Cost-Effectiveness of Canagliflozin Added to Standard of Care for Treating Diabetic Kidney Disease (DKD) in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) in England: Estimates Using the CREDEM-DKD Model

Michael Willis, Andreas Nilsson, Klas Kellerborg, Philip Ball, Rupert Roe, Shana Traina, Rebecca Beale, Isabelle Newell, Michael Willis, Andreas Nilsson, Klas Kellerborg, Philip Ball, Rupert Roe, Shana Traina, Rebecca Beale, Isabelle Newell

Abstract

Introduction: On the basis of reductions in diabetic kidney disease (DKD) progression and major adverse cardiovascular events observed in the landmark CREDENCE trial, canagliflozin 100 mg received an extension to its EU marketing authorisation in July 2020 to include the treatment of DKD in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) making it the first pharmacological therapy to receive regulatory authorisation for treatment of DKD since the RENAAL and IDNT trials in nearly 20 years. Efficient allocation of limited healthcare resources requires evaluation not only of clinical safety and efficacy but also economic consequences. The study aim was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of canagliflozin when added to current standard of care (SoC) versus SoC alone from the perspective of the NHS in England.

Methods: A microsimulation model was developed using patient-level data from CREDENCE, including risk equations for the key clinical outcomes of start of dialysis, hospitalisation for heart failure, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and all-cause mortality. DKD progression was modelled using estimated glomerular filtration rate and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio evolution equations. Risk for kidney transplant was sourced from UK-specific sources given the near absence of events in CREDENCE. Patient characteristics and treatment effects were sourced from CREDENCE. Unit costs (£2019) and disutility weights were sourced from the literature and discounted at 3.5% annually. The time horizon was 10 years in the base case, and sensitivity analysis was performed.

Results: Canagliflozin was associated with sizable gains in life-years and quality-adjusted life-year (QALYs) over 10 years, with gains increasing with simulation duration. Cost offsets associated with reductions in cardiovascular and renal complications were sufficient to achieve overall net cost savings. The findings were generally confirmed in the sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion: Model results suggest that adding canagliflozin 100 mg to SoC can improve patient outcomes while reducing overall net costs from the NHS perspective in England.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02065791.

Keywords: Albuminuria; CREDENCE; Canagliflozin; Chronic kidney disease (CKD); Cost-effectiveness; Diabetes; Diabetic kidney disease (DKD); Diabetic nephropathy; Dialysis.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CREDEM-DKD model structure. *Optionally, doubling of serum creatinine can also be simulated. AE adverse event, CVD cardiovascular disease, CREDEM-DKD CREDENCE Economic Model of DKD, CREDENCE Canagliflozin and Renal Endpoints in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation, DoSCr doubling of serum creatinine, eGFR estimated glomerular filtration rate, HF heart failure, HHF hospitalization for heart failure, Hx history, ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, MI myocardial infarction, LY life-year, QALY quality-adjusted life-year, RRT renal replacement therapy, UACR urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Progression of DKD stages over time. RRT renal replacement therapy
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Cumulative incidence of renal and CV outcomes, by study arm. HHF hospitalization for heart failure, MI myocardial infarction
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Cost-effectiveness scatter plot of canagliflozin 100 mg + SoC versus SoC alone
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve of canagliflozin 100 mg + SoC versus SoC alone
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Estimated total costs, total QALYs, and NMBs, by scenario. * Willingness-to-pay of £30,000 per QALY. eGFR estimated glomerular filtration rate, HR hazard ratio, NMB net monetary benefit, QALY quality adjusted life-years

