Cost-effectiveness of alemtuzumab and natalizumab for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis treatment in Iran: decision analysis based on an indirect comparison

References

• Multiple sclerosis International federation [Internet]. London, UK. Available at: https://www.msif.org/ [Last accessed January 2017]
   Google Scholar
• Kurtzke JF. Multiple sclerosis in time and space–geographic clues to cause. J Neurovirol 2000;6(Suppl 2):S134–S40
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Facts about MS [Internet]. Florida, USA. Available at: http://msfocus.org/Facts-About-MS.aspx [Last accessed January 2017]
   Google Scholar
• Pittock SJ, McClelland RL, Mayr WT, et al. Clinical implications of benign multiple sclerosis: a 20-year population-based follow-up study. Ann Neurol 2004;56:303–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlewska E, Mierzejewski P, Zaborski J, et al. A prospective study of the financial costs of multiple sclerosis at different stages of the disease. Eur J Neurol 2005;12:31–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naci H, Fleurence R, Birt J, et al. Economic burden of multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics 2010;28:363–79
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell C, Graham J, Earnshaw S, et al. Cost-effectiveness of four immunomodulatory therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a Markov model based on long-term clinical data. J Manag Care Pharm 2007;13:245–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Etemadifar M, Izadi S, Nikseresht A, et al. Estimated prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis in Iran. Eur Neurol 2014;72:370–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eskandarieh S, Heydarpour P, Minagar A, et al. Multiple sclerosis epidemiology in East Asia, South East Asia and South Asia: a systematic review. Neuroepidemiology 2016;46:209–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imani A, Rasekh HR, Asefzadeh S, et al. Cost analysis of disease-modifying drugs therapy for patients with multiple sclerosis in Iran. Am J Sci Res 2012;95–102
   Google Scholar
• Khanizadeh H, Izham M, Akmal A. PND12 the costs analysis of multiple sclerosis at different stages in Iran. Value Health 2012;15:A143
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yamout B, Alroughani R, Al-Jumah M, et al. Consensus recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of multiple sclerosis: the Middle East North Africa Committee for Treatment and Research In Multiple Sclerosis (MENACTRIMS). Curr Med Res Opin 2015;31:1349–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Earnshaw SR, Graham J, Oleen-Burkey M, et al. Cost effectiveness of glatiramer acetate and natalizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2009;7:91–108
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Whetten-Goldstein K, Sloan FA, Goldstein LB, et al. A comprehensive assessment of the cost of multiple sclerosis in the United States. Mult Scler 1998;4:419–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pucci E, Giuliani G, Solari A, et al. Natalizumab for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;CD007621
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox EJ. Alemtuzumab in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Expert Rev Neurother 2010;10:1789–97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Final appraisal determination alemtuzumab for treating relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. London, UK: NICE; 2013. p. 1–62. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/14059/66001/66001.pdf [Last accessed August 2017]
   Google Scholar
• Palesh M, Jonsson PM, Jamshidi H, et al. Diffusion of interferon beta in Iran and its utilization in Tehran. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2008;17:934–41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikfar S, Kebriaeezadeh A, Dinarvand R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of different interferon beta products for relapsing-remitting and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: decision analysis based on long-term clinical data and switchable treatments. Daru 2013;21:50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983;33:1444–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palace J, Bregenzer T, Tremlett H, et al. UK multiple sclerosis risk-sharing scheme: a new natural history dataset and an improved Markov model. BMJ Open 2014;4:e004073
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scalfari A, Neuhaus A, Degenhardt A, et al. The natural history of multiple sclerosis, a geographically based study 10: relapses and long-term disability. Brain 2010;133:1914–29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hettle R, Harty G, Wong SL. Cost-effectiveness of cladribine tablets, alemtuzumab and natalizumab in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with high disease activity in England. J Med Econ 2018;21(7):676–686
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernandez L, Guo S, Toro-Diaz H, et al. Peginterferon beta-1a versus other self-injectable disease-modifying therapies in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Scotland: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Med Econ 2017;20:228–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melendez-Torres GJ, Auguste P, Armoiry X, et al. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of beta-interferon and glatiramer acetate for treating multiple sclerosis: systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2017;21:1–352
