Valutazione economica del sistema di aferesi per la rimozione di granulociti e macrofagi (Adacolumn®) rispetto a biologico nel trattamento della colite ulcerosa moderata-severa in pazienti steroido-dipendenti o resistenti in Italia

  • R. Ravasio
  • G. De Silvestro
  • A. Saggioro
  • G. C. Sturniolo
  • P. Vernia
Articolo Originale
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

Background

The treatment of chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is always a challenge for gastroenterologists dealing with this type of condition. The development of granulocyte-monocyte apheresis (GMA) appears to be an innovative approach, comprising both treatment safety and therapeutic potential.

Objective

To assess the cost-consequence of granulocyte monocyte adsorption—apheresis (GMA-Apheresis; Adacolumn®) versus infliximab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) in steroid-dependent or steroid-resistant patients.

Methods

One-year cost-consequence analysis from the Italian National Health Service (NHS) perspective using a decision tree model was carried out. Probabilities of each event were derived from literature and an expert panel. Direct medical costs were obtained from official sources (€2013).

Results

The average annual cost per patient who started the treatment with GMA-Apheresis was estimated to be €13,931.33; the cost was estimated to be €15,179.08, starting the treatment with infliximab. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the results of the base case.

Conclusions

We performed a cost-consequence analysis focused on the use of GMA-Apheresis (Adacolumn®) in the therapeutic management of moderate-to-severe UC in steroid-dependent or steroid-resistant patients. From the Italian NHS perspective, GMA-Apheresis is a cost-saving strategy compared with infliximab.

Notes

Ringraziamenti

Questa ricerca è stata supportata da un grant educazionale messo a disposizione da Otsuka Pharmaceutical Italy S.r.l.

