IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Febuxostat for the Management of Hyperuricaemia in Patients with Gout: A NICE Single Technology Appraisal

  • Matt Stevenson

    (School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK)

  • Abdullah Pandor

    (School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK)

Registered author(s):

    As part of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) single technology appraisal (STA) process, the manufacturer of febuxostat (Adenuric; Ipsen, UK) was invited to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of febuxostat for the management of hyperuricaemia in patients with gout. The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group (ScHARR-TAG) at the University of Sheffield were commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article provides details of the company's initial submission, the ERG's clarification questions and the ERG report submitted to NICE. The decision made by NICE is provided alongside a brief comment on additional results produced by a substantially different model, which were presented by the manufacturer after the production of the appraisal consultation document. The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical evidence and cost effectiveness of the technology based upon the manufacturer's submission to NICE. The clinical evidence was derived from two head-to-head, phase III, multi-arm, randomized, double blind, controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of febuxostat with fixed-dose allopurinol (300/100 mg/day) in patients with hyperuricaemia and gout. The ERG considered that the trials were of reasonable methodological quality and measured a clinically relevant range of outcomes. Although a simple pooled analysis of the individual patient-level data from the two trials was undertaken, the statistical approach for combining the data was considered inappropriate by the ERG as it failed to preserve randomization and introduced bias and confounding. There was substantial uncertainty in the relationships reported by the manufacturer regarding serum uric acid levels and the incidence of gout flares and underlying patient utility. The mathematical model developed was flawed and was not corrected despite ERG comments. It focused only on patients receiving febuxostat (80 mg/day titrated to 120 mg/day if necessary) with fixed-dose allopurinol (300/100 mg/day). Sequential treatment was not modeled, nor was titrating allopurinol to 900 mg/day, which is regarded as best practice. Numerous other errors were identified, which included the uncertain price of febuxostat being sampled within the probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Supplementary exploratory modelling addressing the position of febuxostat where patients were intolerant or contraindicated to allopurinol was provided to the NICE Appraisal Committee following the release of the appraisal consultation document. The NICE Appraisal Committee concluded that febuxostat be recommended as an option for the management of chronic hyperuricaemia in gout only for people who are intolerant to allopurinol or for whom allopurinol is contraindicated.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://PharmacoEconomics.adisonline.com/pt/re/pec/pdfhandler.00019053-201129020-00004.pdf
    Download Restriction: Pay per view

    File URL: http://PharmacoEconomics.adisonline.com/pt/re/pec/fulltext.00019053-201129020-00004.htm
    Download Restriction: Pay per view

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Springer Healthcare | Adis in its journal PharmacoEconomics.

    Volume (Year): 29 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 2 ()
    Pages: 133-140

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:29:y:2011:i:2:p:133-140
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://pharmacoeconomics.adisonline.com/

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:29:y:2011:i:2:p:133-140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dave Dustin)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.