Cost Effectiveness of Denosumab versus Oral Bisphosphonates for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in the US
In the US, 26 % of women aged ≥65 years, and over 50 % of women aged ≥85 years are affected with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO). Each year, the total direct health care costs are estimated to be $US12–18 billion.
The cost effectiveness of denosumab versus oral bisphosphonates in postmenopausal osteoporotic women from a US third-party payer perspective was evaluated.
A lifetime cohort Markov model was developed with seven health states: ‘well’, hip fracture, vertebral fracture, ‘other’ osteoporotic fracture, post-hip fracture, post-vertebral fracture, and dead. During each cycle, patients could have a fracture, remain healthy, remain in a post-fracture state or die. Relative fracture risk reductions, background fracture risks, mortality rates, treatment-specific persistence rate, utilities, and medical and drug costs were derived using published sources. Expected costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated for generic alendronate, denosumab, branded risedronate, and branded ibandronate in the overall PMO population and high-risk subgroups: (a) ≥2 of the following risks: >70 years of age, bone mineral density (BMD) T score less than or equal to −3.0, and prevalent vertebral fracture; and (b) ≥75 years of age. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3 % annually, and all costs were inflated to 2012 US dollars. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying parameters e.g., efficacies of interventions, costs, utilities, and the medication persistence ratio.
In the overall PMO population, total lifetime costs for alendronate, denosumab, risedronate, and ibandronate were $US64,400, $US67,400, $US67,600 and $US69,200, respectively. Total QALYs were 8.2804, 8.3155, 8.2735 and 8.2691, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for denosumab versus generic alendronate was $US85,100/QALY. Risedronate and ibandronate were dominated by denosumab. In the high-risk subgroup (a), total costs for alendronate, denosumab, risedronate and ibandronate were $US70,400, $US70,800, $US74,000 and $US76,900, respectively. Total QALYs were 7.2006, 7.2497, 7.1969 and 7.1841, respectively. Denosumab had an ICER of $US7,900/QALY versus generic alendronate and dominated all other strategies. Denosumab dominated all strategies in women aged ≥75 years. Base-case results between denosumab and generic alendronate were most sensitive to the relative risk of hip fracture for both drugs and the cost of denosumab.
In each PMO population examined, denosumab represented good value for money compared with branded bisphosphonates. Furthermore, denosumab was either cost effective or dominant compared with generic alendronate in the high-risk subgroups.
- 2.Kanis JA. WHO Technical Report 2007. University of Sheffield, UK.Google Scholar
- 4.US Department of Health and Human Services. Bone health and osteoporosis: a report of the Surgeon General. Rockville: US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General; 2004.Google Scholar
- 16.Denosumab (Prolia) Prescribing Information, June 2010I.Google Scholar
- 17.National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (UK). 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’. National Collaborating Centre for Nursing and Supportive Care, September 2008. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=download&o=42362.
- 18.Bone HG, Bolognese MA, Yuen CK, et al. Effects of denosumab treatment and discontinuation on bone mineral density and bone turnover markers in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96:972–80.Google Scholar
- 22.http://www.Mortality.org. US Life Tables 2007.
- 25.Kanis J, et al. Excess mortality after vertebral fracture. Sheffield: WHO Collaborating Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases; 2002.Google Scholar
- 33.Silverman SL, Minshall ME, Shen W, Harper KD, Xie S. 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):2611–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Marketscan Database Analysis. Data on file-Amgen 2010.Google Scholar
- 38.National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS) Data 2006—National Center for Health Statistics: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Google Scholar
- 40.Stevenson M, Davis S. Analyses of the cost-effectiveness of pooled alendronate and risedronate, compared with strontium ranelate, raloxifene, edifronate and teriparatide. 2006. http://www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?0=370643. Accessed 12 May 2008.
- 41.Healthcare Costs & Utilization Project Database based on US Nationwide Inpatient Sample. http://hcupnet.ahrq.gov/.
- 42.Denosumab Clinical Study Report, Nov 2008.Google Scholar
- 47.Boonen S, McClung M, Minisola S, et al. 2009. Effect of denosumab on the incidence of hip, new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures over 3 years among postmenopausal women with higher fracture risk: a subgroup analysis from the FREEDOM study. J Bone Miner Res 24(Suppl 1). http://www.asbmr.org/Meetings/AnnualMeeting/AbstractDetail.aspx?aid=da35831c-de93-4607-8b12-b7fcaf42f45d. Accessed March 23 2012.
- 49.McClung MR, Boonen S, Torring O, et al. Effect of denosumab treatment on the risk of fractures in subgroups of women with postmenopausal ostoeoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 2011. doi:10.1002/jbmr.536.
- 51.Meadows ES, Klein R, Rousculp MD, et al. Cost-effectiveness of preventative therapies for postmenopausal women with osteopenia. BMC Womens Health. 2007;7(6):1–9.Google Scholar
- 52.National Osteoporosis Foundation. Osteoporos Int. 1998; (Suppl 4)S7–S80.Google Scholar
- 54.Physician’s Fee and Coding Guide 2012. MAG Mutual Healthcare Solutions, 2011.Google Scholar
- 55.Drug Topics Red Book. Montvale: Thomson Healthcare; 2010.Google Scholar
- 56.AnalySource 2011. WAC Pricing, November 1, 2011.Google Scholar