scholarly journals Evaluation of the cost-utility of phosphate binders as a treatment option for hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the economic evaluations

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamolpat Chaiyakittisopon ◽  
Oraluck Pattanaprateep ◽  
Narisa Ruenroengbun ◽  
Tunlanut Sapankaew ◽  
Atiporn Ingsathit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Phosphate Binders ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Dialysis Patients ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Uncontrolled hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients commonly results in vascular calcification leading to increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Phosphate binders (PBs) are used for hyperphosphatemia and can be calcium-based (CBPBs) or non-calcium-based (NCBPBs), the latter being more expensive than CBPBs. In this study, we used meta-analysis approaches to assess the cost-utility of PBs for hyperphosphatemia in CKD patients. Methods Relevant studies published prior to June 2019 were identified from PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. Studies were eligible if they included CKD patients with hyperphosphatemia, compared any PBs and reported economic outcomes. Meta-analysis was applied to pool incremental net benefit (INB) across studies stratified by country income. Results A total of 25 studies encompassing 32 comparisons were eligible. Lanthanum carbonate, a NCBPB, was a more cost-effective option than CBPBs in high-income countries (HICs), with a pooled INB of $3984.4 (599.5–7369.4), especially in pre-dialysis patients and used as a second-line option with INBs of $4860.2 (641.5–9078.8), $4011.0 (533.7–7488.3), respectively. Sevelamer, also a NCBPB, was not more cost-effective as a first-line option compared to CBPBs with a pooled INB of $6045.8 (− 23,453.0 to 35,522.6) and $34,168.9 (− 638.0 to 68,975.7) in HICs and upper middle-income countries, respectively. Conclusions Lanthanum carbonate was significantly more cost-effective than CBPBs as a second-line option for hyperphosphatemia in pre-dialysis patients in HICs. However, the use of sevelamer is not more cost-effective as a first-line option compared to CBPBs.

scholarly journals P1011CARDIOVASCULAR OUTCOME TRIALS (CVOT) USING NEW ANTI-DIABETIC AGENTS IN CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Sarween ◽  
Nuvreen Phagura ◽  
Adnan Sharif
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Receptor Agonists ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background and Aims The latest consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) recommends metformin and lifestyle intervention as first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes. Second-line therapy recommendation is the use sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT 2) inhibitors (if estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] is adequate) or GLP-1 receptor agonists if eGFR is inadequate (or SGLT-2 inhibitors not tolerated). No recommendation is made for dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. Therapy choices are limited for patients with both type 2 diabetes and moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) and it is unclear from published data if observed cardiovascular benefits of new anti-diabetic agents extend to the CKD cohort. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review of all published CVOT trials using new anti-diabetic agents (GLP-1 receptor agonist, DPP-4 inhibitor, SGLT 2 inhibitor). Method We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) up to 1st December 2019. Data was stratified by trial entry eGFR into normal (eGFR ≥60 ml/min) and CKD (eGFR <60 ml/min), with data extracted for primary major cardiovascular event (MACE) rates such as cardiovascular death, stroke and/or myocardial infarct. A meta-analysis with random effects model was performed to estimate overall hazard ratios (HRs) for MACE with new anti-diabetic agents stratified by eGFR. Inter-study heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 index and Cochran’s Q test. Results We analysed 13 studies from 16 that were eligible after our search strategy, with 2 excluded due lack of data stratified by eGFR and 1 excluded due to combined MACE/renal outcomes. The studies (GLP-1 agonists, n=6; DPP-4 inhibitors, n=4; SGLT 2 inhibitors, n=3) had a combined total of 128,266 participants (22.1% with eGFR <60 ml/min). HR for MACE with GLP-1 agonists for participants with eGFR ≥60 ml/min was 0.87 (95% CI 0.77-0.98; p=0.02) and for participants with eGFR <60 ml/min was 0.90 (95% CI 0.78-1.04; p=0.14). HR for MACE with DPP-4 inhibitors for participants with eGFR ≥60 ml/min was 0.99 (95% CI 0.92-1.07; p=0.86) and for participants with eGFR <60 ml/min was 0.99 (95% CI 0.91-1.08; p=0.86). HR for MACE with SGLT 2 inhibitors for participants with eGFR ≥60 ml/min was 0.98 (95% CI 0.88-1.10; p=0.78) and for participants with eGFR <60 ml/min was 0.82 (95% CI 0.70-0.96; p=0.01). Significant heterogeneity was observed in the meta-analyses for each new anti-diabetic therapy drug class stratified by eGFR. Conclusion Among the new anti-diabetic agents, our study suggests efficacy for prevention of MACE in the setting of CKD exists only for SGLT 2 inhibitors and not with GLP-1 receptor agonists or DPP-4 inhibitors. Targeted CVOT studies incorporating participants with diabetes and CKD are critical to guide glycaemic management in these high-risk patients. Until then, we suggest recommendations for second-line therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and renal impairment should be amended to reflect the current evidence base supporting prevention of MACE with SGLT 2 inhibitors versus other new anti-diabetic agents.

