H-3 COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF OMALIZUMAB FOR THE TREATMENT OF ADULTS WITH MODERATE TO SEVERE PERSISTENT ASTHMA: RESULTS FROM A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL IN JAPAN

Tuesday, October 25, 2011: 10:30 AM
Grand Ballroom CD (Hyatt Regency Chicago)
(ESP) Applied Health Economics, Services, and Policy Research

Candidate for the Lee B. Lusted Student Prize Competition


Toshitaka Morishima, MD, Hiroshi Ikai, MD, PhD and Yuichi Imanaka, MD, PhD, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan

Purpose: Omalizumab, a recombinant humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, reduces risk of exacerbations and improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with moderate to severe persistent asthma. Several economic evaluations of omalizumab have been reported previously. Our objective was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of omalizumab, using results of a randomized controlled trial which enrolled Asian population for the first time and was conducted in Japan.

Method: We developed a Marcov model comparing omalizumab plus standard therapy with standard therapy alone, on the basis of efficacy data from the randomized placebo-controlled double-blind trial and cost data of Japan. Our model had a lifetime horizon in which five-year omalizumab plus standard therapy was followed by standard therapy alone. The study cohort matched the clinical trial population with an average age of 50 and 50% men. Omalizumab provides different benefits for patients with persistent asthma, although no predictive factor for response has been found. Non-responders who represented little effect of omalizumab reverted back to standard therapy after 16-week omalizumab therapy. We assumed that patients could transition every week among symptom-free state, day-to-day state, and exacerbation state, and that patients in asthma-related hospitalization state were at risk of dying from asthma exacerbation. We derived preference-based utility values from another study examining relationship between asthma control level and HRQoL because the clinical trial in Japan failed to measure HRQoL convertible into utilities. Costs from a societal perspective included estimates for drugs, medical resource uses, and lost productivity.

Result: The mean lifetime discounted costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were $118,000 and 16.097 for omalizumab plus standard therapy, and $47,000 and 16.003 for standard therapy alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $751,000/QALY. One-way sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were sensitive to asthma-related mortality, exacerbation rates, symptom-free rates, and omalizumab price.

Conclusion: The result of the base case analysis suggested that omalizumab was not cost-effective given a willingness to pay of $54,000 in Japan. However, omalizumab possesses a unique mechanism and is required for the treatment of persistent asthma. The cost-effectiveness of omalizumab would be improved if the price of omalizumab is cut down and omalizumab therapy is confined to patients with higher asthma mortality or exacerbation risk.