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang H, Duchesneau E, Foster R, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of ocrelizumab versus subcutaneous interferon beta-1a for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis. J Med Econ 2017;20:1056–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dashputre AA, Kamal KM, Pawar G. Cost-effectiveness of peginterferon beta-1a and alemtuzumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2017;23:666–76
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mauskopf J, Fay M, Iyer R, et al. Cost-effectiveness of delayed-release dimethyl fumarate for the treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis in the United States. J Med Econ 2016;6998:1–11
   Google Scholar
• Cohen JA, Coles AJ, Arnold DL, et al. Alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a as first-line treatment for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2012;380:1819–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coles AJ, Twyman CL, Arnold DL, et al. Alemtuzumab for patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis after disease-modifying therapy: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2012;380:1829–39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER). Disease-modifying therapies for relapsing remitting and primary-progressive multiple sclerosis: effectiveness and value. Boston, USA: ICER; 2017. p 1–253. Available at: https://icer-review.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CTAF_MS_Final_Report_030617.pdf [Last accessed January 2018]
   Google Scholar
• Patzold U, Pocklington PR. Course of multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand 1982;65:248–66
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tappenden P, Chilcott J, O’Hagan A, et al. Cost effectiveness of beta interferons and glatiramer acetate in the management of multiple sclerosis. Report to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE); 2001
   Google Scholar
• Tran K, Milev S, Jabr MF, et al. CADTH therapeutic review comparative clinical and cost-effectiveness of drug therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Can Agency Drugs Technol Health 2014;1:1–102
   Google Scholar
• Abdoli G. Estimation of social discount rate for Iran. Economic Research Review 2009;3(34):135–156
   Google Scholar
• Robberstad B. Estimation of private and social time preferences for health in northern Tanzania. Soc Sci Med 2005;61:1597–607
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• I.R. Iran GDP per capita (current US$) [Internet]. Washington, D. C.: World Bank. Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD/countries/IR [Last accessed January 12, 2016]
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Table: Threshold values for intervention cost-effectiveness by Region. Geneva: WHO; 2014
   Google Scholar
• Polman CH, O’Connor PW, Havrdova E, et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006;354:899–910
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coles AJ, Compston DAS, Selmaj KW, et al. Alemtuzumab vs interferon beta-1a in early multiple sclerosis. The CAMMS223 trial investigators. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1786–801
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamidi V, Couto E, Ringerike T, et al. A multiple treatment comparison of eleven disease-modifying drugs used for multiple sclerosis. J Clin Med Res 2018;10:88–105
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fogarty E, Schmitz S, Tubridy N, et al. Comparative efficacy of disease-modifying therapies for patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: systematic review and network meta-analysis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2016;9:23–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filippini G, Del Giovane C, Vacchi L, et al. Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane database Syst Rev 2013;6:CD008933
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalincik T, Brown JWL, Robertson N, et al. Treatment effectiveness of alemtuzumab compared with natalizumab, fingolimod, and interferon beta in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2017;16:271–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Alemtuzumab for treating relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Technology appraisal guidance TA312. London, UK: NICE; 2014. Available at: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta312 [Last accessed November 2016]
   Google Scholar
• Orme M, Kerrigan J, Tyas D, et al. The effect of disease, functional status, and relapses on the utility of people with multiple sclerosis in the UK. Value Health 2007;10:54–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prosser LA, Kuntz KM, Bar-Or A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of interferon beta-1a, interferon beta-1b, and glatiramer acetate in newly diagnosed non-primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Value Health 2004;7:554–68
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acaster S, Perard R, Chauhan D, et al. A forgotten aspect of the NICE reference case: an observational study of the health related quality of life impact on caregivers of people with multiple sclerosis. BMC Health Serv Res 2013;13:1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nickerson M, Cofield SS, Tyry T, et al. Impact of multiple sclerosis relapse: the NARCOMS participant perspective. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2015;4:234–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell JD, McQueen RB, Miravalle A, et al. Comparative effectiveness of early natalizumab treatment in JC virus-negative relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Am J Manag Care 2013;19:278–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Couto E, Hamidi V, Ringerike T, Odgaard-Jensen J, Harboe I, Klemp M. Medicines used for Multiple Sclerosis – A Health Technology Assessment. Report from Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Oslo: Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Oslo: 2016. Available at: https://www.fhi.no/globalassets/kss/filer/filer/publikasjoner/rapporter/20162/rapport_2016_ms-legemidlerv5.pdf [Last accessed January 2017]
