2014; 34:1016-29.
• [29]Hyde R, Dobrovolny D. Orphan drug pricing and payer management in the United States: are we approaching the tipping point? Am Health Drug Benefit. 2010; 3:15-23.
• [30]Caro JJ, Briggs AH, Siebert U, Kuntz KM, Force I-SMGRPT. Modeling good research practices--overview: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-1. Med Decis Making. 2012; 32:667-77.
• [31]Roberts M, Russell LB, Paltiel AD, Chambers M, McEwan P, Krahn M et al.. Conceptualizing a model: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force--2. Value Health. 2012; 15:804-11.
• [32]Drummond MF, Wilson DA, Kanavos P, Ubel P, Rovira J. Assessing the economic challenges posed by orphan drugs. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007; 23:36-42.
• [33]Simoens S. How to assess the value of medicines? Front Pharmacol. 2010; 1:115.
• [34]NICE. Developing NICE highly specialised technologies. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 2013. http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/howwework/devhst/DevelopingNICEHighlySpecialisedTechnologies.jsp. Accessed July 1st 2015.
• [35]Tilson L, Barry M. Recent developments in pharmacoeconomic evaluation in Ireland. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2010; 10:221-4.
• [36]George B, Harris A, Mitchell A. Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in australia (1991 to 1996). Pharmacoeconomics. 2001; 19:1103-9.
• [37]Beresniak A, Medina-Lara A, Auray JP, De Wever A, Praet JC, Tarricone R et al.. Validation of the underlying assumptions of the quality-adjusted life-years outcome: results from the ECHOUTCOME European project. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015; 33:61-9.
• [38]Gold M. Panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Med Care. 1996; 34:DS197-9.
• [39]Neumann PJ. What next for QALYs? Jama. 2011; 305:1806-7.
• [40]Williams A. QALYS and ethics: a health economist’s perspective. Soc Sci Med. 1996; 43:1795-804.
• [41]O'Sullivan BP, Orenstein DM, Milla CE. Pricing for orphan drugs: will the market bear what society cannot? JAMA. 2013; 310:1343-4.