scholarly journals Cost Benefit Analysis of Limited Reopening Relative to a Herd Immunity Strategy or Shelter in Place for SARS-CoV-2 in the United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert B. Schonberger ◽  
Yair J. Listokin ◽  
Ian Ayres ◽  
Reza Yaesoubi ◽  
Zachary R. Shelley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Herd Immunity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
United States Government ◽  
Effective Vaccine ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Mortality Effect ◽  
Life Years

ABSTRACTBackgroundFierce debate about the health and financial tradeoffs presented by different COVID-19 pandemic mitigation strategies highlights the need for rigorous quantitative evaluation of policy options.ObjectiveTo quantify the economic value of the costs and benefits of a policy of continued limited reopening with social distancing relative to alternative COVID-19 response strategies in the United States.DesignWe estimate the number and value of quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained from mortality averted, with a value of $125,000 per QALY, and compare these benefits to the associated costs in terms of plausible effects on US GDP under a policy of continued limited reopening with social distancing relative to a policy of full reopening toward herd immunity. Using the same QALY value assumptions, we further evaluate cost-effectiveness of a return to Shelter-in-Place relative to a policy of limited reopening.SettingUnited StatesMeasurementsQALY and cost as percent of GDP of limited reopening with continued social distancing relative to a strategy of full reopening aimed at achieving herd immunity; a limited reopening “budget” measured in the number of months before this strategy fails to demonstrate cost-effectiveness relative to a full reopening; a shelter-in-place “threshold” measured in the number of lives saved at which a month of sheltering in place demonstrates cost effectiveness relative to the limited reopening strategy.ResultsQALY benefits from mortality averted by continued social distancing and limited reopening relative to a policy of full reopening exceed projected GDP costs if an effective vaccine or therapeutic can be developed within 11.1 months from late May 2020. White House vaccine projections fall within this date, supporting a partial reopening strategy. One month of shelter-in-place restrictions provides QALY benefits from averted mortality that exceed the associated GDP costs relative to limited reopening if the restrictions prevent at least 154,586 additional COVID-19 deaths over the course of the pandemic. Current models of disease progression suggest that limited reopening will not cause this many additional deaths, again supporting a limited reopening strategy.LimitationLimited horizon of COVID-19 mortality projections; infection fatality ratio stable across strategies, ignoring both the potential for ICU overload to increase mortality and the deployment of partially effective therapeutics to decrease mortality; effect on GDP modeled as constant within a given phase of the pandemic; accounts for age and sex distribution of QALYs, but not effect of comorbidities; only considers impact from QALY lost due to mortality and from changes in GDP, excluding numerous other considerations, such as non-fatal COVID-19 morbidity, reduced quality of life caused by prolonged social distancing, or educational regression associated with prolonged school closures and restrictions.ConclusionsA limited reopening to achieve partial mitigation of COVID-19 is cost effective relative to a full reopening if an effective therapeutic or vaccine can be deployed within 11.1 months of late May 2020. One additional month of shelter-in-place restrictions should only be imposed if it saves at least 154,586 lives per month before the development of an effective therapeutic or vaccine relative to limited reopening.FundingThis work was supported in part by grant K01AI119603 from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). This work does not necessarily represent the opinions of the NIAID, the NIH, or the United States Government.

Cost-effectiveness of digital cognitive behavioral therapy (Sleepio) for insomnia: a Markov simulation model in the United States

SLEEP ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Darden ◽  
Colin A Espie ◽  
Jenna R Carl ◽  
Alasdair L Henry ◽  
Jennifer C Kanady ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Insomnia Treatment ◽  
Group Cbt

