Cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States

Alison T Stopeck, Adam Brufsky, Lisa Kennedy, Sumi Bhatta, Debajyoti Bhowmik, Jacqueline Buchanan, Nicolas Despiegel, Guy Hechmati

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aims: Bone complications (also known as skeletal-related events [SREs]) pose significant health and financial burdens on patients with bone metastases. Denosumab demonstrated superiority over zoledronic acid in delaying the time to first SRE. This study examined the lifetime cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs zoledronic acid from both US payer and societal perspectives. Methods: This analysis used a lifetime Markov model and included patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other solid tumors and bone metastases. The societal perspective included direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect costs associated with denosumab and zoledronic acid; the payer perspective included direct medical costs only. Bone complication rates for each tumor type were estimated from three pivotal phase 3 studies and modified to reflect real-world incidence. Results: From a societal perspective, compared with zoledronic acid, denosumab use resulted in an incremental cost of $9,043, an incremental benefit of 0.128 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), a lifetime cost per QALY of $70,730, and a net monetary benefit (NMB) of $10,135 in favor of denosumab. Direct drug costs for denosumab ($28,352) were higher than zoledronic acid/untreated ($578), but were offset by reduced costs associated with bone complications. From a payer perspective, denosumab use was associated with an incremental cost of $13,396, and an incremental benefit of 0.128 QALYs, for a cost of $104,778 per QALY and an NMB of $5,782 in favor of denosumab. Limitations: Some model inputs had limited information and, given that the results may be sensitive to changes in these inputs, our findings should be interpreted within the context of the data inputs and modeling assumptions used in the analysis. Conclusions: Denosumab is a cost-effective option to prevent bone complications in patients with solid tumors when considering both payer and broader societal perspectives.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of medical economics
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

zoledronic acid
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Neoplasm Metastasis
Bone and Bones
Costs and Cost Analysis
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Neoplasms
Prostatic Neoplasms
Denosumab
Drug Costs
Breast Neoplasms

Keywords

  • bone metastases
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis
  • denosumab
  • net monetary benefit
  • zoledronic acid

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States. / Stopeck, Alison T; Brufsky, Adam; Kennedy, Lisa; Bhatta, Sumi; Bhowmik, Debajyoti; Buchanan, Jacqueline; Despiegel, Nicolas; Hechmati, Guy.

In: Journal of medical economics, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stopeck, Alison T ; Brufsky, Adam ; Kennedy, Lisa ; Bhatta, Sumi ; Bhowmik, Debajyoti ; Buchanan, Jacqueline ; Despiegel, Nicolas ; Hechmati, Guy. / Cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States. In: Journal of medical economics. 2019.
@article{de20a1c20f66427bb94961ee1342652d,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States",
abstract = "Aims: Bone complications (also known as skeletal-related events [SREs]) pose significant health and financial burdens on patients with bone metastases. Denosumab demonstrated superiority over zoledronic acid in delaying the time to first SRE. This study examined the lifetime cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs zoledronic acid from both US payer and societal perspectives. Methods: This analysis used a lifetime Markov model and included patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other solid tumors and bone metastases. The societal perspective included direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect costs associated with denosumab and zoledronic acid; the payer perspective included direct medical costs only. Bone complication rates for each tumor type were estimated from three pivotal phase 3 studies and modified to reflect real-world incidence. Results: From a societal perspective, compared with zoledronic acid, denosumab use resulted in an incremental cost of $9,043, an incremental benefit of 0.128 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), a lifetime cost per QALY of $70,730, and a net monetary benefit (NMB) of $10,135 in favor of denosumab. Direct drug costs for denosumab ($28,352) were higher than zoledronic acid/untreated ($578), but were offset by reduced costs associated with bone complications. From a payer perspective, denosumab use was associated with an incremental cost of $13,396, and an incremental benefit of 0.128 QALYs, for a cost of $104,778 per QALY and an NMB of $5,782 in favor of denosumab. Limitations: Some model inputs had limited information and, given that the results may be sensitive to changes in these inputs, our findings should be interpreted within the context of the data inputs and modeling assumptions used in the analysis. Conclusions: Denosumab is a cost-effective option to prevent bone complications in patients with solid tumors when considering both payer and broader societal perspectives.",
keywords = "bone metastases, Cost-effectiveness analysis, denosumab, net monetary benefit, zoledronic acid",
author = "Stopeck, {Alison T} and Adam Brufsky and Lisa Kennedy and Sumi Bhatta and Debajyoti Bhowmik and Jacqueline Buchanan and Nicolas Despiegel and Guy Hechmati",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/13696998.2019.1651122",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Medical Economics",
issn = "1369-6998",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of denosumab for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in the United States

