Pharmacoeconomic analysis of flexible-dose administration regimen of Xeomine® in patients with focal dystonia

• Main Authors: A. E. Cheberda, D. Yu. Belousov, S. K. Zyryanov
• Format: Article
• Language: Russian
• Published: Izdatelstvo OKI 2018-06-01
• Series: Качественная клиническая практика
• Subjects: blepharospasm; cervical dystonia; incobotulinumtoxinа; onabotulinumtoxinа; abobotulinumtoxinа; ­flexible-dose administration regimen; pharmacoeconomics; cost-effectiveness analysis; cost-utility analysis; budget impact analysis
• Online Access: https://www.clinvest.ru/jour/article/view/217
• ISSN: 2588-0519; 2618-8473

Relevance. The most effective treatment for focal dystonia (blepharospasm (BsP) and cervical dystonia (CD)) is use of botulinum toxin, including onabotulinumtoxinА (BoNTA-Ona), incobotulinumtoxin А (BoNTA-Inco), abobotulinumtoxinА (BoNTA-Abo). In 2016, it became possible to use ­exible-dose regimens of incobotulinumtoxin А, thus necessitating analysis of pharmacoeconomic properties of such regimens. Aim. To determine pharmacoeconomic properties of BsP and CD therapy with incobotulinumtoxin А relative to regimens based on onabotulinumtoxinА (BoNTA-Ona and abobotulinumtoxinА (BoNTA-Abo) accounting for properties of ­exible administration regimen of incobotulinumtoxin А. Methodology. Pharmacoeconomic analysis was performed from the perspective of Russian healthcare system within context of mandatory healthcare insurance, as well as from the perspective of overall social interests of Russian Federation, including impact upon GDP. Modelling horizon was 5 years. A complex Markov model was developed to estimate costs and outcomes. The parameter used for clinical efficacy assessment was number of days patient spend in remission state. Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost utility analysis (CUA) and budget impact analysis (BIA) were performed based on modelling results, and sensitivity analysis (SA) was performed to ascertain model robustness. Result. Incobotulinumtoxin А in fl­exible dose regimen demonstrated pharmacoeconomic superiority during CEA for cervical dystonia and blepharospasm indications. When indirect costs are accounted for, superiority of incobotulinumtoxin А increases. Similar results were obtained during CUA. BIA indicates that use of ­flexible-dose regimen of incobotulinumtoxin А allows to achieve reduction of budgetary burden. SA has conrmed the robustness of these results. Conclusion. Use of incobotulinumtoxin А in a ­flexible-dose regimen is pharmacoeconomically justied.