Abstract Study Objectives To examine the cost-effectiveness and potential net monetary benefit (NMB) of a fully automated digital cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) intervention for insomnia compared with no insomnia treatment in the United States (US). Similar relative comparisons were made for pharmacotherapy and clinician-delivered CBT (individual and group). Methods We simulated a Markov model of 100,000 individuals using parameters calibrated from the literature including direct (treatment) and indirect costs (e.g. insomnia-related healthcare expenditure and lost workplace productivity). Health utility estimates were converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and one QALY was worth $50,000. Simulated individuals were randomized equally to one of five arms (digital CBT, pharmacotherapy, individual CBT, group CBT, or no insomnia treatment). Sensitivity was assessed by bootstrapping the calibrated parameters. Cost estimates were expressed in 2019 US dollars. Results Digital CBT was cost beneficial when compared with no insomnia treatment and had a positive NMB of $681.06 (per individual over 6 months). Bootstrap sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the NMB was positive in 94.7% of simulations. Relative to other insomnia treatments, digital CBT was the most cost-effective treatment because it generated the smallest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (−$3,124.73). Conclusions Digital CBT was the most cost-effective insomnia treatment followed by group CBT, pharmacotherapy, and individual CBT. It is financially prudent and beneficial from a societal perspective to utilize automated digital CBT to treat insomnia at a population scale.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Sequential Treatment of Abaloparatide Followed by Alendronate Versus Teriparatide Followed by Alendronate in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis in the United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quang A. Le ◽  
Joel W. Hay ◽  
Russell Becker ◽  
Yamei Wang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
High Risk ◽  
The United States ◽  
Clinical Event ◽  
Risk Of Fracture ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Us ◽  
Des Model

Background: The US Food and Drug Administration has recently approved abaloparatide (ABL) for treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) at high risk of fracture. With increasing health care spending and drug prices, it is important to quantify the value of newly available treatment options for PMO. Objective: To determine cost-effectiveness of ABL compared with teriparatide (TPTD) for treatment of women with PMO in the United States. Methods: A discrete-event simulation (DES) model was developed to assess cost-effectiveness of ABL from the US health care perspective. The model included three 18-month treatment strategies with either placebo (PBO), TPTD, or ABL, all followed by additional 5-year treatment with alendronate (ALN). High-risk patients were defined as women with PMO ⩾65 years old with a prior vertebral fracture. Baseline clinical event rates, risk reductions, and patient characteristics were based on the Abaloparatide Comparator Trial in Vertebral Endpoints (ACTIVE) trial. Results: Over a 10-year period, the DES model yielded average total discounted per-patient costs of $10 212, $46 783, and $26 837 and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of 6.742, 6.781, and 6.792 for PBO/ALN, TPTD/ALN, and ABL/ALN, respectively. Compared with TPTD/ALN, ABL/ALN accrued higher QALYs at lower cost and produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $333 266/QALY relative to PBO/ALN. In high-risk women, ABL/ALN also had more QALYs and less cost over TPTD/ALN and yielded an ICER of $188 891/QALY relative to PBO/ALN. Conclusion and Relevance: ABL is a dominant treatment strategy over TPTD. In women with PMO at high risk of fracture, ABL is an alternative cost-effective treatment.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Olaratumab in Combination with Doxorubicin for Patients with Soft Tissue Sarcoma in the United States

Sarcoma ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Santiago Zuluaga-Sanchez ◽  
Lisa M. Hess ◽  
Sorrel E. Wolowacz ◽  
Yulia D’yachkova ◽  
Emma Hawe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Soft Tissue Sarcoma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Life Years

Background. Standard first-line treatments for advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) have changed little for 40 years, and outcomes have been poor. Recently, the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration conditionally approved olaratumab in combination with doxorubicin (Olara + Dox) based on a randomized phase II trial that reported a significant 11.8-month improvement in median survival versus single-agent doxorubicin (Dox). The present study investigated the cost-effectiveness of Olara + Dox compared with Dox and five other standard-of-care regimens from the US payer perspective. Methods. An economic model was constructed to estimate costs and outcomes over patients’ lifetimes from start of therapy. Progression-free and overall survival were based on survival analysis of patient-level data and a meta-analysis. Adverse-event rates were based on trials. Costs were from published sources. Results. Olara + Dox resulted in an estimated additional 1.27 life-years (LYs) compared with Dox, with an increase in total expected lifetime costs of $133,653. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated at $105,408 per LY gained; in a fully incremental analysis, all other regimens were dominated (higher costs and lower LYs or a higher ICER). Conclusion. Olara + Dox is cost-effective for STS treatment compared with Dox and other standard-of-care regimens at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $150,000 per LY and above.

scholarly journals PRS56 Cost-Effectiveness of Social Distancing to Reduce COVID-19 Mortality in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. S727
Author(s):  
B. Bloudek ◽  
K. Migliaccio-Walle ◽  
P.J. Barrett ◽  
V. Nguyen ◽  
L. Bloudek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Distancing

scholarly journals Projected COVID-19 epidemic in the United States in the context of the effectiveness of a potential vaccine and implications for social distancing and face mask use

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingwang Shen ◽  
Jian Zu ◽  
Christopher K. Fairley ◽  
José A. Pagán ◽  
Li An ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Social Contact ◽  
Face Mask ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vaccine Effectiveness ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Effective Vaccine ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
The Us

ABSTRACTBackgroundMultiple candidates of COVID-19 vaccines have entered Phase III clinical trials in the United States (US). There is growing optimism that social distancing restrictions and face mask requirements could be eased with widespread vaccine adoption soon.MethodsWe developed a dynamic compartmental model of COVID-19 transmission for the four most severely affected states (New York, Texas, Florida, and California). We evaluated the vaccine effectiveness and coverage required to suppress the COVID-19 epidemic in scenarios when social contact was to return to pre-pandemic levels and face mask use was reduced. Daily and cumulative COVID-19 infection and death cases were obtained from the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus resource center and used for model calibration.ResultsWithout a vaccine, the spread of COVID-19 could be suppressed in these states by maintaining strict social distancing measures and face mask use levels. But relaxing social distancing restrictions to the pre-pandemic level without changing the current face mask use would lead to a new COVID-19 outbreak, resulting in 0.8-4 million infections and 15,000-240,000 deaths across these four states over the next 12 months. In this scenario, introducing a vaccine would partially offset this negative impact even if the vaccine effectiveness and coverage are relatively low. However, if face mask use is reduced by 50%, a vaccine that is only 50% effective (weak vaccine) would require coverage of 55-94% to suppress the epidemic in these states. A vaccine that is 80% effective (moderate vaccine) would only require 32-57% coverage to suppress the epidemic. In contrast, if face mask usage stops completely, a weak vaccine would not suppress the epidemic, and further major outbreaks would occur. A moderate vaccine with coverage of 48-78% or a strong vaccine (100% effective) with coverage of 33-58% would be required to suppress the epidemic. Delaying vaccination rollout for 1-2 months would not substantially alter the epidemic trend if the current interventions are maintained.ConclusionsThe degree to which the US population can relax social distancing restrictions and face mask use will depend greatly on the effectiveness and coverage of a potential COVID-19 vaccine if future epidemics are to be prevented. Only a highly effective vaccine will enable the US population to return to life as it was before the pandemic.

scholarly journals The Use of Empathic Communication During the COVID-19 Outbreak

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 648-652
Author(s):  
Sheila K Stevens ◽  
Rebecca Brustad ◽  
Lena Gilbert ◽  
Benjamin Houge ◽  
Timothy Milbrandt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Prediction Models ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Medical Resources ◽  
Usual Practice ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Medical Visits ◽  
Empathic Communication

As of May 13, 2020, the number of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (novel corona virus, COVID-19) infections has risen to 4 300 000 worldwide, with over 1 300 000 confirmed cases in the United States. Various prediction models of spread indicate more hospitalization, increased ventilator use, and the shifting of medical resources to most efficiently serve the patient’s needs. Additionally, mitigation strategies such as monitoring for symptoms, social distancing, safer at home, and the wearing of masks caused our institution to implement significant operational changes to our usual practice. This included screening patients and staff for symptoms, rescheduling routine medical visits, postponing procedures, converting face-to-face visits to telephone or video visits, and changing visitor visit policies. In this article, we describe the various ways we deployed empathic communication messaging and resources across the institution during the COVID-19 pandemic.

scholarly journals The Futures of the Pandemic in the USA: A Timed Intervention Model

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary D. Hachtel ◽  
John D. Stack ◽  
Jordan A. Hachtel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Public Access ◽  
United States Government ◽  
List Type ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
States Government ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The U.S

AbstractWe propose a novel Timed InterventionS, P, E, I, Q, R, D model for projecting the possible futures of the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA. The proposed model introduces a series of timed interventions that can account for the influence of real time changes in government policy and social norms. We consider three separate types of interventions:Protective interventions. Where population moves from susceptible to protected corresponding to mask mandates, stay-at-home orders and/or social distancing.Release interventions. Where population moves from protected to susceptible corresponding to social distancing mandates and practices being lifted by policy or pandemic fatigue.Vaccination interventions. Where population moves from susceptible, protected, and exposed to recovered (meaning immune) corresponding to the mass immunization of the U.S. Population.By treating the pandemic with timed interventions, we are able to model the pandemic extremely effectively, as well as directly predicting of the course of the pandemic under differing sets of intervention schedules. We show that without prompt effective protective/vaccination interventions the pandemic will extend all the way into 2022 and result in many millions of deaths in the U.S.†Copyright NoticeThis manuscript has been authored by UT-Battelle, LLC under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the U.S. Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes. The Department of Energy will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan (http://energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan).

scholarly journals Impact of Post-Hematopoietic Cell Transplant (HCT) Survival on Cost-Effectiveness of CPX-351 Versus 7+3 in the Treatment of Therapy-Related AML or AML-MRC in the United States

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5837-5837
Author(s):  
Anuraag Kansal ◽  
Odette Reifsnider ◽  
Lora Todorova ◽  
Anna Coughlan ◽  
Kathleen F. Villa
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Life Expectancy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Treatment Pathways ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: A central goal of treatment for high-risk AML is enabling patients to receive HCT. CPX-351 is a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of cytarabine and daunorubicin at a synergistic ratio. A large randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 3 trial demonstrated superior outcomes, including significantly longer overall survival and a larger fraction of patients reaching HCT, for CPX-351 versus conventional cytarabine/daunorubicin (7+3 regimen) in patients aged 60 to 75 years with newly diagnosed therapy-related AML (tAML) or AML with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC; Lancet JE, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2018). In order to estimate the cost-effectiveness of treatments for AML, and for CPX-351 in particular, it is necessary to extrapolate survival of patients undergoing HCT to the long-term. The objective of this analysis was to assess the impact of different estimates of post-HCT mortality on cost-effectiveness of CPX-351. Methods: An existing economic model of CPX-351 versus 7+3 for the treatment of tAML or AML-MRC was used to project lifetime health and cost outcomes. The modeled population included 30% patients <60 years of age and 70% between 60 and 75 years of age. The model uses a survival-partition approach, with distinct survival curves for cohorts defined by treatment pathways (response and transplantation). Projected life expectancy for each cohort was estimated based on trial data (for those 60-75 years of age), US population life-tables, and published data. For patients younger than age 60, response rates were adjusted based on published literature. Standardized mortality ratio (SMR) values following HCT were selected individually for the younger and older cohorts. SMR values were calibrated in the model to match the literature finding that post-HCT mortality results in a loss of approximately 30% of life expectancy. This yielded an SMR of 2.25 for older patients and 4.0 for younger patients. Values ranged from 1.0 to 4.0 in sensitivity analyses based on recent appraisals by the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Model outputs included survival, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: In the base case with different SMR values by age, the model yielded a predicted ICER value of $111,841/QALY in the overall cohort, which compares favorably to the typical $150,000/QALY threshold (Bae 2014) for good value care in the United States. Using the same estimates of SMR in all patients yielded ICER values of $125,280/QALY and $151,793/QALY for SMR values of 2.25 and 4.0, respectively. Assuming no excess mortality post-HCT relative to the general population, using an SMR of 1.0, resulted in modest improvements in cost-effectiveness (ICER = $102,298/QALY). Conclusions: CPX-351 is a cost-effective option for the treatment of patients with tAML or AML-MRC when accounting for potentially increased mortality following HCT. Disclosures Kansal: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Reifsnider:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Todorova:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Coughlan:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Villa:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Stock and stock options.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Short-Course Radiation Plus Temozolomide for the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Among Elderly Patients in China and the United States

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jigang Chen ◽  
Xin Tong ◽  
Mingyang Han ◽  
Songfeng Zhao ◽  
Linjin Ji ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Elderly People ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Us

Background: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a fatal type of brain tumor with a high incidence among elderly people. Temozolomide (TMZ) has proven to be an effective chemotherapeutic agent with significant survival benefits. This study aimed to evaluate the economic outcomes of radiotherapy (RT) and TMZ for the treatment of newly diagnosed GBM in elderly people in the United States (US) and China.Methods: A partitioned survival model was constructed for RT plus TMZ and RT alone among patients with methylated and unmethylated tumor status. Base case calculations and one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (in 2021 US dollars [$] and Chinese Yuan Renminbi [¥]), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated.Results: RT plus TMZ was found to be associated with significantly higher costs and QALYs in all groups. Only US patients with methylated status receiving RT plus TMZ had an ICER ($89358.51) less than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100000 per QALY gained when compared with receiving RT alone. When the WTP threshold ranged from $100000 to $150000 from the US perspective, the probability of RT plus TMZ being cost-effective increased from 80.5 to 99.8%. The cost of TMZ must be lower than ¥120 per 20 mg for RT plus TMZ to be cost-effective among patients with methylated tumor status in China.Conclusion: RT plus TMZ was not cost-effective in China, and a reduction in the TMZ price was justified. However, it is highly likely to be cost-effective for patients with methylated tumor status in the US.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness and health impact of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography for never smokers in Japan and the United States: a modelling study

2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akiko Kowada
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Lung Cancer Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Never Smokers ◽  
Low Dose Computed Tomography

Abstract Background Never smokers in Asia have a higher incidence of lung cancer than in Europe and North America. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for never smokers in Japan and the United States. Methods We developed a state-transition model for three strategies: LDCT, chest X-ray (CXR), and no screening, using a healthcare payer perspective over a lifetime horizon. Sensitivity analyses were also performed. Main outcomes were costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life expectancy life-years (LYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and deaths from lung cancer. The willingness-to-pay level was US$100,000 per QALY gained. Results LDCT yielded the greatest benefits with the lowest cost in Japan, but the ICERs of LDCT compared with CXR were US$3,001,304 per QALY gained for American men and US$2,097,969 per QALY gained for American women. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the incidence of lung cancer. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that LDCT was cost-effective 99.3–99.7% for Japanese, no screening was cost-effective 77.7% for American men, and CXR was cost-effective 93.2% for American women. Compared with CXR, LDCT has the cumulative lifetime potential for 60-year-old Japanese to save US$117 billion, increase 2,339,349 QALYs and 3,020,102 LYs, and reduce 224,749 deaths, and the potential for 60-year-old Americans to cost US$120 billion, increase 48,651 QALYs and 67,988 LYs, and reduce 2,309 deaths. Conclusions This modelling study suggests that LDCT screening for never smokers has the greatest benefits and cost savings in Japan, but is not cost-effective in the United States. Assessing the risk of lung cancer in never smokers is important for introducing population-based LDCT screening.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document