Search

Objectives: Ocrelizumab demonstrated significant clinical benefit for the treatment of relapsing (RMS) and primary progressive (PPMS) multiple sclerosis (MS), an incurable disease characterized by disability progression. This study evaluated the clinical and economic impact of ocrelizumab relative to current clinical practice, including other disease-modifying therapies (DMT), available in Portugal. Methods: Markov models for MS were adapted to estimate the impact of ocrelizumab across three patient populations: treatment-naïve RMS, previously treated RMS, and PPMS. Health states were defined according to the Expanded Disability Status Scale. For RMS, the model further captured the occurrence of relapses and progression to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). A lifetime time-horizon and Portuguese societal perspective were adopted. Results: For RMS patients, ocrelizumab was estimated to maximize the expected time (years) without progression to SPMS (10.50) relative to natalizumab (10.10), dimethyl fumarate (8.64), teriflunomide (8.39), fingolimod (8.38), interferon β-1a (8.33) and glatiramer acetate (8.18). As the most effective option, with quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains between 0.3 and 1.2, ocrelizumab was found to be cost-saving relative to natalizumab and fingolimod, and presented incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) below €16,720/QALY relative to the remaining DMT. For PPMS patients, the ICER of ocrelizumab versus best supportive care was estimated at €78,858/QALY. Conclusions: Ocrelizumab provides important health benefits for RMS and PPMS patients, comparing favourably with other widely used therapies. In RMS, ocrelizumab was revealed to be either cost-saving or have costs-per-QALY likely below commonly accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds. In PPMS, ocrelizumab fills a clear clinical gap in the current clinical practice. Overall, ocrelizumab is expected to provide good value for money in addressing the need of MS patients.

Objective: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost of illness (COI) of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) and its relation to disease progression, using age as a proxy, and according to the ambulatory status of patients. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients diagnosed with DMD identified through the Portuguese Neuromuscular Patients Association (APN). Data regarding patient and caregiver demographics, patient health status, resource utilization and cost, and informal care were collected using a custom semistructured questionnaire. Labor productivity and absenteeism losses were captured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. Costs were valued using a societal perspective. Results: A total of 46 patient–caregiver pairs were included, of which eight of the patients were ambulant and 38 were nonambulant. Age had a decreasing effect on COI, independent of the patient’s disease stage. Annualized lifetime costs were at their highest in nonambulant patients around the mean age of loss of ambulation (10 years of age). The mean per patient stage-specific costs (year 2019 values) of DMD were estimated at €48,991 in the nonambulant stage and €19,993 in the ambulant stage. Direct nonmedical costs were the main cost drivers, followed by indirect costs. Conclusions: Our results indicate a close relation between overall disease costs and disease progression. DMD is associated with a substantial economic burden, which appears to be larger around the time ambulation is lost (10 years of age). The availability of new therapeutic options that delay disease progression, especially loss of ambulation, may prove to be highly beneficial for not only patients with DMD but also their families and society.