An overview of models used in economic analyses of biologic therapies for arthritis-From current diversity to future consensus

Rheumatology

Volumn 50, Issue SUPPL. 4, 2011, Pages

  Madan, Jason ^a   Ades, Anthony E ^a   Welton, Nicky J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biologic therapies; Cost effectiveness analysis; Economic model

Indexed keywords

ANTIRHEUMATIC AGENT; DISEASE MODIFYING ANTIRHEUMATIC DRUG; ETANERCEPT; METHOTREXATE; TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR ALPHA ANTIBODY;

ADVERSE OUTCOME; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOLOGICAL THERAPY; BIRMINGHAM RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS MODEL; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE SEVERITY; DRUG COST; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG RESPONSE; DRUG TREATMENT FAILURE; DRUG WITHDRAWAL; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; MORTALITY; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PATIENT SELECTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SOCIAL CARE; UNSPECIFIED SIDE EFFECT;

ANTIRHEUMATIC AGENTS; ARTHRITIS; BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 80052225239     PISSN: 14620324     EISSN: 14620332     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/ker240     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Chiou CF, Choi J, Reyes CM. Cost-effectiveness analysis of biological treatments for rheumatoid arthritis. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2004;4: 307-15.
2. Kobelt G, Lindgren P, Singh A, Klareskog L. Cost effectiveness of etanercept (Enbrel) in combination with methotrexate in the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis based on the TEMPO trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64:1174-9.
3. Welsing PM, Severens JL, Hartman M, van Riel PL, Laan RF. Modeling the 5-year cost effectiveness of treatment strategies including tumor necrosis factor-blocking agents and leflunomide for treating rheumatoid arthritis in the Netherlands. Arthritis Rheum 2004;51:964-73.
4. National Institue for Health and Clinical Excellence. Adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis - Technology Appraisal TA130. London: NICE, 2007.
5. Brennan A, Bansback N, Reynolds A, Conway P. Modelling the cost-effectiveness of etanercept in adults with rheumatoid arthritis in the UK. Rheumatology 2004; 43:62-72.
6. Tosh J, Brennan A, Wailoo A, Bansback N. The Sheffield rheumatoid arthritis health ecomomic model. Rheumatology 2011;50(Suppl 4):iv26-31.
7. Barton P. Development of the Birmingham Rheumatoid Arthritis Model: past, present and future plans. Rheumatology 2011;50(Suppl 4):iv32-8.
8. Moreland LW, Schiff MH, Baumgartner SW et al. Etanercept therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1999;130:478-86.
9. Geborek P, Crnkic M, Petersson IF, Saxne T. Etanercept, infliximab, and leflunomide in established rheumatoid arthritis: clinical experience using a structured follow up programme in southern Sweden. Ann Rheum Dis 2002;61: 793-8.
10. Anderson JJ, Wells G, Verhoeven AC, Felson DT. Factors predicting response to treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: the importance of disease duration. Arthritis Rheum 2000; 43:22-9.
11. Emery P, Breedveld FC, Lemmel EM et al. A comparison of the efficacy and safety of leflunomide and methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology 2000;39:655-65.
12. Crnkic M, Teleman A, Saxne T, Geborek P. Survival on drug as a tool for the evaluation of drug tolerability. Initial experience in southern Sweden of infliximab, etanercept and leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology 2001;40(Suppl.1 abstract 231b):82-3.
13. Genovese MC, Bathon JM, Martin RW et al. Etanercept versus methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: two-year radiographic and clinical outcomes. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:1443-50.
14. Maetzel A, Wong A, Strand V, Tugwell P, Wells G, Bombardier C. Meta-analysis of treatment termination rates among rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Rheumatology 2000;39:975-81.
15. Scott DL, Garrood T. Quality of life measures: use and abuse. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2000;14: 663-87.
16. Jerram S, Butt S, Gadsby K, Deighton C. Discrepancies between the EULAR response criteria and the NICE guidelines for continuation of anti-TNF therapy in RA: a cause for concern? Rheumatology 2008;47: 180-2.
17. Bruce B, Fries JF. The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire: a review of its history, issues, progress, and documentation. J Rheumatol 2003;30:167-78.
18. Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M et al. American College of Rheumatology. Preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1995; 38:727-35.
19. van der Heijde DM, van't HM, van Riel PL, van de Putte LB. Development of a disease activity score based on judgment in clinical practice by rheumatologists. J Rheumatol 1993;20:579-81.
20. Fransen J, van Riel PL. The Disease Activity Score and the EULAR response criteria. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005;23: S93-9.
21. National Institue for Health and Clinical Excellence. Etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of adults with psoriatic arthritis - Technology Appraisal TA104. London: NICE, 2006.
22. Brennan A, Bansback N, Nixon R et al. Modelling the cost effectiveness of TNF-alpha antagonists in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: results from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registry. Rheumatology 2007;46:1345-54.
23. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, rituximab and abatercept for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis after the failure of a TNF inhibitor - Technology Appraisal TA195. London: NICE, 2010.
24. Nixon R, Bansback N, Brennan A. The efficacy of inhibiting tumour necrosis factor alpha and interleukin 1 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis and adjusted indirect comparisons. Rheumatology 2007;46:1140-7.
25. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE, 2008:1-76.