The gene therapy voretigene neparvovec (VN) is the first Food and Drug Administrationeapproved treatment for vision loss owing to the ultra-rare RPE65-mediated inherited retinal disorders. We modeled the cost-utility of VN compared with standard of care (SoC). Study Design: A 2-state Markov model, alive and dead, with a lifetime horizon. Methods: Visual acuity (VA) and visual field (VF) were tracked to model quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). VN led to an improvement in VA and VF that we assumed was maintained for 10 years followed by a 10-year waning period. The cost of VN was $850 000, and other direct medical costs for depression and trauma were included for a US healthcare system perspective. A modified societal perspective also included direct nonmedical costs and indirect costs. Results: VN provided an additional 1.3 QALYs over the remaining lifetime of an individual. The average total lifetime direct medical cost

There is broad agreement among health-care stakeholders that more must be done to ensure that patients have timely access to new and innovative medicines. Assuming that industry will continue to develop such medicines at a sustainable rate, regulators and payers become the gatekeepers. Regulators, starting in the late 1980s/early 1990s, and, more recently, payers have implemented a variety of early-access pathways or initiatives, and this practice is continuing even today. This article describes the specific approaches that have been taken in four economically developed regions, reviews their success rates, and suggests possible new directions.

OCA is a promising new therapy to substantially improve the long-term outcomes of PBC patients, but at its current annual price of $69,350, it is not cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life year; pricing below $18,450/year is needed to make OCA cost-effective. (Hepatology 2017;65:920-928).

No abstract

Objective: Opioid abuse is a significant public health problem in the United States. We evaluate the clinical effectiveness and economic impact of abuse-deterrent formulations (ADF) of opioids relative to non-ADF opioids in preventing abuse. Methods: We developed a costeffectiveness model simulating 2 cohorts of 100 000 noncancer, chronic-pain patients newly prescribed either ADF or non-ADF extended-release (ER) opioids and followed them over 5 years, tracking new events of opioid abuse and opioid-related overdose deaths in addition to tracking 5-year cumulative costs of therapeutic use and abuse of ADF and non-ADF opioids. Patients in each cohort entered the model for therapeutic opioid use from where they could continue in that pathway, discontinue opioid use, or abuse opioids or die of opioid overdose-related or unrelated causes. In addition, oneway sensitivity and scenario analysis were conducted. Results: Over a 5-year time period, using ADF opioids prevented an additional 2300 new cases of opioid abuse at an additional cost of approximately $535 million to the healthcare sector. Threshold analyses showed that a 40% decrease in ADF opioid costs was required to attain cost neutrality between the 2 cohorts, whereas a 100% effectiveness in abuse reduction still did not result in cost neutrality. A 43% decrease in diversion with ADFs relative to non-ADFs was required to attain cost neutrality. Including a societal perspective produced results directionally similar to the base-case analysis findings. Conclusion: ADF opioids have the potential to prevent new cases of opioid abuse, but at substantially higher costs to the health system.