Economic evaluation of immunoglobulin replacement in patients with primary antibody deficiencies

Lifelong immunoglobulin replacement is the standard, expensive therapy for severe primary antibody deficiencies. This treatment can be administrated either by intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) or subcutaneous infusions (SCIG) and delivered at home or in an out‐patient setting. This study aims to determine whether SCIG is cost‐effective compared with IVIG from a French social insurance perspective. Because both methods of administration provide similar efficacies, a cost‐minimization analysis was performed. First, costs were calculated through a simulation testing different hypothesis on costs drivers. Secondly, costs were estimated on the basis of field data collected by a questionnaire completed by a population of patients suffering from agammaglobulinaemia and hyper‐immunoglobulin (Ig)M syndrome. Patients' satisfaction was also documented. Results of the simulation showed that direct medical costs ranged from €19 484 for home‐based IVIG to €25 583 for hospital‐based IVIG, with home‐based SCIG in between at €24 952 per year. Estimations made from field data were found to be different, with significantly higher costs for IVIG. This result was explained mainly by a higher immunoglobulin mean dose prescribed for IVIG. While the theoretical model showed very little difference between SCIG and hospital‐based IVIG costs, SCIG appears to be 25% less expensive with field data because of lower doses used in SCIG patients. The reality of the dose difference between both routes of administration needs to be confirmed by further and more specific studies.

[1]  K. Cimon,et al.  Economic assessment of different modalities of immunoglobulin replacement therapy. , 2008, Immunology and allergy clinics of North America.

[2]  M. Conley,et al.  Adults With X-Linked Agammaglobulinemia: Impact of Disease on Daily Lives, Quality of Life, Educational and Socioeconomic Status, Knowledge of Inheritance, and Reproductive Attitudes , 2008, Medicine.

[3]  É. Oksenhendler,et al.  Infections in 252 patients with common variable immunodeficiency. , 2008, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[4]  L. Hammarström,et al.  Rapid subcutaneous immunoglobulin administration every second week results in high and stable serum immunoglobulin G levels in patients with primary antibody deficiencies , 2008, Clinical and experimental immunology.

[5]  M. Berger Principles of and Advances in Immunoglobulin Replacement Therapy for Primary Immunodeficiency , 2008, Immunology and Allergy Clinics of North America.

[6]  A. Fasth,et al.  Safety and efficacy of subcutaneous human immunoglobulin in children with primary immunodeficiency , 2007, Acta paediatrica.

[7]  Shigeaki Nonoyama,et al.  Primary immunodeficiency diseases: an update from the International Union of Immunological Societies Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases Classification Committee. , 2007, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[8]  S. Stanworth,et al.  Recognition, clinical diagnosis and management of patients with primary antibody deficiencies: a systematic review , 2007, Clinical and experimental immunology.

[9]  A N N Gardulf,et al.  Replacement IgG therapy and self-therapy at home improve the health-related quality of life in patients with primary antibody deficiencies , 2006, Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology.

[10]  E. Hachulla,et al.  Étude comparative du coût du traitement à domicile des immunoglobulines intraveineuses ou sous-cutanées à visée substitutive , 2006 .

[11]  H. Ochs,et al.  Safety and Efficacy of Self-Administered Subcutaneous Immunoglobulin in Patients with Primary Immunodeficiency Diseases , 2006, Journal of Clinical Immunology.

[12]  M. Atkinson,et al.  Hierarchical construct validity of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM version II) among outpatient pharmacy consumers. , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[13]  M. Bellanger,et al.  The “Health Benefit Basket” in France , 2005, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[14]  M. Atkinson,et al.  Health and Quality of Life Outcomes , 2004 .

[15]  D. Ericson,et al.  The Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Versus Subcutaneous Immunoglobulin Replacement Therapy , 2000, Journal of Clinical Immunology.

[16]  T O Jefferson,et al.  Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ , 1996, BMJ.

[17]  L. Hammarström,et al.  Subcutaneous immunoglobulin replacement in patients with primary antibody deficiencies: safety and costs , 1995, The Lancet.

[18]  M. Stano,et al.  The Economics of Health and Health Care : International Student Edition, 8th Edition , 1993 .

[19]  R. Proujansky Immunologic Disorders in Infants and Children , 1990 .

[20]  S. Wilson Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes , 1987 .

[21]  M. Lischner Immunologic disorders in infants and children , 1974 .

[22]  H. Ochs,et al.  Health-Related Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in North American Patients with Primary Immunedeficiency Diseases Receiving Subcutaneous IgG Self-Infusions at Home , 2006, Journal of Clinical Immunology.

[23]  E. Hachulla,et al.  [Economic evaluation of at home subcutaneous and intravenous immunoglobulin substitution]. , 2006, La Revue de medecine interne.

[24]  M. Borte,et al.  Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of immunoglobulin treatment in patients with antibody deficiencies from the perspective of the German statutory health insurance , 2005, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[25]  C. Kallenberg,et al.  The effect of two different dosages of intravenous immunoglobulin on the incidence of recurrent infections in patients with primary hypogammaglobulinemia. A randomized, double-blind, multicenter crossover trial. , 2001, Annals of internal medicine.