Posted by Michael Wonder on 16 Nov 2018
ICER issues final report on long-term prophylaxis for hereditary angioedema, provides policy recommendations to improve cost-effectiveness
15 November 2018 - Cost-effectiveness and coverage considerations hinge on the frequency and intensity of attacks.
The ICER today released a final evidence report and Report-at-a-Glance assessing the comparative clinical effectiveness and value of therapies for long-term prophylaxis against hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks. HAE is an ultra-rare condition characterised by attacks of deep tissue swelling within the skin and/or mucosa. In its report, ICER assessed three therapies for the prevention of HAE attacks: lanadelumab (Takhzyro, Shire), and two C1 inhibitors (Haegarda, CSL Behring; and Cinryze, Shire).
ICER’s report was reviewed at an October 2018 public meeting of the California Technology Assessment Forum (CTAF), one of ICER’s three independent evidence appraisal committees. During the meeting, CTAF found that the evidence demonstrated a net health benefit for using the C1 inhibitors as long-term prophylaxis, but that the evidence was insufficient to distinguish between Cinryze and Haegarda. Because of concerns about risks with a new therapy, the committee also found that current evidence was not adequate to determine whether long-term prophylaxis with lanadelumab is superior to on-demand therapy alone.
