Cost-effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in COVID-19 patient groups at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19 in the Netherlands

2Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is indicated for the treatment of COVID-19 in symptomatic adults with increased risk for severe illness, not requiring supplemental oxygen yet. From a Dutch societal perspective, a cost-utility assessment of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir versus best supportive care (BSC) was conducted in three patient groups: (a) immunocompromised patients, (b) patients aged at least 60 years with one comorbidity, (c) patients aged at least 70 years. Groups were selected considering their relevance as high-risk groups, as described in Dutch and international guidelines and recommendations. Methods: A one-year decision-tree, estimating costs and outcomes associated with a COVID-19 infection was coupled to a lifetime two-state Markov component simulating subsequent life-time survival and quality of life. Effectiveness estimates, informing the intervention preventing hospital admission or death, were based on real-world evidence by Lewnard and colleagues (2023) in a vaccinated population during a timeframe with predominance of the Omicron variant. Epidemiology relies on publicly available data, primarily sourced during the Omicron variant’s era. In the decision tree, clinically relevant event-related disutilities per disease course were applied to adjusted age-dependent Dutch-specific utility levels. In the Markov component, a disutility was considered for post-ICU patients. Costs rely on Dutch pharmacoeconomic guidelines and public data sources. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was analysed as the main outcome, with a positive ICER indicating the cost associated with each additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained by adopting the intervention. Results: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was associated with an ICER of € 395 in the immunocompromised group (per patient: + 0.125 QALYs gained; + 0.130 life-years [LYs] gained; € 49 incremental cost), with an ICER of € 8700 in 60-plus patients with comorbidity (+ 0.054 QALYs; + 0.055 LYs; € 474 incremental cost), and with an ICER of € 13,021 among 70-plus patients (+ 0.053 QALYs; + 0.045 LYs; € 689 incremental cost). Results were most sensitive to the baseline hospitalization rates among high-risk individuals. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicate a high probability of being cost-effective (100, 94, 85% respectively), considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of € 20,000 per QALY. Conclusions: From a Dutch societal perspective, over a lifetime horizon, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is cost-effective versus BSC in the three groups analysed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Arteaga Duarte, C. H., Peters, M. L., de Goeij, M. H. M., Spijkerman, R., & Postma, M. J. (2025). Cost-effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in COVID-19 patient groups at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19 in the Netherlands. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-025-00604-0

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free