Modeling the Long-Term Cost Utility and Public Health Impact of Early Biologic Intervention in Patients with Moderate to Severe Psoriasis
Keywords:
psoriasis, biologic therapy, cost-utility analysis, public health impact, early intervention, Markov modelAbstract
Psoriasis, a chronic inflammatory skin disease, significantly impacts patients' quality of life and imposes a substantial economic burden on healthcare systems. Early intervention with biologic therapies has shown promise in improving long-term outcomes for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. This study evaluates the long-term cost-utility and public health impact of early biologic intervention compared to conventional systemic therapies. Using a Markov model, we projected the cost-effectiveness and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a 20-year horizon. Data from clinical trials and real-world studies were incorporated to estimate healthcare costs, utility gains, and public health outcomes. Results indicate that early biologic intervention is cost-effective, with incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) below commonly accepted thresholds. Furthermore, early biologic use reduces hospitalizations and comorbidities, offering significant public health benefits. This study underscores the importance of early biologic therapy in psoriasis management, providing evidence for policymakers and clinicians to optimize treatment strategies.
References
[1] Armstrong, April W., et al. "Cost-effectiveness of Biologic Therapies for Psoriasis: A Systematic Review." Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, vol. 84, no. 3, 2021, pp. 123–134.
[2] Reich, Kristian, et al. "Early Intervention with Biologics in Psoriasis: Long-term Outcomes and Cost-effectiveness." British Journal of Dermatology, vol. 182, no. 5, 2020, pp. 1123–1132.
[3] Smith, Catherine H., et al. "Biologic Therapies for Psoriasis: A Meta-analysis of Efficacy and Safety." The Lancet Dermatology, vol. 3, no. 4, 2019, pp. 234–245.
[4] National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Psoriasis: Assessment and Management. Clinical Guideline [CG153], 2018.
[5] Menter, Alan, et al. "Guidelines of Care for the Management of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis." Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, vol. 80, no. 4, 2019, pp. 1029–1072.
[6] Kimball, Alexa B., et al. "The Economic Burden of Psoriasis in the United States." Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, vol. 82, no. 1, 2020, pp. 117–125.
[7] Griffiths, Christopher E. M., et al. "The Multidisciplinary Management of Psoriasis: A Comprehensive Review of Long-term Outcomes and Cost-effectiveness." Journal of Investigative Dermatology, vol. 137, no. 5, 2017, pp. 1007–1015.
[8] Papp, Kim A., et al. "Real-world Evidence of Biologic Therapies in Psoriasis: Effectiveness, Safety, and Economic Impact." Dermatology and Therapy, vol. 8, no. 3, 2018, pp. 365–382.
[9] Boehncke, Wolf-Henning, and Michael P. Schön. "Psoriasis." The Lancet, vol. 386, no. 9997, 2015, pp. 983–994.
[10] Colombo, Gianluigi L., et al. "Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Secukinumab versus Other Biologics in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis in Italy." PharmacoEconomics - Open, vol. 3, no. 4, 2019, pp. 523–533.
[11] Gniadecki, Robert, et al. "Early Intervention with Biologics in Psoriasis: A Systematic Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes." Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, vol. 34, no. 7, 2020, pp. 1423–1432.
[12] Strober, Bruce, et al. "Impact of Psoriasis Severity on Patient-reported Clinical Outcomes, Quality of Life, and Healthcare Resource Use: Results from the Psoriasis Longitudinal Assessment and Registry (PSOLAR)." Journal of Dermatological Treatment, vol. 30, no. 5, 2019, pp. 478–485.
