Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content

Table 5 Base case results for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Spain over a lifetime horizon (45 years)

From: Cost-utility analysis of certolizumab pegol versus alternative tumour necrosis factor inhibitors available for the treatment of moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis in Spain

 

Mean costs (€)

Difference in costs vs CZP (€)

Mean QALY

Difference in QALYs vs CZP

ICER vs CZP

Combination therapies

CZP + MTX

140,971

0

6.578

0

–

ADA + MTX (every 2 weeks)

139,148

1823

6.430

0.148

€12,346

ADA + MTX (weekly)

164,741

−23,770

6.430

0.148

CZP dominant

ETA + MTX

141,197

−226

6.462

0.116

CZP dominant

IFX (3 mg/kg) + MTX

136,961

4010

6.318

0.260

€15,414

IFX (5 mg/kg) + MTX

152,561

−11,590

6.318

0.260

CZP dominant

Monotherapies

CZP

134,792

0

6.416

0

–

ADA (every 2 weeks)

136,745

−1953

6.216

0.200

CZP dominant

ADA (weekly)

156,223

−21,431

6.216

0.200

CZP dominant

ETAa

135,459

667

6.492

0.076

€8,778a

  1. ADA adalimumab, CZP certolizumab pegol, ETA etanercept, ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, IFX infliximab, MTX methotrexate, QALY quality-adjusted life years
  2. aIncremental Analysis is for ETA versus CZP and not the other way round
Back to article page

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation

ISSN: 1478-7547

Contact us