scholarly journals A Budget impact analysis of pegfilgrastim biosimilar in the treatment of febrile neutropenia in Italy

ABOUTOPEN ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-8
Author(s):  
Roberto Ravasio ◽  
Lorenzo Antonuzzo ◽  
Marco Danova ◽  
Paolo Pronzato

Introduction: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) can significantly reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) among certain patients receiving chemotherapy. FN is associated with significant clinical and nonclinical complications. At present, the patent protection of pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®) has expired, and a biosimilar (Ziextenzo®) has been approved. Since the biosimilar price is expected to be lower as compared with the originator’s, the present Drug Budget Impact analysis tries to evaluate whether and how much profitable the biosimilar availability will be for the Italian NHS, in terms of cost containment (savings).Methods and Results: The model time horizon extends to five years. The initial overall number of treatments with pegfilgrastim is estimated based on the number of pegfilgrastim packages (assuming a recommended dose of 6 mg is administered after each cytotoxic chemotherapy) and kept constant in time. The model assumes that, year by year, the number of treatments with the originator will partly switch to the biosimilar (according to an uptake rate assumed). The results show that the availability of the biosimilar would provide an €6.4 million cumulated savings to the NHS in the five years.Conclusions: According to the present analysis, the availability of the biosimilar would generate cumulated savings (in five years) as high as €6.4 million for the Italian NHS.  (HTA & Market Access)

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. A529 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Singh ◽  
RK Jha ◽  
D Mazumder ◽  
A Kapoor

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S568
Author(s):  
W. Padula ◽  
S. Malaviya ◽  
N. Reid ◽  
F. Chingcuanco ◽  
J. Ballreich ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1612.2-1613
Author(s):  
J. M. Bello-Gualtero ◽  
O. J. Calixto ◽  
G. Salguedo ◽  
Y. M. Chamorro-Melo ◽  
C. A. Camargo Rodríguez ◽  
...  

Background:Spondyloarthritis refers to a family of diseases, of which ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis are responsible for axial impairment. Previously, the only treatment available were NSAIDs, which control activity and stop radiological progression, but at the expense of increased adverse effects, such as cardiovascular risk, dyspepsia and chronic renal failure. For the past 2 decades, biological therapy has been available, which means an increase in care costs.Objectives:The objective of this study is to perform a budget impact analysis of biologic therapy.Methods:To do a budget impact analysis from the perspective of the payer, comparing biological therapy with coventional therapy for the treatment of spondyloarthritis. Demographic characterization of the population attended at the Central Military Hospital. Time horizon from 2012 to 2018, taking the activity count according to the hospital’s billing and the prices of the activities of the state body SISMED. Exchange rates at the end of 2018.Results:The patients attended were 117, mostly men (63, 25%), average age 46, 4 years (SD 13), with disease diagnosis time of 9, 8 years (SD 9, 6). In the budget impact analysis, it is observed that 25% of patients were on DMARDs therapy, 22% with NSAIDs and 96% with biologic therapy. The average year/patient cost with NSAIDs alone would be EUR 381, with DMARDs only EUR 9,318 and, if only biological therapy was used, EUR 423. Within the total number of patients, the average annual cost, including the possibility of combining these drugs, amounted to EUR 5,403Conclusion:Including biological therapy in the care of patients with spondyloarthritis can increase up to 24 times the annual cost per patient. This increase is not only due to higher market value, it also relates to the need for more medical procedures and diagnostic follow-up tests.References:[1]Strömbeck, et al. Cost of Illness from the Public Payers’ Perspective in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis in Rheumatological Care. J Rheumatol 2010;37;2348-2355.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laure Benjamin ◽  
Valérie Buthion ◽  
Michaël Iskedjian ◽  
Bechara Farah ◽  
Catherine Rioufol ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S81
Author(s):  
O. Siskou ◽  
A. Koutsovasilis ◽  
J. Doupis ◽  
I. Karagkouni ◽  
O. Konstantakopoulou ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document