P424 Economic evaluation of vedolizumab SC for the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Vedolizumab intravenous (IV), a gut selective humanised monoclonal antibody, is indicated for the management of moderately to severely active Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and has been shown in the only head-to-head clinical trial within UC to be superior to adalimumab (NCT02497469). Furthermore, the novel vedolizumab subcutaneous (SC) has recently been proven to be an effective treatment of UC (NCT02611830). The objective of this study is to estimate the comparative cost-effectiveness of vedolizumab IV with updated efficacy data, and vedolizumab SC for the first time. Both vedolizumab IV and SC have been compared with other publicly reimbursed biologics for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe UC from a Canadian public healthcare payer perspective. Methods A hybrid decision tree/Markov model was developed to simulate the clinical course of UC, translating the disease course into costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Comparative efficacy of vedolizumab SC, vedolizumab IV, adalimumab, infliximab IV, and golimumab were sourced from a network meta-analysis. Drug and disease management costs (2019 $CAD) were sourced from Ontario public payer schedules of benefits. Utilities were sourced from the literature. Clinical and economic outcomes were projected over a lifetime and discounted at 1.5% annually. Results Within a mixed bio-naïve/experienced population, vedolizumab SC resulted in slightly more QALYs than vedolizumab IV and dominated adalimumab (Table 1); vedolizumab SC yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $CAD 6,727 per QALY and $CAD 52,673 per QALY relative to golimumab and to infliximab (for which the price of a biosimilar was used), respectively. Further scenario analysis within bio-naïve populations supported the robustness of the base-case results, demonstrating that vedolizumab SC or vedolizumab IV were either dominant or cost-effective across all scenarios. Conclusion Our analysis suggests that vedolizumab SC and vedolizumab IV are a cost-effective therapeutic alternative relative to other biologics for moderate-to-severe UC in Canada. Future research will expand the analysis across all biologic comparators as they are used in the real world.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".