A systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies comparing conventional, biological and surgical interventions for inflammatory bowel disease

PLoS One. 2017 Oct 3;12(10):e0185500. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185500. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

Background: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic disease placing a large health and economic burden on health systems worldwide. The treatment landscape is complex with multiple strategies to induce and maintain remission while avoiding long-term complications. The extent to which rising treatment costs, due to expensive biologic agents, are offset by improved outcomes and fewer hospitalisations and surgeries needs to be evaluated. This systematic review aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for IBD.

Materials and methods: A systematic literature search was performed in March 2017 to identify economic evaluations of pharmacological and surgical interventions, for adults diagnosed with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC). Costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were adjusted to reflect 2015 purchasing power parity (PPP). Risk of bias assessments and a narrative synthesis of individual study findings are presented.

Results: Forty-nine articles were included; 24 on CD and 25 on UC. Infliximab and adalimumab induction and maintenance treatments were cost-effective compared to standard care in patients with moderate or severe CD; however, in patients with conventional-drug refractory CD, fistulising CD and for maintenance of surgically-induced remission ICERs were above acceptable cost-effectiveness thresholds. In mild UC, induction of remission using high dose mesalazine was dominant compared to standard dose. In UC refractory to conventional treatments, infliximab and adalimumab induction and maintenance treatment were not cost-effective compared to standard care; however, ICERs for treatment with vedolizumab and surgery were favourable.

Conclusions: We found that, in general, while biologic agents helped improve outcomes, they incurred high costs and therefore were not cost-effective, particularly for use as maintenance therapy. The cost-effectiveness of biologic agents may improve as market prices fall and with the introduction of biosimilars. Future research should identify optimal treatment strategies reflecting routine clinical practice, incorporate indirect costs and evaluate lifetime costs and benefits.

Publication types

  • Review
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Cost-Benefit Analysis*
  • Humans
  • Inflammatory Bowel Diseases / therapy*

Grants and funding

This study was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) grant N° 33CS30-148422 (Swiss IBD cohort study). NP is supported by the Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (IUMSP) PhD Fellowship. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.