ReachRxResearch
Home
Research
Sign Up
  1. Home
  2. Research Hub
  3. Approved Monoclonal Antibody Therapies f…

Approved Monoclonal Antibody Therapies for Hidradenitis Suppurativa

JAMA Dermatology·August 5Open Access
DermatologyPractice changingHidradenitis SuppurativaEconomic EvaluationIL-17A/F InhibitorMonoclonal AntibodyTNF-Alpha InhibitorAdultBimzelxCosentyxHumiraAdalimumabBimekizumabSecukinumab

Summary

View source

What was studied

This economic evaluation compared the cost-efficiency of three approved monoclonal antibody therapies for moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) — adalimumab, secukinumab, and bimekizumab — across five countries (US, Canada, France, Germany, Australia) using Phase 3 trial efficacy data and publicly available drug pricing as of January 31, 2026.

Key findings

Adalimumab 40 mg weekly was on the efficiency frontier in all five countries for both HiSCR-50 and HiSCR-75 outcomes. Secukinumab 300 mg every 4 weeks reached the frontier only when US wholesale acquisition costs were used. Annual costs ranged from $11,345 (adalimumab in Australia) to $411,990 (bimekizumab in the US).

Study limitations

- Only publicly available list prices were used; negotiated or rebated prices, which vary widely, were not included. - Efficacy data were drawn from separate Phase 3 trials without head-to-head comparisons, limiting direct cross-drug efficacy inference. - Full-text access was unavailable; some methodological details may be incomplete.

Clinical implications

Adalimumab remains the most cost-efficient approved biologic for HS across major health systems, with costs up to 36-fold lower than bimekizumab in the US. Clinicians and payers advocating for value-based formulary decisions should weigh these large pricing differentials alongside efficacy data.

Caveats

  • Bimekizumab brand name 'Bimzelx' assumed based on known regulatory approval; not explicitly stated in the source text.
  • Full text was inaccessible; summary is based solely on the abstract and results excerpt. Methodological nuances (e.g., discounting, time horizon, sensitivity analyses beyond severity adjustment) could not be verified.
  • Level of evidence assigned as 4 (economic/decision analysis); no direct clinical trial was conducted in this study.
Show all 4
  • Sample size tag reflects 6 Phase 3 trials used for efficacy data synthesis, not a patient-level N — no total patient count was reported in the available abstract.

Related Questions

Explore related topics

How does adalimumab compare to bimekizumab in clinical efficacy for hidradenitis suppurativa?What is the cost-effectiveness of biologics for moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa?How do international drug pricing differences affect biologic access for hidradenitis suppurativa patients?

Publication Details

Year
2026
Journal
JAMA Dermatology
Sample Size
n=6
Source
View article
Keep scrolling
More content below.
Up Next