Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Baloxavir Marboxil and Laninamivir in Patients with Influenza and High Risk of Complications in JAPAN
Author(s)
Dronova M1, Ikeoka H2, Hirotsu N3, Ansaripour A4, Aballéa S4, Onishi Y5, Hill M6, Igarashi A7
1Creativ-Ceutical, Krakow, MA, Poland, 2Shionogi & Co., Ltd., Osaka, Japan, 3Hirotsu Clinic, Kawasaki, Japan, 4Creativ-Ceutical, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 5Creativ-Ceutical, Tokyo, Japan, 6Shionogi Limited, London, UK, 7Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan
OBJECTIVES : The morbidity and mortality associated with influenza is substantial in people with high-risk conditions (HRC) for complications. Baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) was previously found to be a cost-effective alternative to laninamivir in otherwise healthy adults in Japan. The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of baloxavir versus laninamivir in patients with HRC in Japan. METHODS : A decision tree was developed to estimate costs and health gains associated with the use of baloxavir compared to laninamivir over a lifetime horizon. The study population was stratified in three categories: non-elderly adults with HRC, elderly without other HRC, and elderly with other HRC. The cost-effectiveness was assessed from a public health care payer’s perspective. Numbers of symptomatic days, probabilities of complications and probabilities of drug-related adverse events (DRAEs) were obtained from a clinical trial and network meta-analysis. Costs of influenza management and DRAEs were obtained from the JammNet claims database. Health state utilities were driven by influenza symptoms, DRAEs and complications, with inputs informed by EQ-5D-5L data from a clinical trial of baloxavir and literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSA/PSA) were performed. RESULTS : The baloxavir strategy was associated with higher costs (+¥144) and higher QALYs (+0.001, +0.002 and +0.004 in adults with HRC, elderly without HRC and elderly with HRC respectively). The overall incremental cost/QALY gained for baloxavir versus laninamivir was ¥68,617, which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥5,000,000/QALY. The most influential factors of the model results were probability of pneumonia and bronchitis based on the results of DSA. The PSA showed 94% probability that baloxavir is cost-effective versus laninamivir in total HR population. CONCLUSIONS : This study suggests that influenza treatment with baloxavir is cost-effective compared to laninamivir in the adult population with HRC in Japan.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2020-11, ISPOR Europe 2020, Milan, Italy
Value in Health, Volume 23, Issue S2 (December 2020)
Code
PIN14
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Drugs, Infectious Disease (non-vaccine)