Denosumab for Elderly Men with Osteoporosis

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the US Payer Perspective

Stuart Silverman, Irene Agodoa, Morgan Kruse, Anju Parthan, Eric Orwoll

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus other osteoporotic treatments in older men with osteoporosis from a US payer perspective. Methods. A lifetime cohort Markov model previously developed for postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) was used. Men in the model were 78 years old, with a BMD T-score of -2.12 and a vertebral fracture prevalence of 23%. During each 6-month Markov cycle, patients could have experienced a hip, vertebral or nonhip, nonvertebral (NHNV) osteoporotic fracture, remained in a nonfracture state, remained in a postfracture state, or died. Background fracture risks, mortality rates, persistence rates, health utilities, and medical and drug costs were derived from published sources. Previous PMO studies were used for drug efficacy in reducing fracture risk. Lifetime expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated for denosumab, generic alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, teriparatide, and zoledronate. Results. Denosumab had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $16,888 compared to generic alendronate and dominated all other treatments. Results were most sensitive to changes in costs of denosumab and the relative risk of hip fracture. Conclusion. Despite a higher annual treatment cost compared to other medications, denosumab is cost-effective compared to other osteoporotic treatments in older osteoporotic US men.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number627631
JournalJournal of Osteoporosis
Volume2015
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Osteoporosis
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Alendronate
Postmenopausal Osteoporosis
zoledronic acid
Costs and Cost Analysis
Teriparatide
Osteoporotic Fractures
Drug Costs
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Hip Fractures
Health Care Costs
Hip
Therapeutics
Denosumab
Mortality
Health
Pharmaceutical Preparations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
  • Endocrinology

Cite this

Denosumab for Elderly Men with Osteoporosis : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the US Payer Perspective. / Silverman, Stuart; Agodoa, Irene; Kruse, Morgan; Parthan, Anju; Orwoll, Eric.

In: Journal of Osteoporosis, Vol. 2015, 627631, 2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{cee296ebd89e4a8e8fb9d73c0b1f399b,
title = "Denosumab for Elderly Men with Osteoporosis: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the US Payer Perspective",
abstract = "Purpose. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus other osteoporotic treatments in older men with osteoporosis from a US payer perspective. Methods. A lifetime cohort Markov model previously developed for postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) was used. Men in the model were 78 years old, with a BMD T-score of -2.12 and a vertebral fracture prevalence of 23{\%}. During each 6-month Markov cycle, patients could have experienced a hip, vertebral or nonhip, nonvertebral (NHNV) osteoporotic fracture, remained in a nonfracture state, remained in a postfracture state, or died. Background fracture risks, mortality rates, persistence rates, health utilities, and medical and drug costs were derived from published sources. Previous PMO studies were used for drug efficacy in reducing fracture risk. Lifetime expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated for denosumab, generic alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, teriparatide, and zoledronate. Results. Denosumab had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $16,888 compared to generic alendronate and dominated all other treatments. Results were most sensitive to changes in costs of denosumab and the relative risk of hip fracture. Conclusion. Despite a higher annual treatment cost compared to other medications, denosumab is cost-effective compared to other osteoporotic treatments in older osteoporotic US men.",
author = "Stuart Silverman and Irene Agodoa and Morgan Kruse and Anju Parthan and Eric Orwoll",
year = "2015",
doi = "10.1155/2015/627631",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2015",
journal = "Journal of Osteoporosis",
issn = "2090-8059",
publisher = "Hindawi Publishing Corporation",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Denosumab for Elderly Men with Osteoporosis

T2 - A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the US Payer Perspective

AU - Silverman, Stuart

AU - Agodoa, Irene

AU - Kruse, Morgan

AU - Parthan, Anju

AU - Orwoll, Eric

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Purpose. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus other osteoporotic treatments in older men with osteoporosis from a US payer perspective. Methods. A lifetime cohort Markov model previously developed for postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) was used. Men in the model were 78 years old, with a BMD T-score of -2.12 and a vertebral fracture prevalence of 23%. During each 6-month Markov cycle, patients could have experienced a hip, vertebral or nonhip, nonvertebral (NHNV) osteoporotic fracture, remained in a nonfracture state, remained in a postfracture state, or died. Background fracture risks, mortality rates, persistence rates, health utilities, and medical and drug costs were derived from published sources. Previous PMO studies were used for drug efficacy in reducing fracture risk. Lifetime expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated for denosumab, generic alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, teriparatide, and zoledronate. Results. Denosumab had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $16,888 compared to generic alendronate and dominated all other treatments. Results were most sensitive to changes in costs of denosumab and the relative risk of hip fracture. Conclusion. Despite a higher annual treatment cost compared to other medications, denosumab is cost-effective compared to other osteoporotic treatments in older osteoporotic US men.

AB - Purpose. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus other osteoporotic treatments in older men with osteoporosis from a US payer perspective. Methods. A lifetime cohort Markov model previously developed for postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) was used. Men in the model were 78 years old, with a BMD T-score of -2.12 and a vertebral fracture prevalence of 23%. During each 6-month Markov cycle, patients could have experienced a hip, vertebral or nonhip, nonvertebral (NHNV) osteoporotic fracture, remained in a nonfracture state, remained in a postfracture state, or died. Background fracture risks, mortality rates, persistence rates, health utilities, and medical and drug costs were derived from published sources. Previous PMO studies were used for drug efficacy in reducing fracture risk. Lifetime expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated for denosumab, generic alendronate, risedronate, ibandronate, teriparatide, and zoledronate. Results. Denosumab had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $16,888 compared to generic alendronate and dominated all other treatments. Results were most sensitive to changes in costs of denosumab and the relative risk of hip fracture. Conclusion. Despite a higher annual treatment cost compared to other medications, denosumab is cost-effective compared to other osteoporotic treatments in older osteoporotic US men.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84953207018&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84953207018&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1155/2015/627631

DO - 10.1155/2015/627631

M3 - Article

VL - 2015

JO - Journal of Osteoporosis

JF - Journal of Osteoporosis

SN - 2090-8059

M1 - 627631

ER -