Search

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with a significant clinical, economic, and human burden. The JAK1 Atopic Dermatitis Efficacy and Safety (JADE) program's Phase 3 trials demonstrated that as a treatment for moderate‐to‐severe AD in adults with previous exposure to immunotherapy, abrocitinib showed superior efficacy and safety compared with standard of care (SoC), consisting of topical corticosteroids. This study assessed the cost‐effectiveness of abrocitinib with SoC versus SoC alone for this patient population in Japan from a societal perspective. A hybrid decision tree and Markov model were used to capture the initial treatment and long‐term maintenance phases. Clinical inputs at 16 weeks were obtained through a Bayesian network meta‐analysis of four pivotal trials from the JADE program. Clinical inputs at 52 weeks were derived from the JADE EXTEND trial. Response‐specific utility inputs were obtained from published literature. Resource use, costs, and productivity inputs were gathered from Japanese claims analysis, literature, public documents, and expert opinion. Costs and quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) were discounted at 2.0% per year and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to validate the base case results and explore a payer perspective. Over a lifetime horizon and with the base‐case societal perspective, abrocitinib produced a mean gain of 0.75 QALYs, incremental costs of JPY (¥) 2 270 386 (USD [$] 17 265.6), and a resulting ICER of ¥3 034 514 ($23 076.5) per QALY compared with SoC. From a payer perspective, the incremental costs increased to ¥4 476 777 ($34 044.4), with an ICER of ¥5 983 495 ($45 502.6) per QALY. The results were most sensitive to treatment‐specific, response‐based utility weights, drug costs, and productivity‐related inputs. From a Japanese societal perspective, abrocitinib demonstrated superior QALYs and with a willingness‐to‐pay threshold of ¥5 000 000 ($38 023.4) per QALY, can be considered cost‐effective compared with SoC as a treatment for moderate‐to‐severe AD in adult patients with previous immunosuppressant exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the public health and economic impact of the COVID-19 booster vaccination with BNT162b2 in Japan during an Omicron-dominant period from early 2022. Research design and methods: A combined cohort Markov decision tree model estimated the cost-effectiveness of annual or biannual booster vaccination strategies compared to no booster vaccination for those aged 65 years and above, and those aged 60–64 years at high risk as the base case. The societal perspective was primarily considered. We also examined other target populations with different age and risk groups. Sensitivity and scenario analyses with alternative inputs were performed. Results: Annual and biannual vaccination strategies were dominant from the societal perspective in the base case. Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) from the payer perspective were JPY 1,752,499/Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) for annual vaccination and JPY 2,831,878/QALY for biannual vaccination, both less than the threshold value in Japan (JPY 5 million/QALY). The results were consistent even when examining other target age and risk groups. All sensitivity and scenario analyses indicated that ICERs were below JPY 5 million/QALY. Conclusions: Booster vaccination with the COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 is a dominant strategy and beneficial to public health in Japan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Japan, medical expenses for COVID-19 treatment transitioned from full public funding support to out-of-pocket (OOP) payment by patients plus partial public support in October 2023, and public support fully ended in March 2024. This study evaluated the clinical and economic impacts of initiating OOP payments., Research Design and Methods: To assess the impact on prescription rates, we compared the prescription rates of antivirals from the 4-month pre- to post-OOP payment initiation period using a claims database. Subsequently, a budget impact model assessed the impacts of a hypothetical decline in the prescription rates on COVID-19-related hospitalizations, deaths, and direct medical costs for antiviral prescription and hospitalization., Results: The antiviral prescription rate per 100 patients decreased from 17.5 for the pre-OOP payment initiation period to 11.5 for the post-OOP payment initiation period, that is, a change of - 34.3%. With prescription rate decreases of 40%, 60%, and 80%, the hospitalizations would increase annually by 22,533 (3.3%), 33800 (5.0%), and 45,066 (6.6%), respectively. The total costs would increase by JPY9.5 billion (USD67.3 million; 0.7%), JPY14.3 billion (USD100.9 million; 1.0%), and JPY19.0 billion (USD134.5 million; 1.3%), respectively., Conclusions: Higher OOP payment decreased the antiviral prescription rate, potentially leading to clinical and economic loss.