Cost-Effectiveness of Rituximab Versus Bortezomib in Kidney Transplant Patients

Kidney transplantation is still the most important and main treatment for advanced kidney failure. However, some patients reject the transplant through an immune system reaction. Improvement of immunosuppression with drugs such as rituximab and bortezomib allows these patients to be eligible for transplantation. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of rituximab versus bortezomib in kidney transplant patients at Farhikhtegan Hospital, Tehran.

The target statistical population in this research was inpatients receiving rituximab and bortezomib in 2022 in Farhikhtegan Hospital. Rituximab with a minimum dose of 375 mg/m2 was administered one day before transplantation. Bortezomib was administered at a dose of 1.3 mg/m2 on four occasions (usually days 1, 4, 8, and 11). The indicators related to the calculation of the cost of the disease and the parameters indicating the effectiveness were determined through library studies and interviews with experts, and finally, the aforementioned information was collected through the examination of the patient's records (hospital database). Cost indicators include the cost of a physician visit (first day, second day, general practitioner, emergency department, discharge day), medicine (main medicine, complementary medicine), hospital hoteling (nursing services, consumables, bed, radiology, ECG, critical care, physiotherapy, preparation of nutrition formulary, examination, and burial permit) and tests (all tests necessary to evaluate and monitor the patient). Efficacy indices included IgG class I, IgG class II, IgM class I, and IgM class II. The data analysis was conducted by SPSS software.

77 kidney transplant patients including 53 treated with bortezomib and 24 receiving rituximab with an average age of 41.01±8.50 years were studied. Our findings showed that the average cost of the bortezomib group was 19,548,230.86 tomans. Before taking bortezomib, the average level of class I and class II IgG was 68.16±6.34 and 67.11±4.96, respectively, which significantly decreased to 17.28±15.73 and 18.13±16.75 after treatment with bortezomib (P=0.000). The average IgM class I and class II before taking medicine were 5.69±1.30 and 5.54±0.95, respectively, which reached 5.43±0.79 and 5.13±0.39 after taking Bortezomib, respectively. This decrease was significant for IgM class II (P=0.000), but not significant for IgM class I (P=0.223). In patients receiving rituximab, before taking the drug, the average level of class I and class II IgG was 71.66±7.86 and 67.83±4.53, respectively, which significantly decreased to 13.95±13.82 and 15.83±14.15 after treatment with rituximab (P=0.000). The average IgM class I and class II before taking rituximab was 5.70±1.23 and 5.45±0.97, respectively, after taking the drug, it decreased to 5.41±0.65 and 5.16±0.38, respectively, and this decrease was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The average cost of the rituximab group was 28,261,539.29 Tomans and caused a significant decrease in the average level of IgG class I and II. The incremental cost-effectiveness rate (ICER) was 1770997.65, which was lower than the threshold defined by WHO.

The results of our study showed that rituximab is cost-effective compared to bortezomib