Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic ileocaecal resection versus infliximab treatment of terminal ileitis in Crohn’s disease: the LIR!C Trial

Gut ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (10) ◽  
pp. 1774-1780 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Joline de Groof ◽  
Toer W Stevens ◽  
Emma J Eshuis ◽  
Tjibbe J Gardenbroek ◽  
Judith E Bosmans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crohn’S Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Crohn's Disease ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Infliximab Treatment ◽  
Resection Group ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment

ObjectiveEvaluate the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic ileocaecal resection compared with infliximab in patients with ileocaecal Crohn’s disease failing conventional therapy.DesignA multicentre randomised controlled trial was performed in 29 centres in The Netherlands and the UK. Adult patients with Crohn’s disease of the terminal ileum who failed >3 months of conventional immunomodulators or steroids without signs of critical strictures were randomised to laparoscopic ileocaecal resection or infliximab. Outcome measures included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) based on the EuroQol (EQ) 5D-3L Questionnaire and the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ). Costs were measured from a societal perspective. Analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Missing cost and effect data were imputed using multiple imputation. Cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were estimated to show uncertainty.ResultsIn total, 143 patients were randomised. Mean Crohn’s disease total direct healthcare costs per patient at 1 year were lower in the resection group compared with the infliximab group (mean difference €−8931; 95% CI €−12 087 to €−5097). Total societal costs in the resection group were lower than in the infliximab group, however not statistically significant (mean difference €−5729, 95% CI €−10 606 to €172). The probability of resection being cost-effective compared with infliximab was 0.96 at a willingness to pay (WTP) of €0 per QALY gained and per point improvement in IBDQ Score. This probability increased to 0.98 at a WTP of €20 000/QALY gained and 0.99 at a WTP of €500/point of improvement in IBDQ Score.ConclusionLaparoscopic ileocaecal resection is a cost-effective treatment option compared with infliximab.Clinical trial registration numberDutch Trial Registry NTR1150; EudraCT number 2007-005042-20 (closed on 14 October 2015).

scholarly journals The Cost-effectiveness of Initial Immunomodulators or Infliximab Using Modern Optimization Strategies for Crohn’s Disease in the Biosimilar Era

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abhinav Vasudevan ◽  
Francis Ip ◽  
Danny Liew ◽  
Daniel R Van Langenberg
Keyword(s):  
Crohn’S Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Crohn's Disease ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Extended Model ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Therapy Costs ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Treatment cost, efficacy, and safety are integral considerations when optimizing management of Crohn’s disease (CD). This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of initial immunomodulator and anti–tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents for the treatment of CD from a US third-party perspective, incorporating current treatment algorithms, optimization strategies, and reduced costs availed by biosimilars. Method A 1-year Markov model was developed to simulate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of initial azathioprine, infliximab, and combination therapy for moderate to severe CD. Treatment was changed based on tolerability and clinical disease activity at 3-monthly intervals. Efficacy data were based on published literature. Results Initial azathioprine had the lowest cost and utility ($35,337 and 0.63 QALYs), whereas combination therapy was the costliest yet conferred the highest health benefits ($57,638 and 0.67 QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness of infliximab and combination therapy compared with azathioprine were both in excess of $500,000 per QALY gained. Initial azathioprine remained the most cost-effective treatment on sensitivity analysis compared with infliximab and combination therapy, with 90% reductions in anti-TNF therapy costs and a 5-year time horizon, although combination therapy had an acceptable cost-effectiveness when costs were reduced in the extended model. Initial infliximab, ustekinumab, and vedolizumab were dominated by combination therapy. Conclusions In the biosimilar era, initial azathioprine with escalation to infliximab appeared more cost-effective in the short term compared with infliximab or combination therapy, although initial combination therapy yields acceptable ICERs in the long term with continued reductions in anti-TNF therapy costs and will likely be the preferred treatment strategy in the future.

