Cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide for severe postmenopausal osteoporosis in Japan

• Published in: Osteoporosis international 2021-10, Vol.32 (10), p.2011-2021
• Main Authors: Hagino, H., Tanaka, K., Silverman, S., McClung, M., Gandra, S. R., Charokopou, M., Adachi, K., Johnson, B., Stollenwerk, B.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Alendronic acid; Bisphosphonates; Bone density; Bone mineral density; Clinical trials; Endocrinology; Fractures; Health care; Markov chains; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Monoclonal antibodies; Original Article; Orthopedics; Osteoporosis; Parathyroid hormone; Post-menopause; Rheumatology; Risk assessment; Sensitivity analysis
• ISSN: 0937-941X; 1433-2965
• DOI: 10.1007/s00198-021-05927-1

Summary This study assessed the cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate, for the treatment of severe postmenopausal osteoporosis in Japan, using bone mineral density (BMD) efficacy data. Results show that romosozumab/alendronate produces greater health benefits at a lower cost than teriparatide/alendronate. Introduction This study aims to assess the cost effectiveness of romosozumab versus teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate, for the treatment of severe postmenopausal osteoporosis in Japanese women previously treated with bisphosphonates. Methods A Markov model was used to assess the relative cost effectiveness of 1 year of romosozumab versus 2 years of teriparatide, both sequenced to alendronate for a total treatment duration of 5 years. Outcomes for a cohort of women with a mean age of 78 years, a T-score ≤−2.5 and a previous fragility fracture were simulated over a lifetime horizon. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Japanese healthcare system and used a discount rate of 2% per annum. To inform relative fracture incidence, the bone mineral density (BMD) advantage of romosozumab over teriparatide was translated into relative risks of fracture, using relationships provided by a meta-regression of osteoporosis therapy trials. Outcomes were assessed in terms of lifetime costs (2020 US dollars) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Results Base case results showed that, compared with teriparatide/alendronate, romosozumab/alendronate reduced costs by $5134 per patient and yielded 0.045 additional QALYs. Scenario analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed that results are robust to uncertainty in model assumptions and inputs. Conclusion Results show that romosozumab/alendronate produces greater health benefits at a lower total cost than teriparatide/alendronate.