AU - Stopeck, Alison T

AU - Brufsky, Adam

AU - Kennedy, Lisa

AU - Bhatta, Sumi

AU - Bhowmik, Debajyoti

AU - Buchanan, Jacqueline

AU - Despiegel, Nicolas

AU - Hechmati, Guy

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Aims: Bone complications (also known as skeletal-related events [SREs]) pose significant health and financial burdens on patients with bone metastases. Denosumab demonstrated superiority over zoledronic acid in delaying the time to first SRE. This study examined the lifetime cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs zoledronic acid from both US payer and societal perspectives. Methods: This analysis used a lifetime Markov model and included patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other solid tumors and bone metastases. The societal perspective included direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect costs associated with denosumab and zoledronic acid; the payer perspective included direct medical costs only. Bone complication rates for each tumor type were estimated from three pivotal phase 3 studies and modified to reflect real-world incidence. Results: From a societal perspective, compared with zoledronic acid, denosumab use resulted in an incremental cost of $9,043, an incremental benefit of 0.128 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), a lifetime cost per QALY of $70,730, and a net monetary benefit (NMB) of $10,135 in favor of denosumab. Direct drug costs for denosumab ($28,352) were higher than zoledronic acid/untreated ($578), but were offset by reduced costs associated with bone complications. From a payer perspective, denosumab use was associated with an incremental cost of $13,396, and an incremental benefit of 0.128 QALYs, for a cost of $104,778 per QALY and an NMB of $5,782 in favor of denosumab. Limitations: Some model inputs had limited information and, given that the results may be sensitive to changes in these inputs, our findings should be interpreted within the context of the data inputs and modeling assumptions used in the analysis. Conclusions: Denosumab is a cost-effective option to prevent bone complications in patients with solid tumors when considering both payer and broader societal perspectives.

AB - Aims: Bone complications (also known as skeletal-related events [SREs]) pose significant health and financial burdens on patients with bone metastases. Denosumab demonstrated superiority over zoledronic acid in delaying the time to first SRE. This study examined the lifetime cost-effectiveness of denosumab vs zoledronic acid from both US payer and societal perspectives. Methods: This analysis used a lifetime Markov model and included patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other solid tumors and bone metastases. The societal perspective included direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect costs associated with denosumab and zoledronic acid; the payer perspective included direct medical costs only. Bone complication rates for each tumor type were estimated from three pivotal phase 3 studies and modified to reflect real-world incidence. Results: From a societal perspective, compared with zoledronic acid, denosumab use resulted in an incremental cost of $9,043, an incremental benefit of 0.128 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), a lifetime cost per QALY of $70,730, and a net monetary benefit (NMB) of $10,135 in favor of denosumab. Direct drug costs for denosumab ($28,352) were higher than zoledronic acid/untreated ($578), but were offset by reduced costs associated with bone complications. From a payer perspective, denosumab use was associated with an incremental cost of $13,396, and an incremental benefit of 0.128 QALYs, for a cost of $104,778 per QALY and an NMB of $5,782 in favor of denosumab. Limitations: Some model inputs had limited information and, given that the results may be sensitive to changes in these inputs, our findings should be interpreted within the context of the data inputs and modeling assumptions used in the analysis. Conclusions: Denosumab is a cost-effective option to prevent bone complications in patients with solid tumors when considering both payer and broader societal perspectives.

KW - bone metastases

KW - Cost-effectiveness analysis

KW - denosumab

KW - net monetary benefit

KW - zoledronic acid

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071162055&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071162055&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/13696998.2019.1651122

DO - 10.1080/13696998.2019.1651122

M3 - Article

C2 - 31364885

AN - SCOPUS:85071162055

JO - Journal of Medical Economics

JF - Journal of Medical Economics

SN - 1369-6998

ER -