scholarly journals Tight control for Crohn’s disease with adalimumab-based treatment is cost-effective: an economic assessment of the CALM trial

Gut ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 658-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Remo Panaccione ◽  
Jean-Frederic Colombel ◽  
Simon P L Travis ◽  
Peter Bossuyt ◽  
Filip Baert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crohn’S Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Crohn's Disease ◽  
Activity Index ◽  
Work Productivity ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Medical Costs ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Tight Control ◽  
Life Years

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an inflammatory biomarker and clinical symptom directed tight control strategy (TC) compared with symptom-based clinical management (CM) in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) naïve to immunosuppressants and biologics using a UK public payer perspective.DesignA regression model estimated weekly CD Activity Index (CDAI)-based transition matrices (remission: CDAI <150, moderate: CDAI ≥150 to <300, severe: CDAI ≥300 to <450, very severe: CDAI ≥450) based on the Effect of Tight Control Management on Crohn’s Disease (CALM) trial. A regression predicted hospitalisations. Health utilities and costs were applied to health states. Work productivity was monetised and included in sensitivity analyses. Remission rate, CD-related hospitalisations, adalimumab injections, other direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated.ResultsOver 48 weeks, TC was associated with a higher clinical remission (CDAI <150) rate (58.2% vs 46.8%), fewer CD-related hospitalisations (0.124 vs 0.297 events per patient) and more injections of adalimumab (40 mg sc) (mean 31.0 vs 24.7) than CM. TC was associated with 0.032 higher QALYs and £593 higher total medical costs. The ICER was £18 656 per QALY. The ICER was cost-effective in 57.9% of simulations. TC became dominant, meaning less costly but more effective, when work productivity was included.ConclusionA TC strategy as used in the CALM trial is cost-effective compared with CM. Incorporating costs related to work productivity increases the economic value of TC. Cross-national inferences from this analysis should be made with caution given differences in healthcare systems.Trial registration numberNCT01235689; Results.

scholarly journals The Cost-effectiveness of Celecoxib versus Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs plus Proton-pump Inhibitors for Treating Osteoarthritis in Algeria

10.36469/9865 ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadir Hammoumraoui ◽  
Sid Ahmed Kherraf ◽  
Joaquin Mould-Quevedo ◽  
Tarek A. Ismail
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Private Clinic ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Background: Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib are as effective as non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ns-NSAIDs) in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA), have fewer gastrointestinal side effects, but are more expensive. Objective: To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of celecoxib versus ns-NSAIDs, with/without proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) co-therapy, for treating OA in Algeria. Methods: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) health economic model from UK, updated with relative risks of adverse events using CONDOR trial data, was adapted for costeffectiveness analysis in OA patients aged ≥65 years. Patients could initiate treatment with celecoxib or ns-NSAIDs with/without omeprazole. Conditional probabilities were obtained from published clinical trials; effectiveness measure was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained/patient. The analysis was conducted from a healthcare payer’s perspective. The average daily treatment costs and frequencies of resource use for adverse events were based on data collected in August 2011 from a private clinic located in Cheraga, Algiers, Algeria. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed to construct cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs). Results: QALYs gained/patient over a 6-month horizon were higher with celecoxib (0.368) and celecoxib+PPI (0.40) versus comparators. The lowest expected cost/patient was associated with ibuprofen (US$134.76 versus US$175.67 with celecoxib+PPI, and US$177.57 with celecoxib). Celecoxib+PPI was the most cost-effective drug treatment, with an ICER of US$584.43, versus ibuprofen. Treatment with celecoxib alone showed an ICER of US$1,530.56 versus diclofenac+PPI. These ICERs are &lt;1 gross domestic product per capita in Algeria (US$7,500). Over 1-year, 3-year and 5-year horizons, celecoxib with/without PPI co-therapy showed higher QALYs/patient versus comparators, and decreasing ICERs. The ICER of celecoxib+PPI was lower than that of comparators over all time horizons. These findings were confirmed with CEACs generated via PSA. Conclusion: Using data from a single private clinic in Cheraga, Algiers, Algeria, and after considering new adverse event risks, we showed that celecoxib with/without PPI co therapy is more cost-effective than ns-NSAID+PPI for treating OA patients aged ≥65 years. Celecoxib+PPI remains dominant over a 5-year horizon, making it the most cost-effective treatment option for medium- and long-term use.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of adding psychomotor therapy to a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program for chronic pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-130
Author(s):  
Lia Van der Maas ◽  
Judith E. Bosmans ◽  
Maurits W. Van Tulder ◽  
Thomas W.J. Janssen
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Rehabilitation Program ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Data Uncertainty ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Chronic Pain Patients ◽  
Pain Patients