   Google Scholar
• Matza LS, Cong Z, Chung K, et al. Utilities associated with subcutaneous injections and intravenous infusions for treatment of patients with bone metastases. Patient Prefer Adherence 2013;7:855–65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tariff of healthcare services in public and private sectors in Iran. Tehran: Iran Ministry of Health and Medical Education Press; 2016
   Google Scholar
• Rasekh HR, Imani A, Karimi, et al. Cost-utility analysis of immune tolerance induction therapy versus on-demand treatment with recombinant factor VII for hemophilia A with high titer inhibitors in Iran. Clin Outcomes Res 2011;207–212
   Google Scholar
• Coles AJ, Boyko AN, De Seze J, et al. Alemtuzumab durably improves clinical outcomes in patients with active RRMS in the absence of continuous treatment: 7-year follow-up of CARE-MS-I patients (TOPAZ study). Mult Scler J 2017;23:427–679
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oreja-Guevara C, Alroughani R, Brassat D, et al. Alemtuzumab demonstrated durable efficacy and safety in CARE-MS I patients switching from SC IFNB-1a: 5-year follow-up after alemtuzumab (TOPAZ study). Mult Scler J 2017;23:427–679
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coles AJ, Cohen JA, Fox EJ, et al. Alemtuzumab CARE-MS II 5-year follow-up: efficacy and safety findings. Neurology 2017;89:1117–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Havrdova E, Arnold DL, Cohen JA, et al. Alemtuzumab CARE-MS I 5-year follow-up. Neurology 2017;89:1107 LP–1116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuohy O, Costelloe L, Hill-Cawthorne G, et al. Alemtuzumab treatment of multiple sclerosis: long-term safety and efficacy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2015;86:208–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olek MJ. Treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in adults. In: Post TW, editor. UpToDate. Waltham, MA: UpToDate; 2012. p. 1–18
   Google Scholar
• Statistical center of Iran. Tehran, Iran. Available at: https://www.amar.org.ir [Last accessed January 2017]
   Google Scholar
• Langer-Gould A, Atlas SW, Green AJ, et al. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in a patient treated with natalizumab. N Engl J Med 2005;353:375–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleinschmidt-DeMasters BK, Tyler KL. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy complicating treatment with natalizumab and interferon beta-1a for multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2005;353:369–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniels GH, Vladic A, Brinar V, et al. Alemtuzumab-related thyroid dysfunction in a phase 2 trial of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2014;99:80–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cuker A, Coles AJ, Sullivan H, et al. A distinctive form of immune thrombocytopenia in a phase 2 study of alemtuzumab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Blood 2011;118:6299–305
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Twyman C, Oyuela P, Palmer J, et al. Thyroid autoimmune adverse events in patients treated with alemtuzumab for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: four-year follow-up of the CARE-MS studies (P2.199). Neurology 2014;82
   Google Scholar
• Tsourdi E, Gruber M, Rauner M, et al. Graves’ disease after treatment with Alemtuzumab for multiple sclerosis. Hormones 2015;14:148–53
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Willis M, Robertson NP. Drug safety evaluation of alemtuzumab for multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2014;13:1115–24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selmaj KW, Habek M, Bass A, et al. Efficacy and safety of alemtuzumab in patients with RRMS is durable over 10 years: follow-up from the CAMMS223 study (P5. 338). Neurology 2017;88:P5–338
   Google Scholar
• Tan CS, Koralnik IJ. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and other disorders caused by JC virus: clinical features and pathogenesis. Lancet Neurol 2010;9:425–37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TYSABRI® (natalizumab): PML incidence in patients receiving TYSABRI. Cambridge, MA. Available at: https://medinfo.biogenidec.com/medinfo [Last accessed October 22, 2016]
   Google Scholar
• Fox RJ, Rudick RA. Risk stratification and patient counseling for natalizumab in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2012;78:436–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloomgren G, Richman S, Hotermans C, et al. Risk of natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1870–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger JR, Fox RJ. Reassessing the risk of natalizumab-associated PML. J Neurovirol 2016;22:533–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGuigan C, Craner M, Guadagno J, et al. Stratification and monitoring of natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy risk: recommendations from an expert group. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016;87:117–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alroughani R, Akhtar S, Ahmed SF, et al. JC virus seroprevalence and seroconversion in multiple sclerosis cohort: a Middle-Eastern study. J Neurol Sci 2016;360:61–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calabrese L. A rational approach to PML for the clinician. Cleve Clin J Med 2011;78(Suppl 2):S38–S41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koralnik IJ. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy: treatment and prognosis. In: Post TW, editor. UpToDate. Waltham, MA: UpToDate; 2016. p. 1–13
