Fingolimod versus natalizumab in patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility study in Iran. (3rd April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rezaee, Mehdi; Izadi, Sadegh; Keshavarz, Khosro; Borhanihaghighi, Afshin; Ravangard, Ramin
• Is Part Of: Journal of medical economics. Volume 22:Number 4(2019)
• Page Start: 297
• Page End: 305
• Publication Date: 2019-04-03
• Subjects: Cost-effectiveness -- cost-utility -- relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis -- fingolimod -- natalizumab; Medical care -- Cost control -- Periodicals; Medical economics -- Periodicals; 362.10941
• DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2018.1560750
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1369-6998

Abstract

Abstract: Aims: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, autoimmune, and inflammatory disease. If the first-line medicines are not effective enough, specialists will prescribe second-line medicines, such as natalizumab and fingolimod. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of fingolimod with those of natalizumab in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) in Iran, Fars province in 2016. Materials and methods: This study was a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility study in which a Markov model was used. The study used the census method to evaluate 81 patients with MS in Iran, Fars province who were being treated with fingolimod and natalizumab. In this study, costs were collected from the societal perspective, and the outcomes were the mean of relapse avoided rate and QALY. The cost data collection form, Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale, and EQ-5D-3L questionnaire were used to collect the required data. Results: The results showed that, compared to natalizumab, patients who used fingolimod had decreased costs (58, 087 vs 201, 707), increased QALYs (8.09 vs 7.37), and a better relapse avoided rate (6.27 vs 5.83) per patient over the lifetime. The results of the sensitivity analysis showed that the results of the study were robust. Also, the results of the scatter plots showed that fingolimod was more cost-effective based on the QALY and relapse avoided rate in 62% and 56%, respectively, of the simulations for the thresholds below $15, 657 for the studied patients. Conclusions: According to the results of this study, the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of fingolimod were higher than those of natalizumab. Therefore, it is recommended that treatment with fingolimod be the first priority of second-line treatment for MS patients, and policy-makers and health managers are encouraged to make efforts in order to increase insurance coverage and reduce the out-of-pocket payments of these patients.