Date: 23 Sep 2012
Cost Effectiveness of Denosumab Compared with Oral Bisphosphonates in the Treatment of Post-Menopausal Osteoporotic Women in Belgium
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Background: Denosumab has recently been shown to be well tolerated, to increase bone mineral density (BMD) and to significantly reduce the risk of hip, vertebral and non-vertebral fractures in the FREEDOM (Fracture REduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis every 6 Months) trial. It is becoming increasingly important to evaluate not only the therapeutic value of a new drug but also the cost effectiveness compared with the most relevant treatment alternatives.
Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the cost effectiveness of denosumab compared with oral bisphosphonates (branded and generic drugs) in the treatment of post-menopausal osteoporotic women in Belgium.
Methods: Cost effectiveness of 3 years of treatment with denosumab was compared with branded risedronate and branded and generic alendronate using an updated version of a previously validated Markov microsimulation model. The model was populated with relevant cost, adherence and epidemiological data for Belgium from a payer perspective and the results were presented as costs per QALY gained (€, year 2009 values). Analyses were performed in populations (aged ≥60 years) in which osteoporosis medications are currently reimbursed in many European countries, i.e. those with BMD T-score of −2.5 or less or prevalent vertebral fracture. Patients receiving denosumab were assumed to have a 46% lower risk of discontinuation than those receiving oral bisphosphonates, and the effect of denosumab after treatment cessation was assumed to decline linearly to zero over a maximum of 1 year.
Results: Denosumab was cost effective compared with all other therapies, assuming a willingness to pay of ¬40 000 per QALY gained. In particular, denosumab was found to be cost effective compared with branded alendronate and risedronate at a threshold value of ¬30 000 per QALY and denosumab was dominant (i.e. lower cost and greater effectiveness) compared with risedronate from the age of 70 years in women with a T-score of −2.5 or less and no prior fractures. The cost effectiveness of denosumab compared with generic alendronate was estimated at ¬38 514, h22 220 and ¬27 862 per QALY for women aged 60, 70 and 80 years, respectively, with T-scores of −2.5 or less. The equivalent values were ¬37 167, ¬19 718 and h19 638 per QALY for women with prevalent vertebral fractures.
Conclusion: This study suggests, on the basis of currently available data, that denosumab is a cost-effective strategy compared with oral bisphosphonates (including generic alendronate) for the treatment of post-menopausal osteoporotic women, aged ≥60 years in Belgium. Denosumab therefore appears to have the potential to become a first-line treatment for post-menopausal women with osteoporosis. However, further studies would be required to evaluate the long-term safety and adherence of denosumab in real-world clinical practice as well as head-to-head effectiveness compared with oral bisphosphonates.
Siris ES, Selby PL, Saag KG, et al. Impact of osteoporosis treatment adherence on fracture rates in North America and Europe. Am J Med 2009; 122 Suppl. 2: S3–13CrossRef
Sambrook P. Compliance with treatment in osteoporosis patients: an ongoing problem. Aust Fam Physician 2006; 35 (3): 135–7PubMed
European Medicines Agency. CHMP assessment report for Prolia. London: European Medicines Agency, 2009 Mar 18 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Public_assessment_report/human/001120/WC500093529.pdf [Accessed 2010 July 27]
Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007
Drummond M, Sculpher M, O’Brien B, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007
Hiligsmann M, Ethgen O, Bruyere O, et al. An economic evaluation of quantitative ultrasonometry as pre-screening test for the identification of patients with osteoporosis. Dis Manage Health Outcomes 2008; 16: 429–38CrossRef
Boonen S, Kaufman JM, Reginster JY, et al. Patient assessment using standardized bone mineral density values and a national reference database: implementing uniform thresholds for the reimbursement of osteoporosis treatments in Belgium. Osteoporos Int 2003; 14 (2): 110–5PubMed
National Institute of Statistics. Directorate-General Statistics and Economic Information. Mortality tables 2004 and 2002–2004. Brussels: National Institute of Statistics, 2008
Silverman SL, Minshall ME, Shen W, et al. The relationship of health-related quality of life to prevalent and incident vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation Study. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 44 (11): 2611–9PubMedCrossRef
Belgian Federal Government. FPS economy, SMEs, independent professions and energy: consumer price indexes. 2009 [online]. Available from URL: http://economie.fgov.be/fr/statistiques/chiffres/economie/prix_consommation/indices_prix_consommation/index.jsp [Accessed 2010 Mar 1]
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness prepared for the guideline ‘Osteoporosis: assessment of fracture risk and the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in individuals at high risk’. London: NICE, 2008 Sep [online]. Available from URL: http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11621/42362/42362.pdf [Accessed 2010 Mar 1]
Belgian Center for Pharmacotherapeutic Information [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cbip.be/GGR/MPG/MPG_NI.cfm#MP_04090 [Accessed 2010 Apr 1]
Greenspan SL, Emkey RD, Bone HG, et al. Significant differential effects of alendronate, estrogen, or combination therapy on the rate of bone loss after discontinuation of treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137 (11): 875–83PubMed
Strom O, Landfeldt E, Robbins S, et al. Adherence to treatment of osteoporosis and fracture risk: the Swedish adherence register analysis (SARA) [abstract no. P109]. Osteoporos Int 2010; 21 Suppl. 1: S29
Kendler DL, McClung MR, Freemantle N, et al. on behalf of the DAPS Investigators. Adherence, preference, and satisfaction of postmenopausal women taking denosumab and alendronate. Osteoporos Int. Epub 2010 Sep 9
Brown JP, Prince RL, Deal C, et al. Comparison of the effect of denosumab and alendronate on bone mineral density and biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: a randomized, blinded, phase 3 trial. J Bone Miner Res 2009; 14: 1–34
Cleemput I, Neyt M, Thiry N, et al. Valeurs seuils pour le rapport coût-efficacitéen soins de santé. Health Technology Assessment (HTA). Bruxelles: centre fédéral d’expertise des soins de santé (KCE), 2008. KCE Reports 100B (D/2008/10.273
Tosteson AM, Malton LJ, Dawson-Hughes B, et al. National Osteoporosis Foundation Guide Committee. Costeffective osteoporosis treatment thresholds: the United States perspective. Osteoporos Int 2008; 4: 437–47CrossRef
- Cost Effectiveness of Denosumab Compared with Oral Bisphosphonates in the Treatment of Post-Menopausal Osteoporotic Women in Belgium
Volume 29, Issue 10 , pp 895-911
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer International Publishing
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors