Cost-Effectiveness of Secukinumab Versus Other Biologics in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis: The Chinese Healthcare System Perspective.

Introduction: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of secukinumab compared with other biologics (adalimumab, infliximab, ustekinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, and Yisaipu [etanercept biosimilar]) for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. Methods: A decision-tree (first year)/Markov model (subsequent years), with an annual cycle, was implemented over a lifetime horizon. The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response rate at week 16 was used for treatment response. Efficacy inputs were obtained from a mixed-treatment comparison conducted using data from randomized controlled trials. Other clinical inputs (adverse events, dropout, and mortality rates), utility weights, and costs were derived from published literature and local Chinese sources. Both costs and outcomes were discounted at 5% per annum. Model outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of results. Results: For patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, secukinumab generated the highest QALYs (12.334) against all comparators at a lifetime cost of ¥231,477. Secukinumab dominated (higher QALYs at lower costs) all other biologics except ixekizumab in this population. Compared with secukinumab, ixekizumab incurred slightly lower costs (¥228,320) but gained lesser QALYs (12.284). Thus, secukinumab was a cost-effective treatment than ixekizumab at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥257,094 per QALY gained. In the one-way sensitivity analysis, base-case results were most sensitive to changes in the PASI response at 16 weeks and year 2+ dropout rates. Conclusion: Secukinumab is the most cost-effective treatment option for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis compared with other commonly used biologics from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]