Economic benefits of optimizing anchor therapy for rheumatoid arthritis

Abstract

The total cost of RA is substantial, particularly in patients with high levels of disability. There are considerable differences in cost between countries, driven in part by differences in the use of biologic therapies. Economic evaluations are needed to assess the extra cost of using these treatments and the benefits obtained, to ensure appropriate allocation of limited health care resources. The BeSt trial, evaluating four treatment strategies, found comparable medium-term efficacy but substantially higher costs with early biologic therapy. A systematic review of such cost-effectiveness analyses concluded that biologic therapy should be used after therapy has failed with less costly alternatives such as synthetic DMARDs and glucocorticoids. Optimizing such relatively low-cost therapy to improve outcomes may delay the need for biologic therapy, thereby saving costs. A simple model has confirmed the value of this approach. The addition of modified-release prednisone 5 mg/day to existing synthetic DMARD therapy in patients with active disease resulted in improvement in DAS-28 to below the threshold level for initiation of reimbursed biologic therapy in 28-34% of patients. On a conservative estimate (i.e. assuming no further benefits beyond the 12 weeks of the study and a 12-week wait-and-see approach to starting biologic therapy), cost savings amounted to nearly € 400 per patient. While treatment decisions should never be based only on cost considerations, prolonging disease control by optimizing the use of non-biologic treatments may bring benefits to patients and also economic benefits by delaying the need for biologic treatments.