Comparison between Intravenous Iron and Oral Iron Preparations for the Treatment of Anemia of Chronic Kidney Disease - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 3748-3748
Author(s):  
Anat Gafter-Gvili ◽  
Benaya Rozen-Zvi ◽  
Mical Paul ◽  
Leonard Leibovici ◽  
Gafter Uzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Dialysis Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Iron Preparation ◽  
Iv Iron

Abstract Background: There is confounding data regarding the best method of iron supplementation in chronic kidney disease (CKD), without a consistent approach in clinical practice. Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) iron versus oral iron in patients treated for anemia of CKD. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing IV iron preparation with oral iron preparation for the treatment of anemia in patients with CKD (stage III, IV and V). The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, conference proceedings and references were searched until 2007. Primary outcomes: absolute hemoglobin (Hb) level or change in Hb level from baseline at two months or at end of study; all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes: need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) in predialysis patient and adverse events. Weighted mean differences (WMD) for outcomes with continuous variables and relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated and pooled. Results: Our search yielded 11 trials which compared IV iron preparations (iron sucrose, iron gluconate or iron dextran) to oral iron. Compared to oral iron, there was a significant rise in Hb level in the IV iron treated hemodialysis patients (WMD 1.17; 95%CI 0.19–2.15, fig). Significant heterogeneity was observed due to different baseline Hb values and baseline iron status, different dosages of oral iron, and different dosages of erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESA). For predialysis patients, there was a small but significant difference in the Hb level favoring the IV iron group (WMD 0.28; 95% CI 0.15–0.4, fig). For both groups effect estimates were not influenced by ESA administration. In predialysis patients, there was no significant difference in the risk for requiring RRT during the trial between the different groups (RR 0.63; 95%CI 0.25–1.65). Data on all-cause mortality were sparse (RR 0.54; 95%CI 0.09–3.13, 3 trials) and there was no difference in adverse events (RR 0.9; 95%CI 0.65–1.24) between the IV and oral treated patients. However, discontinuations of treatment were more common (RR 3.27; 95%CI 1.15–9.26) for the IV iron treated patients. Conclusions: Our review demonstrates that dialysis patients treated with IV iron have better Hb response than patients treated with oral iron. For predialysis patients, this effect is very small. IV iron should be preferred in the treatment of anemia in dialysis patients. In predialysis patients the slight advantage in Hb response should be weighed against the inconvenience and cost of IV iron treatment.

scholarly journals Cost-Utility of Acromegaly Pharmacological Treatments in a French Context

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thierry Brue ◽  
Philippe Chanson ◽  
Patrice Rodien ◽  
Brigitte Delemer ◽  
Delphine Drui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Somatostatin Analogues ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Pharmacological Treatments ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Efficient Treatment ◽  
The Cost

ObjectiveEfficacy of pharmacological treatments for acromegaly has been assessed in many clinical or real-world studies but no study was interested in economics evaluation of these treatments in France. Therefore, the objective of this study was to estimate the cost-utility of second-line pharmacological treatments in acromegaly patients.MethodsA Markov model was developed to follow a cohort of 1,000 patients for a lifetime horizon. First-generation somatostatin analogues (FGSA), pegvisomant, pasireotide and pegvisomant combined with FGSA (off label) were compared. Efficacy was defined as the normalization of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) concentration and was obtained from pivotal trials and adjusted by a network meta-analysis. Costs data were obtained from French databases and literature. Utilities from the literature were used to estimate quality-adjusted life year (QALY).ResultsThe incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) of treatments compared to FGSA were estimated to be 562,463 € per QALY gained for pasireotide, 171,332 € per QALY gained for pegvisomant, and 186,242 € per QALY gained for pegvisomant + FGSA. Pasireotide seems to be the least cost-efficient treatment. Sensitivity analyses showed the robustness of the results.ConclusionFGSA, pegvisomant and pegvisomant + FGSA were on the cost-effective frontier, therefore, depending on the willingness-to-pay for an additional QALY, they are the most cost-effective treatments. This medico-economic analysis highlighted the consistency of the efficiency results with the efficacy results assessed in the pivotal trials. However, most recent treatment guidelines recommend an individualized treatment strategy based on the patient and disease profile.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Caspofungin and Fluconazole for Primary Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis and Candidemia in Ethiopia

