Cost-Effectiveness of Baloxavir Marboxil Versus Oseltamivir or no Treatment for the Management of Influenza in the United States

• Published in: Infectious diseases and therapy Vol. 13; no. 9; pp. 2071 - 2087
• Main Authors: Kommandantvold, Svenn Alexander, Chang, Shih-Chen, Surinach, Andy, Yau, Vincent, Best, Jennie H., Zaraket, Hassan, Zhou, Hao, Frimpter, Jeff, Blanchet Zumofen, Marie-Helene
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cheshire Springer Healthcare 01.09.2024; Springer; Springer Nature B.V; Adis, Springer Healthcare
• Subjects: Antiviral drugs; Antiviral treatment; Baloxavir; Biotechnology industry; Commercial payer; Cost analysis; Cost control; Cost-effectiveness; Development and progression; Economic aspects; Infectious Diseases; Influenza; Internal Medicine; Medicaid; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Original Research; Oseltamivir; Oseltamivir phosphate; United States; Switzerland; United States > US; Oseltamivir; Antiviral treatment; United States; Viral transmission; Influenza; Real-world data; Pandemic; Commercial payer; Cost-effectiveness; Baloxavir
• ISSN: 2193-8229; 2193-6382
• DOI: 10.1007/s40121-024-01027-9

Introduction This study sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of baloxavir marboxil compared with oseltamivir or no antiviral treatment from a US payer perspective using data from a real-world US administrative claims study. Given baloxavir’s ability to rapidly stop viral shedding, the potential health economic implications of a baloxavir-induced population-level reduction in viral transmission was also explored. Methods A decision tree cost-effectiveness model was developed for seasonal influenza (2018–2020) using a lifetime time horizon with 3.0% discounting for costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Patients aged ≥ 12 years could receive baloxavir, oseltamivir or no antiviral treatment. Patient characteristics, complications, and costs were derived from the Merative™ MarketScan ® Research Databases including US commercial claims and Medicare and Medicaid Supplemental databases. A scenario analysis explored the impact of reduced viral transmission with baloxavir. Results In the base case analysis, baloxavir was cost-effective within a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$100,000/QALY compared with oseltamivir [incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), $6813/QALY gained] or no antiviral treatment (ICER, $669/QALY gained). The net monetary benefit (NMB) of baloxavir was $1180 and $6208 compared with oseltamivir and no treatment, respectively. The NMB of baloxavir increased linearly with reductions in viral transmission, where a 5% transmission reduction yielded an NMB of $2592 versus oseltamivir and $7621 versus no treatment. Baloxavir became dominant (more effective and less costly, with ICERs < 0) starting with a 12.0% reduction in viral transmission versus oseltamivir and 6.0% versus no antiviral treatment. Conclusion Baloxavir was cost-effective compared with oseltamivir or no antiviral treatment. The potential of baloxavir to reduce viral transmission offers a substantial economic benefit from a US payer perspective. Plain Language Summary Baloxavir is a prescription medicine that reduces the duration of flu symptoms and reduces the likelihood of complications from the flu, including serious complications that may require hospitalization. Baloxavir may reduce the spread of the flu to healthy people by reducing the amount and duration of virus shedding from infected people. We designed a model to estimate the cost benefits of using baloxavir versus another flu treatment, known as oseltamivir, or no flu treatment at all. Using baloxavir led to more cost savings than oseltamivir or no treatment for people in the US who have commercial health insurance. Baloxavir was even more cost-effective in the scenario where it reduced the number of flu cases (transmission benefit). This could ultimately have a meaningful benefit across a large health insurance population.