A multi-criteria decision analysis on the value of nintedanib for interstitial lung diseases

Objectives Our aim was to assess the value of nintedanib for non-idiopathic progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease (non-IPF PF-ILD) and systemic sclerosis-associated ILD (SSc-ILD) in the Spanish context, using a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). Methods Following an adaptation of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Zozaya, Néboa|||0000-0003-4618-6894, Arrizubieta Basterrechea, M.I., Bollo, Elena, Castellvi, Ivan|||0000-0002-5410-5807, Espín, Jaime, Ortego, Norberto, Poveda-Andrés, José Luis, Rodríguez Portal, José Antonio, Rivero, Agustín, Marcos-Rodríguez, José Antonio, Verde, Luis
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2022
País:España
Institución:Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Repositorio:Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:ddd.uab.cat:290599
Acceso en línea:https://ddd.uab.cat/record/290599
https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.1017/S0266462322000459
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Interstitial lung diseases
Multi-criteria decision analysis
Pulmonary fibrosis
Systemic sclerosis
Descripción
Sumario:Objectives Our aim was to assess the value of nintedanib for non-idiopathic progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease (non-IPF PF-ILD) and systemic sclerosis-associated ILD (SSc-ILD) in the Spanish context, using a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). Methods Following an adaptation of the Evidence and Value: Impact on DEcision Making (EVIDEM) MCDA methodology, the estimated value of nintedanib was obtained by means of an additive linear model that combined individual weights (100-points distribution) of criteria with the individual scoring of nintedanib in each criterion for every indication, assigned by a multidisciplinary committee of twelve clinicians, patients, pharmacists, and decision-makers. To assess the reproducibility, an alternative weighting method was applied, as well as a re-test of weights and scores at a different moment of time. Results The experts committee recognized nintedanib as an intervention with a positive value contribution in comparison to placebo for the treatment of non-IPF PF-ILD (0.50 ± 0.16, on a scale from -1 to 1) and SSc-ILD (0.40 ± 0.12), diseases which were considered as very severe and with high unmet needs. The drug was perceived as a treatment that provides an added therapeutic benefit for patients (0.06-0.07), given its proven clinical efficacy (0.05-0.06), slight improvements in patient-reported outcomes (0.01-0.02), and similar safety profile than placebo (-0.04-0.00), which will likely be positioned as a recommended therapy in the next clinical practice guidelines updates. Conclusions Under this increasingly used methodology, nintedanib has shown to provide a positive value estimate for non-IPF PF-ILD and SSc-ILD when compared to placebo in Spain.