MODELING THE CLINICAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CLESROVIMAB AGAINST RESPIRATORY SYNCYTIAL VIRUS AMONG INFANTS IN ITALY
Author(s)
Klodeta Kura, PhD1, Filippo Rumi, MA, MSc2, Giovanna Elisa Calabrò, MA, MSc3, Eugenio Di Brino, MA, MSc2, Vanessa Angelucci, MA, MSc4, Tanya Ahuja, MA5, FRANCESCA SENESE, MPH4.
1Principal scientist, Merck Sharp & Dohme (UK) Ltd., London, United Kingdom, 2Altems Advisory, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy, 3V.A.L.U.E. Laboratory, Department of Health and Social Sciences; University of Cassino, Cassino, Italy, 4MSD Italy, Roma, Italy, 5Complete HEOR Solutions LLC., North Wales, PA, USA.
1Principal scientist, Merck Sharp & Dohme (UK) Ltd., London, United Kingdom, 2Altems Advisory, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy, 3V.A.L.U.E. Laboratory, Department of Health and Social Sciences; University of Cassino, Cassino, Italy, 4MSD Italy, Roma, Italy, 5Complete HEOR Solutions LLC., North Wales, PA, USA.
OBJECTIVES: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a major cause of illness in infants, the leading cause of bronchiolitis hospitalizations among newborns in Italy. The objective of this study was to assess the health and economic impact of clesrovimab on medically attended RSV (MA-RSV) infections (i.e., hospitalizations, emergency department and outpatient visits) among infants in Italy compared to the current standard of care.
METHODS: A decision tree model simulated the clinical and economic impact of clesrovimab in infants entering their first RSV season, compared with nirsevimab. Model inputs were obtained from published literature. Efficacy estimates for both interventions were obtained from randomized clinical trials (RCTs). In the base case, medically attended lower respiratory infection (MALRI) efficacy was applied equally to all outcomes, with duration of protection based on the maximum follow-up time reported in the respective global registrational RCTs. Two additional scenarios were evaluated: (1) equal 5-month durations of protection for both interventions, and (2) efficacy against hospitalization for LRTI was applied to hospitalization outcomes. Outcomes included MA-RSV cases, and treatment costs averted (excluding intervention cost). An 80% coverage rate was assumed for both interventions.
RESULTS: In the base case, clesrovimab was projected to reduce MA-RSV cases by 13%-18% versus nirsevimab and lower treatment costs by 15%. In scenario 1, clesrovimab was projected to reduce MA-RSV cases by 12%-19% and lower treatment costs by 14%. In scenario 2, clesrovimab was projected to reduce hospitalizations and associated costs, with and without intensive care unit (ICU), by 17%. Full-term infants incurred the highest total costs and yielded the greatest cost savings across all clinical outcomes and care settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Both nirsevimab and clesrovimab were estimated to reduce the clinical and economic burden of RSV among infants in Italy, with clesrovimab showing a greater estimated impact than nirsevimab.
METHODS: A decision tree model simulated the clinical and economic impact of clesrovimab in infants entering their first RSV season, compared with nirsevimab. Model inputs were obtained from published literature. Efficacy estimates for both interventions were obtained from randomized clinical trials (RCTs). In the base case, medically attended lower respiratory infection (MALRI) efficacy was applied equally to all outcomes, with duration of protection based on the maximum follow-up time reported in the respective global registrational RCTs. Two additional scenarios were evaluated: (1) equal 5-month durations of protection for both interventions, and (2) efficacy against hospitalization for LRTI was applied to hospitalization outcomes. Outcomes included MA-RSV cases, and treatment costs averted (excluding intervention cost). An 80% coverage rate was assumed for both interventions.
RESULTS: In the base case, clesrovimab was projected to reduce MA-RSV cases by 13%-18% versus nirsevimab and lower treatment costs by 15%. In scenario 1, clesrovimab was projected to reduce MA-RSV cases by 12%-19% and lower treatment costs by 14%. In scenario 2, clesrovimab was projected to reduce hospitalizations and associated costs, with and without intensive care unit (ICU), by 17%. Full-term infants incurred the highest total costs and yielded the greatest cost savings across all clinical outcomes and care settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Both nirsevimab and clesrovimab were estimated to reduce the clinical and economic burden of RSV among infants in Italy, with clesrovimab showing a greater estimated impact than nirsevimab.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
EE116
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Epidemiology & Public Health, Health Technology Assessment
Topic Subcategory
Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies
Disease
Pediatrics, Respiratory-Related Disorders (Allergy, Asthma, Smoking, Other Respiratory), Vaccines