Budget impact of introducing Bimekizumab into treatment sequences for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in Emirates Health Services

Introduction Moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis imposes a substantial clinical and economic burden. Bimekizumab, a dual interleukin (IL) − 17A and IL-17F inhibitor, has demonstrated high efficacy in achieving complete skin clearance. However, its financial implications within the United Arab Emirates (UAE), specifically the Emirates Health Services (EHS), require localized evaluation. This study aimed to estimate the 5-year budget impact of introducing bimekizumab into the treatment sequence for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis from both the EHS healthcare payer and societal perspectives. Methods A localized, deterministic budget impact model was developed in Microsoft Excel to compare a reference scenario without bimekizumab uptake versus alternative scenarios in which bimekizumab was introduced in the first, second, or third treatment line over 5 years (2025–2029). The model was evaluated from the EHS perspective for both the payer and societal analyses. The societal analysis included productivity loss and exploratory burden of disease metrics such as years of life lost (YLL), years lived with disability (YLD), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs). Clinical response was evaluated using selectable Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75, PASI 90, and PASI 100 thresholds. Model assumptions were informed by published evidence and localized through a structured round-table discussion with clinicians and pharmacists. Results The modeled treated population increased from 857 patients in 2025 to 971 in 2029. From the payer perspective, first-line introduction of bimekizumab was consistently cost-saving over 5 years, generating cumulative savings of UAE dirhams (AED) 7.66 million, AED 3.49 million, and AED 4.23 million under PASI 75, PASI 90, and PASI 100, respectively. In contrast, second- and third-line placement increased direct costs. From the societal perspective, first-line and second-line placement were cost-saving across all PASI thresholds, whereas third-line placement was cost-saving at PASI 75 and PASI 100, and cost-neutral at PASI 90. Conclusion In this localized EHS budget impact model, the economic impact of bimekizumab depended on treatment-line placement and analytical perspective. First-line introduction was consistently the most favorable strategy from the payer perspective, while societal savings were seen primarily for first- and second-line placement and were driven by reduced productivity losses.