   Google Scholar
• Dahlhaus S, Hoepner R, Chan A, et al. Disease course and outcome of 15 monocentrically treated natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2013;84:1068–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt D, Giovannoni G. Natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leucoencephalopathy: a practical approach to risk profiling and monitoring. Pract Neurol 2012;12:25–35
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• George JN. Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in adults: initial treatment and prognosis. In: Post TW, editor. UpToDate. Waltham, MA: UpToDate; 2016. p. 1–11
   Google Scholar
• Havrdova E, Horakova D, Kovarova I. Alemtuzumab in the treatment of multiple sclerosis: key clinical trial results and considerations for use. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2015;8:31–45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor P, Goodman A, Kappos L, et al. Long-term safety and effectiveness of natalizumab redosing and treatment in the STRATA MS study. Neurology 2014;83:78–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GHO. By category. Life tables by country - Iran (Islamic Republic of). Geneva: WHO. Available at: http://apps.who.int/gho/data/?theme=main&vid=60760 [Last accessed May 27, 2018]
   Google Scholar
• Pokorski RJ. Long-term survival experience of patients with multiple sclerosis. J Insur Med 1997;29:101–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Briggs A, Sculpher M, Claxton K. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006
   Google Scholar
• Smith A, Hashemi L, Ma I. Cost-utility analysis of alemtuzumab versus natalizumab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: US payer perspective. Value Health 2016;19:A431
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Djambazov S, Vekov T. Cost-effectiveness analysis of alemtuzumab for the treatment of multiple sclerosis in Bulgaria, 2016. 22nd Annu. Int. Meet. Int. Soc. Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. poster) abstr. PND31; 2017
   Google Scholar
• Taheri S, Yousefi N, Sahraian M, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of alemtuzumab in comparison with natalizumab, intramuscular interferon beta-1a, subcutaneous interferon beta-1b, and fingolimod for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Iran. Value Health 2017;20:A723
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chirikov V, Ma I, Joshi N, et al. Cost-effectiveness of alemtuzumab in the treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis in the United States and societal spillover effects. Value Health 2017;20:A722
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis M, Harding K, Pickersgil LT, et al. Alemtuzumab for multiple sclerosis: long term follow-up in a multi-centre cohort. Mult Scler 2015;22(9):1215–1223
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dubey D, Cano C, Stuve O. Intractable and highly active relapsing multiple sclerosis – role of alemtuzumab. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 2015;11:2405
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox EJ, Vartanian TK, Zamvil SS. The immunogenicity of disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis: clinical implications for neurologists. Neurologist 2007;13:355–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coyle PK. Current evaluation of alemtuzumab in multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2014;14:127–35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence; 2004
   Google Scholar
• Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. AMCP format for fomulary submissions, version 4. Virginia, USA: ACMP; 2016. Available at: www.amcp.org/FormatV4/ [Last accessed November 1, 2018]
   Google Scholar
• Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment. Guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: Canada. 2nd ed. Ottawa: Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (CCHOTA); 2014
   Google Scholar
• Bozkaya D, Livingston T, Migliaccio-Walle K, et al. The cost-effectiveness of disease-modifying therapies for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Med Econ 2017;20:297–302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montgomery SM, Maruszczak MJ, Slater D, et al. A discrete event simulation to model the cost-utility of fingolimod and natalizumab in rapidly evolving severe relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in the UK. J Med Econ 2017;20:474–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Su W, Kansal A, Vicente C, et al. The cost-effectiveness of delayed-release dimethyl fumarate for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Canada. J Med Econ 2016;19:718–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernandez L, Guo S, Kinter E, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of peginterferon beta-1a compared with interferon beta-1a and glatiramer acetate in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in the United States. J Med Econ 2016;6998:1–12
   Google Scholar
• Gani R, Giovannoni G, Bates D, et al. Cost-effectiveness analyses of natalizumab (Tysabri) compared with other disease-modifying therapies for people with highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in the UK. Pharmacoeconomics 2008;26:617–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar