Cost–utility analysis of an adjunctive recombinant activated factor VIIa for on-demand treatment of bleeding episodes in dengue haemorrhagic fever

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 403-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cho Naing ◽  
Yong Poovorawan ◽  
Joon Wah Mak ◽  
Kyan Aung ◽  
Pirom Kamolratankul
2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 759-774 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander H. Miners ◽  
Caroline A. Sabin ◽  
Keith H. Tolley ◽  
Christine A. Lee

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 337-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Héctor Eduardo Castro Jaramillo ◽  
Mabel Moreno Viscaya ◽  
Aurelio E. Mejia

Objectives: This article presents a cost-utility analysis from the Colombian health system perspective comparing primary prophylaxis to on-demand treatment using exogenous clotting factor VIII (FVIII) for patients with severe hemophilia type A.Methods: We developed a Markov model to estimate expected costs and outcomes (measured as quality-adjusted life-years, QALYs) for each strategy. Transition probabilities were estimated using published studies; utility weights were obtained from a sample of Colombian patients with hemophilia and costs were gathered using local data. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the robustness of results.Results: The additional cost per QALY gained of primary prophylaxis compared with on-demand treatment was 105,081,022 Colombian pesos (COP) (55,204 USD), and thus not considered cost-effective according to a threshold of up to three times the current Colombian gross domestic product (GDP) per-capita. When primary prophylaxis was provided throughout life using recombinant FVIII (rFVIII), which is much costlier than FVIII, the additional cost per QALY gained reached 174,159,553 COP (91,494 USD).Conclusions: using a decision rule of up to three times the Colombian GDP per capita, primary prophylaxis (with either FVIII or rFVIII) would not be considered as cost-effective in this country. However, a final decision on providing or preventing patients from primary prophylaxis as a gold standard of care for severe hemophilia type A should also consider broader criteria than the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio results itself. Only a price reduction of exogenous FVIII of 50 percent or more would make primary prophylaxis cost-effective in this context.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document