Systematic review, network meta-analysis and economic evaluation of biological therapy for the management of active psoriatic arthritis

Abstract

Background
An updated economic evaluation was conducted to compare the cost-effectiveness of the four tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-? inhibitors adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab and infliximab in active, progressive psoriatic arthritis (PsA) where response to standard treatment has been inadequate.

Methods
A systematic review was conducted to identify relevant, recently published studies and the new trial data were synthesised, via a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), to estimate the relative efficacy of the TNF-? inhibitors in terms of Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) response, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) scores and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI). A previously developed economic model was updated with the new meta-analysis results and current cost data. The model was adapted to delineate patients by PASI 50%, 75% and 90% response rates to differentiate between psoriasis outcomes.

Results
All four licensed TNF-? inhibitors were significantly more effective than placebo in achieving PsARC response in patients with active PsA. Adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab were significantly more effective than placebo in improving HAQ scores in patients who had achieved a PsARC response and in improving HAQ scores in PsARC non-responders. In an analysis using 1,000 model simulations, on average etanercept was the most cost-effective treatment and, at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence willingness-to-pay threshold of between £20,000 to £30,000, etanercept is the preferred option.

Conclusions
The economic analysis agrees with the conclusions from the previous models, in that biologics are shown to be cost-effective for treating patients with active PsA compared with the conventional management strategy. In particular, etanercept is cost-effective compared with the other biologic treatments.