Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36398467›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of haematology2023

Cost-effectiveness of recombinant factor VIII Fc versus emicizumab for prophylaxis in adults and adolescents with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK.

Nana Kragh, Anna Tytula, Michał Pochopien, Samuel Aballéa, Mondher Toumi, Zalmai Hakimi, Jameel Nazir, Linda Bystrická, Francis Fatoye

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of haematology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Nana KraghGlobal Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB (Sobi™), Stockholm, Sweden.
Anna TytulaHealth Economics and Outcomes Research Department, Putnam PHMR, Krakow, Poland.
Michał PochopienEconomic Modelling, Assignity, Krakow, Poland.
Samuel AballéaPublic Health Department, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Mondher ToumiPublic Health Department, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France.
Zalmai HakimiGlobal Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB (Sobi™), Stockholm, Sweden.
Jameel NazirPatient Access and Community Engagement, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB (Sobi™), Stockholm, Sweden.
Linda BystrickáMedical Affairs and Clinical Science Haemophilia, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB (Sobi™), Stockholm, Sweden.
Francis FatoyeFaculty of Health and Education, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK.
Swedish Orphan Biovitrum (Sweden) · SEAix-Marseille Université · FRHealth Economics and Outcomes Research (United Kingdom) · GBKrakow University of Economics · PLManchester Metropolitan University · GB

Funding

Swedish Orphan Biovitrum
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe economic and clinical burden of haemophilia A is high. Primary prophylaxis with factor VIII replacement therapy is the recognised standard of care, but the emergence of non-factor therapies, such as emicizumab, is extending treatment options for people with haemophilia A.

aimThere are currently no direct comparisons of efficacy or cost between recombinant factor FVIII Fc-fusion protein efmoroctocog alfa (a recombinant factor FVIII Fc-fusion protein referred to herein as rFVIIIFc) and emicizumab; therefore, a cost-effectiveness model was developed to compare prophylactic treatment with rFVIIIFc versus emicizumab in patients with haemophilia A without inhibitors in the UK.

methodsThe cost-effectiveness model was based on a matching-adjusted indirect comparison and included male patients, aged ≥12 years, with haemophilia A without inhibitors. The model was designed as a Markov process with a flexible lifelong time horizon, and cost-effectiveness was presented as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Base-case analysis and sensitivity analyses (including scenario analyses, one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis [DSA] and probability sensitivity analysis [PSA]) were performed using the following treatment strategies: individualised prophylaxis with rFVIIIFc and prophylaxis with emicizumab administered once weekly (scenario analyses used regimens of once every 2 weeks or once every 4 weeks).

resultsBase-case analysis, DSA and PSA indicated that, compared with emicizumab administered once weekly, rFVIIIFc individualised prophylaxis was the dominant treatment strategy, with lower costs, a greater number of quality-adjusted life years, and a lower number of bleeds.

conclusionsrFVIIIFc has proven efficacy and is cost-effective compared with emicizumab, providing clinicians with a viable treatment option to improve the health outcomes for adults and adolescents with haemophilia A in the UK.

Indexed as

Factor VIIIHemophilia AAdolescentAdultAntibodies, BispecificAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansMaleProstate-Specific AntigenRecombinant Fusion ProteinsUnited KingdomAntibodies, BispecificAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedemicizumabFactor VIIIProstate-Specific AntigenRecombinant Fusion Proteinscost-effectiveness analysisemicizumabhaemophilia Aprophylaxisrecombinant factor VIII Fc

Identifiers

PMID36398467
PMCPMC10107896
OpenAlexW4309368422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.