Format

Send to

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

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.

Author information

1
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

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.

PMID:
19089488
DOI:
10.1007/s10067-008-1060-4
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center