Bibliografia

  1. 1.
    Dignass A, Van Assche G, Lindsay JO, et al.. For the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation (ECCO). The second European evidence-based consensus on the diagnosis and management of Crohn’s disease: current management. J Crohns Colitis. 2010;4:28–62. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Danese S, Fiocchi C. Ulcerative colitis. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:1713–25. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vecchi M, Vernia P, Riegler G, et al.. Therapeutic landscape for ulcerative colitis: where is the Adacolumn® system and where should it be? Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2013;6:1–7. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lichtenstein GR, Rutgeerts P, Sandborn WJ, et al.. A pooled analysis of infections, malignancy, and mortality in infliximab- and immunomodulator-treated adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107:1051–63. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Silva S, Devlin S, Panaccione R. Optimizing the safety of biologic therapy for IBD. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;7:93–101. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saniabadi AR, Hanai H, Fukunaga K, et al.. Therapeutic leukocytapheresis for inflammatory bowel disease. Transfus Apher Sci. 2007;37:2191–200. Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shimoyama T, Sawada K, Hiwatashi N, et al.. Safety and efficacy of granulocyte and monocyte adsorption apheresis in patients with active ulcerative colitis: a multicenter study. J Clin Apher. 2001;16:1–9. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saniabadi AR, Hanai H, Suzuki Y, et al.. Adacolumn for selective leukocytapheresis as a non-pharmacological treatment for patients with disorders of the immune system: an adjuvant or an alternative to drug therapy? J Clin Apher. 2005;20:171–84. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sandborn WJ. Preliminary data on the use of the apheresis in inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2006;12(Suppl 1):15–21. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Caprilli R, D’Ovidio V. Leukocytapheresis as promising therapy for inflammatory bowel disease. Dig Liver Dis. 2007;39:435–7. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Domènech E, Hinojosa J, Esteve-Comas M, et al.. Granulocytaphaeresis in steroid-dependent inflammatory bowel disease: a prospective, open, pilot study (GETECCU). Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;20:1347–52. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bresci G, Parisi G, Mazzoni A, et al.. Treatment of patients with acute ulcerative colitis: conventional corticosteroid therapy (MP) versus granulocytapheresis (GMA): a pilot study. Dig Liver Dis. 2007;39:430–4. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tanaka T, Okanobu H, Yoshimi S, et al.. In patients with ulcerative colitis, adsorptive depletion of granulocytes and monocytes impacts mucosal level of neutrophils and clinically is most effective in steroid naïve patients. Dig Liver Dis. 2008;40:731–6. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hanai H. Position of selective leukocytapheresis in the medical therapy of ulcerative colitis. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;47:7568–77. Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shimada M, Iwase H, Tsuzuki T, et al.. A pilot study of leukocytapheresis efficacy with 1.5 liter blood processing volume in patients with ulcerative colitis. Ther Apher Dial. 2008;12:368–73. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mitsuyama K, Sata M. Therapeutic leukocytapheresis in inflammatory bowel disease: clinical efficacy and mechanisms of action. Cytotherapy. 2009;11:229–37. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hibi T, Ameshima Y, Sekiguchi Y, et al.. Treating ulcerative colitis by Adacolumn therapeutic leucocytapheresis: clinical efficacy and safety based on surveillance of 656 patients in 53 centres in Japan. Dig Liver Dis. 2009;41:570–7. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Habermalz B, Sauerland S. Clinical effectiveness of selective granulocyte, monocyte adsorptive apheresis with the Adacolumn device in ulcerative colitis. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55:1421–8. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Riassunto delle caratteristiche del prodotto. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/pages/includes/document/open_document.jsp?webContentId=WC500051421. Ultimo accesso maggio 2013.
  20. 20.
    Russell LB, Gold MR, Siegel JE, et al.. The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1172–7. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Panés J, Guilera M, Ginard D, et al.. Treatment cost of ulcerative colitis: is apheresis with Adacolumn® cost-effective? Dig Liver Dis. 2007;39:617–25. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seow CH, Newman A, Irwin SP, et al.. Trough serum infliximab: a predictive factor of clinical outcome for infliximab treatment in acute ulcerative colitis. Gut. 2010;59:49–54. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    de Moraes JC, Aikawa NE, Ribeiro AC, et al.. Immediate complications of 3,555 injections of anti-TNFα. Rev Bras Reumatol. 2010;50:165–75. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gavagnin R, Barra S, Lamanna O, et al. L’applicazione di un’analisi di valutazione economica agli interventi sanitari: la scelta dell’alternativa terapeutica nel trattamento di 2a linea delle malattie infiammatorie croniche intestinali presso l’U.O. di Gastroenterologia dell’Ospedale dell’Angelo. Poster presentato al IV Congresso Nazionale SIHTA—Udine, 17–19 novembre 2011. Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    de Silva S, Ma C, Proulx MC, et al.. Postoperative complications and mortality following colectomy for ulcerative colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:972–80. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Società Italiana di Emaferesi e Manipolazione Cellulare (SIdEM), Sezione Veneto, Friuli Venezia Giulia e Trentino Alto Adige. Indicazioni per l’impiego della granulocitoaferesi nel trattamento delle malattie infiammatorie croniche intestinali. 2012. Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Data on file. Otsuka Pharmaceutical Italy S.r.l. Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Remunerazione delle prestazioni di assistenza ospedaliera per acuti, assistenza ospedaliera di riabilitazione e di lungodegenza post acuzie e di assistenza specialistica ambulatoriale. Decreto 18 ottobre 2012. Ministero della Salute. Supplemento ordinario alla “Gazzetta Ufficiale”. n. 23 del 28 gennaio 2013. Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gruppo di lavoro AIES (coordinato da G. Fattore). Proposta di linee guida per la valutazione economica degli interventi sanitari in Italia. PharmacoEcon, Ital Res Artic. 2009;11:83–93. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rutgeerts P, Sandborn WJ, Feagan BG, et al.. Infliximab for induction and maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2462–76. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Ravasio
    • 1
  • G. De Silvestro
    • 2
  • A. Saggioro
    • 3
  • G. C. Sturniolo
    • 4
  • P. Vernia
    • 5
  1. 1.Springer Healthcare Italia SrlMilanoItalia
  2. 2.Servizio trasfusionaleAzienda Ospedale Università di PadovaPadovaItalia
  3. 3.UOC di GastroenterologiaOspedale dell’AngeloVenezia-MestreItalia
  4. 4.Dipartimento di Scienze Chirurgiche e GastroenterologicheUniversità degli Studi di PadovaPadovaItalia
  5. 5.Università di Roma La SapienzaRomaItalia

Personalised recommendations