Supplementary materials: Cost–consequence analysis of ofatumumab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Canada

These are peer-reviewed supplementary materials for the article 'Cost–consequence analysis of ofatumumab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Canada' published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research.Supplementary Table 1: Annual natural history transition probabilities (%) for EDSS statesSupplementary Table 2: EDSS-dependent mortality multiplier and disability weights for MS and number of hospitalization days per yearSupplementary Table 3: Productivity loss per year due to MSSupplementary Table 4: Treatment efficacy and discontinuation probabilities for ofatumumab and comparators versus BSC from the network meta-analysisSupplementary Table 5: Costs by health stateSupplementary Table 6: Drug administration, monitoring, and adverse event costsSupplementary Table 7: Drug administration costsSupplementary Table 8: Drug monitoring costsSupplementary Figure 1: Patient time (in years) in each EDSS health state over 10 years for first-line and second-line treatments without treatment switching or delay. Supplementary Figure 2: YLD and YLL over 10 years for all first-line and second-line treatments without treatment switching or delay.Supplementary Figure 3: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Ocrelizumab at 10-years.Supplementary Figure 4: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Teriflunomide at 10-years.Supplementary Figure 5: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Dimethyl Fumarate at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 6: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Glatiramer Acetate at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 7: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Avonex at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 8: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Rebif 44 at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 9: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Betaseron at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 10: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Extavia at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 11: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus BSC at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 12: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Cladribine at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 13: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Natalizumab at 10-years. Supplementary Figure 14: Sensitivity Analysis results for Ofatumumab versus Fingolimod at 10-years. Aim: The costs and consequences of initial and delayed ofatumumab treatment were evaluated in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with active disease in Canada. Materials & methods: A Markov cohort model was used (10-year horizon, annual cycle length, 1.5% discounting). Scenario analyses examined ofatumumab as first-line treatment versus 3 and 5 years following switch from commonly used first-line therapies. Results: Ofatumumab resulted in improvements in clinical outcomes (relapses and disease progression) and productivity (employment and full-time work), and reduction of economic burden (administration, monitoring and non-drug costs) that were comparable to other high-efficacy therapies (ocrelizumab, cladribine and natalizumab). Switching to ofatumumab earlier in the disease course may improve these outcomes. Conclusion: Results highlight the value of a high-efficacy therapy such as ofatumumab as initial treatment (i.e., first-line) in newly diagnosed relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients with active disease.

本数据集为发表在《比较有效性研究杂志》上的文章《加拿大治疗复发缓解型多发性硬化症的奥法木单抗的成本-效果分析》的同行评审补充材料。补充表1：EDSS状态下年度自然病程转换概率（%）。补充表2：与MS相关的EDSS依赖性死亡率乘数和残疾权重以及每年住院天数。补充表3：由于MS导致的每年生产力损失。补充表4：来自网络荟萃分析的治疗效果和停药概率，比较奥法木单抗及其对照药物与BSC。补充表5：按健康状况划分的成本。补充表6：药物管理、监测和不良事件成本。补充表7：药物管理成本。补充表8：药物监测成本。补充图1：10年内患者在不同EDSS健康状况下的时间（年），针对一线和二线治疗且无治疗切换或延迟。补充图2：10年内所有一线和二线治疗（无治疗切换或延迟）的YLD和YLL。补充图3：奥法木单抗与奥crelizumab在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图4：奥法木单抗与Teriflunomide在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图5：奥法木单抗与Dimethyl Fumarate在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图6：奥法木单抗与Glatiramer Acetate在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图7：奥法木单抗与Avonex在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图8：奥法木单抗与Rebif 44在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图9：奥法木单抗与Betaseron在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图10：奥法木单抗与Extavia在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图11：奥法木单抗与BSC在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图12：奥法木单抗与Cladribine在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图13：奥法木单抗与Natalizumab在10年时的敏感性分析结果。补充图14：奥法木单抗与Fingolimod在10年时的敏感性分析结果。目标：评估了在加拿大针对具有活动性疾病的复发缓解型多发性硬化症患者的初始和延迟奥法木单抗治疗的成本与后果。材料与方法：采用马尔可夫队列模型（10年预测期，年度周期长度，1.5%折现率）。情景分析考察了奥法木单抗作为一线治疗与常用一线疗法切换后3年和5年的比较。结果：奥法木单抗在临床结果（复发和疾病进展）和生产能力（就业和全职工作）方面取得了改善，并降低了经济负担（管理、监测和非药物成本），与其它高效疗法（奥crelizumab、cladribine和natalizumab）相当。在疾病早期阶段较早切换至奥法木单抗可能改善这些结果。结论：研究结果突出了在初诊复发缓解型多发性硬化症患者中，采用如奥法木单抗等高效疗法作为初始治疗（即一线治疗）的价值。