Abstract
Aims Intravenous (IV) iron is the recommended treatment for patients with iron deficiency anemia (IDA) who are unresponsive to oral iron treatment or require rapid iron replenishment. Ferric derisomaltose (FDI) and ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) are high-dose, rapid infusion, IV iron formulations that have recently been compared in three head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which showed significantly higher incidence of hypophosphatemia after administration of FCM than FDI. The present study objective was to evaluate the cost-utility of FDI versus FCM in a population of Chinese patients with IDA.
Materials and methods A previously-published patient-level simulation model was used to model the cost-utility of FDI versus FCM in China. The number of infusions of FDI and FCM was modeled based on the approved posology of the respective formulations using simplified tables of iron need in a population of patients with bodyweight and hemoglobin levels informed by a Chinese RCT of FCM. Data on the incidence of hypophosphatemia was obtained from the PHOSPHARE-IDA RCT, while data on disease-related quality of life was obtained from SF-36v2 data from the PHOSPHARE-IBD RCT.
Results Over the five-year time horizon, patients received 3.98 courses of iron treatment on average, requiring 0.90 fewer infusions of FDI than FCM (7.69 versus 6.79). This resulted in iron procurement and administration cost savings of RMB 206 with FDI (RMB 3,519 versus RMB 3,312). Reduced incidence of hypophosphatemia resulted in an increase of 0.07 quality-adjusted life years and further cost savings of RMB 782 over five years, driven by reduced need for phosphate testing and replenishment. FDI was therefore the dominant intervention.
Conclusions Results showed that FDI would improve patient quality of life and reduce direct healthcare expenditure versus FCM in patients with IDA in China.
Competing Interest Statement
RFP is a full-time employee, director, and shareholder in, and WA is a full-time employee of, Covalence Research Ltd, which received consultancy fees from Pharmacosmos A/S to develop the patient-level simulation model and analysis and prepare the manuscript. FZ and SA have no competing interests to declare.
Funding Statement
Pharmacosmos A/S funded the development of the health economic model and analysis, and preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