References

    1. Kerr M, Bray B, Medcalf J, O'Donoghue DJ, Matthews B. Estimating the financial cost of chronic kidney disease to the NHS in England. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012;27(3):73–80. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfs269.
    1. UK Renal Registry. 21st Annual Report—data to 31/12/2017, Bristol, UK 2019. . Accessed 23 Nov 2020.
    1. Gorodetskaya I, Zenios S, McCulloch CE, et al. Health-related quality of life and estimates of utility in chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. 2005;68(6):2801–2808. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00752.x.
    1. Pagels AA, Soderkvist BK, Medin C, Hylander B, Heiwe S. Health-related quality of life in different stages of chronic kidney disease and at initiation of dialysis treatment. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:71. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-71.
    1. Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) KDIGO 2012 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. 2013;3(1):1–150. doi: 10.1038/kisup.2012.73.
    1. Retnakaran R, Cull CA, Thorne KI, Adler AI, Holman RR. Risk factors for renal dysfunction in type 2 diabetes: U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study 74. Diabetes. 2006;55(6):1832–1839. doi: 10.2337/db05-1620.
    1. Hill CJ, Cardwell CR, Patterson CC, et al. Chronic kidney disease and diabetes in the National Health Service: a cross-sectional survey of the U.K. National Diabetes Audit. Diabet Med. 2014;31(4):448–454. doi: 10.1111/dme.12312.
    1. van der Velde M, Matsushita K, Coresh J, et al. Lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and higher albuminuria are associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. A collaborative meta-analysis of high-risk population cohorts. Kidney Int. 2011;79(12):1341–1352. doi: 10.1038/ki.2010.536.
    1. Lavery LA, Hunt NA, Ndip A, Lavery DC, Van Houtum W, Boulton AJ. Impact of chronic kidney disease on survival after amputation in individuals with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(11):2365–2369. doi: 10.2337/dc10-1213.
    1. Dalrymple LS, Katz R, Kestenbaum B, et al. Chronic kidney disease and the risk of end-stage renal disease versus death. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(4):379–385. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1511-x.
    1. Perkovic V, Jardine MJ, Neal B, et al. Canagliflozin and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(24):2295–2306. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1811744.
    1. Brenner BM, Cooper ME, de Zeeuw D, et al. Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(12):861–869. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa011161.
    1. Lewis EJ, Hunsicker LG, Clarke WR, et al. Renoprotective effect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(12):851–860. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa011303.
    1. European Medicines Agency. Invokana—summary of opinion (post authorisation). 2020. . Accessed 9 July 2020.
    1. Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G, O′Brien B, Stoddart G. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 3. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.
    1. Farahani P. A perspective on principles of comparative cost-effectiveness studies for pharmacotherapy of chronic diseases. Clin Diabetes. 2012;30(2):54. doi: 10.2337/diaclin.30.2.54.
    1. Weinstein MC, O'Brien B, Hornberger J, et al. Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices-Modeling Studies. Value Health. 2003;6(1):9–17. doi: 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2003.00234.x.
    1. Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation (handbooks in health economic evaluation) 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.
    1. Willis M, Asseburg C, Slee A, Nilsson A, Neslusan C. Development and internal validation of a discrete event simulation model of diabetic kidney disease using CREDENCE trial data. Diabetes Ther. 2020;11(11):2657–2676. doi: 10.1007/s13300-020-00923-w.
    1. Mahaffey KW, Jardine MJ, Bompoint S, et al. Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease in primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention groups: results from the randomized CREDENCE trial. Circulation. 2019;140:739–750. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.042007.
    1. Roberts M, Russell LB, Paltiel AD, Chambers M, McEwan P, Krahn M. Conceptualizing a model: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM modeling good research practices task force-2. Med Decis Making . 2012;32(5):678–689. doi: 10.1177/0272989X12454941.
    1. National Kidney Foundation. 2018. . Accessed 5 May 2020.
    1. National Kidney Foundation K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;39(2 Suppl 1):S1–266.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Single technology appraisal (STA)—Tolvaptan for treating autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (TA358) Manufacturer Submission. 2012.
    1. Neal B, Perkovic V, Mahaffey KW, et al. Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal events in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(7):644–657. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1611925.
    1. Vemer P, Corro Ramos I, van Voorn GA, Al MJ, Feenstra TL. AdViSHE: a validation-assessment tool of health-economic models for decision makers and model users. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016;34(4):349–361. doi: 10.1007/s40273-015-0327-2.
    1. NHS Business Services Authority. . Accessed 27 July 2020.
    1. Tattersall J, Dekker F, Heimbürger O, et al. When to start dialysis: updated guidance following publication of the Initiating Dialysis Early and Late (IDEAL) study. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011;26(7):2082–2086. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfr168.
    1. UK Renal Registry. 2019. UK Renal Registry 21st Annual Report—data to 31/12/2017, Bristol, UK. .
    1. Alva ML, Gray A, Mihaylova B, Leal J, Holman RR. The impact of diabetes-related complications on healthcare costs: new results from the UKPDS (UKPDS 84) Diabetic Med. 2015;32(4):459–466. doi: 10.1111/dme.12647.
    1. Jesky MD, Dutton M, Dasgupta I, et al. Health-related quality of life impacts mortality but not progression to end-stage renal disease in pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease: a prospective observational study. PLoS One. 2016;11(11):e0165675. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165675.
    1. Lee AJ, Morgan CL, Conway P, Currie CJ. Characterisation and comparison of health-related quality of life for patients with renal failure. Curr Med Res Opin. 2005;21(11):1777–1783. doi: 10.1185/030079905X65277.
    1. Clarke P, Gray A, Holman R. Estimating utility values for health states of type 2 diabetic patients using the EQ-5D (UKPDS 62) Med Decis Making. 2002;22(4):340–349. doi: 10.1177/027298902400448902.
    1. NICE. Canagliflozin, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin monotherapy for treating type 2 diabetes—Assessment Report National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 2015.
    1. Shingler S, Fordham B, Evans M, et al. Utilities for treatment-related adverse events in type 2 diabetes. J Med Econ. 2015;18(1):45–55. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2014.971158.
    1. NHS Improvement. Reference Cost Collection: National Schedule of Reference Costs, 2018–19. NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts. 2019. .
    1. Peasgood T, Brennan A, Mansell P, Elliott J, Basarir H, Kruger J. The impact of diabetes-related complications on preference-based measures of health-related quality of life in adults with type I diabetes. Med Decis Making. 2016;36(8):1020–1033. doi: 10.1177/0272989X16658660.
    1. Sullivan PW, Ghushchyan VH. EQ-5D scores for diabetes-related comorbidities. Value Health . 2016;19(8):1002–1008. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.05.018.
    1. Neuen BL, Ohkuma T, Neal B, et al. Effect of canagliflozin on renal and cardiovascular outcomes across different levels of albuminuria: data from the CANVAS program. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019;30:2229–2242. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2019010064.
    1. Sugrue DM, Ward T, Rai S, McEwan P, van Haalen HGM. Economic modelling of chronic kidney disease: a systematic literature review to inform conceptual model design. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37:1451–1468. doi: 10.1007/s40273-019-00835-z.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться