Cost-Analysis of Subcutaneous vs Intravenous Administration of Natalizumab Based on Patient Care Pathway in Multiple Sclerosis in Spain

Abstract

Análisis de costes; Administración subcutánea; Esclerosis múltiple

Anàlisi de costos; Administració subcutània; Esclerosi múltiple

Cost-analysis; Subcutaneous administration; Multiple sclerosis

Introduction A subcutaneous (SC) formulation of natalizumab has been recently authorised for multiple sclerosis patients. This study aimed to assess the implications of the new SC formulation, and to compare the annual treatment costs of SC versus intravenous (IV) natalizumab therapy from both the Spanish healthcare system (direct health cost) and the patient (indirect cost) perspectives. Methods A patient care pathway map and a cost-minimisation analysis were developed to estimate SC and IV natalizumab annual costs over a 2-year time horizon. Considering the patient care pathway and according to natalizumab experience (IV) or estimation (SC), a national expert panel involving neurologists, pharmacists, and nurses provided information/data regarding resource consumption for drug and patient preparation, administration, and documentation. One hour of observation was applied to the first six (SC) or 12 (IV) doses, and 5 min for successive doses. The Day hospital (infusion suite) facilities at a reference hospital were considered for IV administrations and the first six SC injections. For successive SC injections, either a reference hospital or regional hospital in a consulting room was considered. Productivity time associated with travel (56 min to reference hospital, 24 min to regional hospital) and waiting time pre- and post-treatment (SC 15 min, IV 25 min) were assessed for patients and caregivers (accompanying 20% of SC and 35% of IV administrations). National salaries for healthcare professionals were used for cost estimation (€, year 2021). Results At years 1 and 2, total time and cost savings (excluding drug acquisition cost) per patient, driven by saving on administration and patient and caregiver productivity for SC at a reference hospital versus IV at a reference hospital, were 116 h (a reduction of 54.6%) and €3682.82 (a reduction of 66.2%). In the case of natalizumab SC at a regional hospital, the total time and cost saving were 129 h (a reduction of 60.6%) and €3883.47 (a reduction of 69.8%). Conclusions Besides the potential benefits of convenient administration and improving work–life balance, as suggested by the expert panel, natalizumab SC was associated with cost savings for the healthcare system by avoiding drug preparation, reducing administration time, and freeing up infusion suite capacity. Additional cost savings could be derived with regional hospital administration of natalizumab SC by reducing productivity loss.