The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Infliximab for the treatment of adults with psoriasis. Evidence Review Group Report for NICE's Single Technology Appraisal process

Infliximab for the treatment of adults with psoriasis. Evidence Review Group Report for NICE's Single Technology Appraisal process
Infliximab for the treatment of adults with psoriasis. Evidence Review Group Report for NICE's Single Technology Appraisal process
This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical and cost-effectiveness of infliximab for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, in accordance with the licensed indication, based on the evidence submission from Schering-Plough to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. The outcomes stated in the manufacturer's definition of the decision problem were severity [Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score], remission rates, relapse rates and health-related quality of life. The main evidence in the submission comes from four randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing infliximab with placebo and eight RCTs comparing either etanercept or efalizumab with placebo.

At week 10, patients on infliximab had a significantly higher likelihood of attaining a reduction in PASI score than placebo patients. There were also statistically significant differences between infliximab and placebo in the secondary outcomes. In the comparator trials both the efalizumab and etanercept arms included a significantly higher proportion of patients who achieved a reduction in PASI score at week 12 than the placebo arms. No head-to-head studies were identified directly comparing infliximab with etanercept or efalizumab. The manufacturer carried out an indirect comparison, but the ERG had reservations about the comparison because of the lack of information presented and areas of uncertainty in relation to the included data.

The economic model presented by the manufacturer was appropriate for the disease area and given the available data. The cost-effectiveness analysis estimates the mean length of time that an individual would respond to infliximab compared with continuous etanercept and the utility gains associated with this response. The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for infliximab compared with continuous etanercept for patients with severe psoriasis was £26,095 per quality-adjusted life-year. A one-way sensitivity analysis, a scenario analysis and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis were undertaken by the ERG.

The ICER is highly sensitive to assumptions about the costs and frequency of inpatient stays for non-responders of infliximab. The guidance issued by NICE in August 2007 as a result of the STA states that infliximab within its licensed indication is recommended for the treatment of adults with very severe plaque psoriasis, or with psoriasis that has failed to respond to standard systematic therapies. Infliximab treatment should be continued beyond 10 weeks in people whose psoriasis has shown an adequate response to treatment within 10 weeks. In addition, when using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), care should be taken to take into account the patient's disabilities, to ensure DLQI continues to be an accurate measure.
1366-5278
55-60
Loveman, Emma
06ff1bf1-0189-4330-b22d-f5a917e9871d
Turner, David L.
6c4c1ccb-a6f2-47cf-944e-e69269198a29
Hartwell, Debbie
e6a0eaa0-956d-45fb-9b7d-03ca1af3334c
Cooper, Keith
ea064f58-d71d-404a-bcf3-49d243b8825b
Clegg, Andy
838091f5-39df-4dbe-a369-675b26f2301b
Loveman, Emma
06ff1bf1-0189-4330-b22d-f5a917e9871d
Turner, David L.
6c4c1ccb-a6f2-47cf-944e-e69269198a29
Hartwell, Debbie
e6a0eaa0-956d-45fb-9b7d-03ca1af3334c
Cooper, Keith
ea064f58-d71d-404a-bcf3-49d243b8825b
Clegg, Andy
838091f5-39df-4dbe-a369-675b26f2301b

Loveman, Emma, Turner, David L., Hartwell, Debbie, Cooper, Keith and Clegg, Andy (2009) Infliximab for the treatment of adults with psoriasis. Evidence Review Group Report for NICE's Single Technology Appraisal process. Health Technology Assessment, 13 (Suppl1), 55-60. (PMID:19567215)

Record type: Article

Abstract

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical and cost-effectiveness of infliximab for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, in accordance with the licensed indication, based on the evidence submission from Schering-Plough to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. The outcomes stated in the manufacturer's definition of the decision problem were severity [Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score], remission rates, relapse rates and health-related quality of life. The main evidence in the submission comes from four randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing infliximab with placebo and eight RCTs comparing either etanercept or efalizumab with placebo.

At week 10, patients on infliximab had a significantly higher likelihood of attaining a reduction in PASI score than placebo patients. There were also statistically significant differences between infliximab and placebo in the secondary outcomes. In the comparator trials both the efalizumab and etanercept arms included a significantly higher proportion of patients who achieved a reduction in PASI score at week 12 than the placebo arms. No head-to-head studies were identified directly comparing infliximab with etanercept or efalizumab. The manufacturer carried out an indirect comparison, but the ERG had reservations about the comparison because of the lack of information presented and areas of uncertainty in relation to the included data.

The economic model presented by the manufacturer was appropriate for the disease area and given the available data. The cost-effectiveness analysis estimates the mean length of time that an individual would respond to infliximab compared with continuous etanercept and the utility gains associated with this response. The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for infliximab compared with continuous etanercept for patients with severe psoriasis was £26,095 per quality-adjusted life-year. A one-way sensitivity analysis, a scenario analysis and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis were undertaken by the ERG.

The ICER is highly sensitive to assumptions about the costs and frequency of inpatient stays for non-responders of infliximab. The guidance issued by NICE in August 2007 as a result of the STA states that infliximab within its licensed indication is recommended for the treatment of adults with very severe plaque psoriasis, or with psoriasis that has failed to respond to standard systematic therapies. Infliximab treatment should be continued beyond 10 weeks in people whose psoriasis has shown an adequate response to treatment within 10 weeks. In addition, when using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), care should be taken to take into account the patient's disabilities, to ensure DLQI continues to be an accurate measure.

Text
supplement1301.pdf - Other
Download (611kB)

More information

Published date: 2009

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 152863
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/152863
ISSN: 1366-5278
PURE UUID: ce98ccb3-f384-4723-bf4e-18191e42fa44
ORCID for Keith Cooper: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-0318-7670

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 17 May 2010 12:55
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 02:44

Export record

Contributors

Author: Emma Loveman
Author: David L. Turner
Author: Debbie Hartwell
Author: Keith Cooper ORCID iD
Author: Andy Clegg

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×