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gebremedhin Beedemariam Gebretekle ◽  
Atalay Mulu Fentie ◽  
Girma Tekle Gebremariam ◽  
Eskinder Eshetu Ali ◽  
Daniel Asfaw Erku ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Invasive Candidiasis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Primary Treatment ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
The Cost ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Background: Caspofungin was shown to be more effective than fluconazole in treating patients with invasive candidiasis and/or candidaemia (IC/C). However, cost-effectiveness of caspofungin for treating IC/C in Ethiopia remains unknown. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of caspofungin compared to fluconazole as primary treatment of IC/C in Ethiopia.Methods: A Markov cohort model was developed to compare the cost-utility of caspofungin versus fluconazole antifungal agents as first-line treatment for adult inpatients with IC/C from the Ethiopian health system perspective. Treatment outcome was categorized as either a clinical success or failure, with clinical failure being switched to a different antifungal medication. Liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) was used as a rescue agent for patients who had failed caspofungin treatment, while caspofungin or L-AmB were used for patients who had failed fluconazole treatment. Primary outcomes were expected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs (US$2021), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). QALYs and costs were discounted at 3% annually. Cost data was obtained from Addis Ababa hospitals while locally unavailable data were derived from the literature. Cost-effectiveness was assessed against the recommended threshold of 50% of Ethiopia’s gross domestic product/capita. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the findings.Results: In the base-case analysis, treatment of IC/C with caspofungin as first-line treatment resulted in better health outcomes (12.86 QALYs) but higher costs (US$7,714) compared to fluconazole-initiated treatment followed by caspofungin (12.30 QALYs; US$3,217) or L-AmB (10.92 QALYs; US$2,781) as second-line treatment. Caspofungin as primary treatment for IC/C was not cost-effective when compared to fluconazole-initiated therapies. Fluconazole-initiated treatment followed by caspofungin was cost-effective for the treatment of IC/C compared to fluconazole with L-AmB as second-line treatment, at US$316/QALY gained. Our findings were sensitive to medication costs, drug effectiveness, infection recurrence, and infection-related mortality rates. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of our findings.Conclusions: Our study showed that the use of caspofungin as primary treatment for IC/C in Ethiopia was not cost-effective when compared with fluconazole-initiated treatment alternatives. The findings supported the use of fluconazole-initiated therapy with caspofungin as a second-line treatment to treat IC/C in Ethiopia and other low-income countries.

The effects of calcium-based versus non-calcium-based phosphate binders on mortality among patients with chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (10) ◽  
pp. 3168-3174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie A. Jamal ◽  
David Fitchett ◽  
Charmaine E. Lok ◽  
David C. Mendelssohn ◽  
Ross T. Tsuyuki
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Phosphate Binders

Economic Evaluation of Bevacizumab for the First-Line Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Multiforme

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (20) ◽  
pp. 2296-2302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Kovic ◽  
Feng Xie
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Glioblastoma Multiforme ◽  
Value Of Information ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Information Analysis ◽  
First Line ◽  
Value Of Information Analysis

Purpose The Avastin in Glioblastoma trial has shown that patients newly diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) treated with bevacizumab plus radiotherapy and temozolomide versus radiotherapy and temozolomide alone showed improvement in progression-free survival, possibly leading to a new indication for first-line use of bevacizumab in GBM. The cost-utility of this new intervention remains unknown; therefore, we developed a Markov model estimating the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) from a Canadian public payer perspective. Methods We incorporated trial data for state transitions and treatment effects from the Avastin in Glioblastoma trial, costs and resource use data from Canadian published studies and databases, and utility parameters from published literature. We addressed uncertainty through one-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, extended the model to lifetime horizon and by another arm to compare first-line versus second-line use of bevacizumab on progression, performed value of information analysis, and performed US costing sensitivity analysis. Results Adding bevacizumab to radiotherapy and temozolomide resulted in increases of 0.13 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and $80,000 per patient over 2-year time horizon at the base case analysis. The ICUR was $607,966/QALY (95% CI, $305,000/QALY to $2,550,000/QALY), with 0% chance of being cost effective at the $100,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold and never going below $450,000/QALY in the one-way sensitivity analysis. The ICUR using the US costing data was $787,519/QALY. The lifetime ICUR was $439,764/QALY (95% CI, $235,000/QALY to $1,520,000/QALY), never going below $350,000/QALY in the sensitivity analysis. Second-line use of bevacizumab on progression is more effective and less expensive than its first-line use. Value of information analysis revealed that future research is unwarranted. Conclusion Bevacizumab has only limited effectiveness and is therefore not likely to be cost effective in treating adult patients with newly diagnosed GBM.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document