2026-10-14T13:01:05Z https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai

oai:figshare.com:article/33955400 2026-09-21T16:56:00Z category_7 category_19 category_21 category_45 category_106 category_132 portal_87 item_type_3 month_year_09_2026

Cost-effectiveness and value implications of veligrotug versus teprotumumab for moderate-to-severe thyroid eye disease in the United States Zhengxuan Li (7195007) Christina Y. Weng (8189025) Hua Chen (43790) Moosa Tatar (22093729) Medicine Pharmacology Biotechnology Sociology Science Policy Infectious Diseases Thyroid eye disease teprotumumab veligrotug cost-effectiveness IGF-1R inhibitor decision-analytic model Thyroid eye disease (TED) is a debilitating autoimmune condition. Teprotumumab is effective but costly, whereas veligrotug is a recently approved IGF-1R inhibitor requiring fewer infusions. A 1-year decision-analytic model compared veligrotug with teprotumumab from a US payer perspective. Clinical inputs came from pivotal phase 3 trials, and costs included drug, infusion, and monitoring. One-way (treatment cost, adherence), two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses used willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of USD 150,000 and 500,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). At a WAC of USD 450,000 per course, veligrotug’s fully loaded cost was USD 459,850 versus USD 444,949 for teprotumumab in a 75-kg patient. Veligrotug was slightly more costly and no more effective (0.0149 vs 0.0161 QALYs), with a negative incremental net monetary benefit of USD 15,080 at USD 150,000/QALY. It was cost-effective in 19.2% of probabilistic iterations and became cost-effective only when fully loaded cost fell below approximately USD 444,800, corresponding to a WAC about 3.4% below launch price. At current price and efficacy, veligrotug is not economically dominant over teprotumumab. A modest price reduction could achieve cost-effectiveness, while its shorter infusion course may add real-world value. Why was this study conducted? Thyroid eye disease (TED) is a serious autoimmune condition that can cause eye bulging, double vision, pain, and a reduced quality of life. Teprotumumab is currently the first biologic therapy approved for TED and has improved clinical outcomes for many patients, but it is expensive and requires multiple infusions. Veligrotug is a newer therapy that targets the same biological pathway but is given in fewer infusions. Because veligrotug now has a confirmed launch price and final trial results, we were able to compare the two treatments directly. What did the researchers do and find? We developed an economic model to compare the costs and health benefits of veligrotug and teprotumumab from the perspective of the U.S. healthcare system, using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) to combine survival and quality of life. Using veligrotug’s confirmed launch price (approximately USD 450,000 per course, comparable with teprotumumab’s) and confirmed trial results, we found that veligrotug costs more than teprotumumab without providing greater health benefit. We also estimated that veligrotug would need to be priced roughly 3.4% lower than its current price to offer comparable value. What do these results mean? At its current price, veligrotug is not the better-value option compared with teprotumumab. However, because the two treatments are priced similarly, other factors, such as veligrotug’s shorter infusion schedule and its safety profile, may matter more for real-world treatment decisions than price alone. Our analysis also provides a concrete price target below which veligrotug would represent good value, which may inform future coverage and pricing discussions. 2026-09-21T16:56:00Z Dataset Dataset 10.6084/m9.figshare.33955400.v1 https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Cost-effectiveness_and_value_implications_of_veligrotug_versus_teprotumumab_for_moderate-to-severe_thyroid_eye_disease_in_the_United_States/33955400 CC BY 4.0