Introduction: This study assesses the cost-effectiveness (CE) of a multidisciplinary pain rehabilitation program (treatment as usual [TAU]) with and without psychomotor therapy (PMT) for chronic pain patients. Methods: Chronic pain patients were assigned to TAU + PMT or TAU using cluster randomization. Clinical outcomes measured were health-related quality of life (HRQOL), pain-related disability, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were measured from a societal perspective. Multiple imputation was used for missing data. Uncertainty surrounding incremental CE ratios was estimated using bootstrapping and presented in CE planes and CE acceptability curves. Results: Ninety-four chronic pain patients (n = 49 TAU + PMT and n = 45 TAU) were included. There were no significant differences in HRQOL, Pain Disability Index, and QALYs between TAU + PMT and TAU. Direct costs in TAU + PMT were significantly higher than in TAU (mean difference €3327, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1329; 5506). However, total societal costs in TAU + PMT were not significantly higher than in TAU (mean difference €642, 95% CI −3323; 4373). CE analyses showed that TAU + PMT was not cost-effective in comparison with TAU. Conclusions: Adding PMT to a multidisciplinary pain rehabilitation program is not considered cost-effective in comparison with a multidisciplinary pain rehabilitation program alone. The results of this study should be interpreted with caution because of the small sample size and high drop-out rate.

scholarly journals Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Early Compared with Late or No Biologic Treatment to Manage Crohn’s Disease using Real-World Data

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 490-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Pillai ◽  
Judith E Lupatsch ◽  
Mark Dusheiko ◽  
Matthias Schwenkglenks ◽  
Michel Maillard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crohn’S Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Crohn's Disease ◽  
Health System ◽  
Real World ◽  
Transition Probabilities ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background and Aims We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of early [≤2 years after diagnosis] compared with late or no biologic initiation [starting biologics &gt;2 years after diagnosis or no biologic use] for adults with Crohn’s disease in Switzerland. Methods We developed a Markov cohort model over the patient’s lifetime, from the health system and societal perspectives. Transition probabilities, quality of life, and costs were estimated using real-world data. Propensity score matching was used to ensure comparability between patients in the early [intervention] and late/no [comparator] biologic initiation strategies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] gained is reported in Swiss francs [CHF]. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. Results Total costs and QALYs were higher for the intervention [CHF384 607; 16.84 QALYs] compared with the comparator [CHF340 800; 16.75 QALYs] strategy, resulting in high ICERs [health system: CHF887 450 per QALY; societal: CHF449 130 per QALY]. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, assuming a threshold of CHF100 000 per QALY, the probability that the intervention strategy was cost-effective was 0.1 and 0.25 from the health system and societal perspectives, respectively. In addition, ICERs improved when we assumed a 30% reduction in biologic prices [health system: CHF134 502 per QALY; societal: intervention dominant]. Conclusions Early biologic use was not cost-effective, considering a threshold of CHF100 000 per QALY compared with late/no biologic use. However, early identification of patients likely to need biologics and future drug price reductions through increased availability of biosimilars may improve the cost-effectiveness of an early treatment approach.

scholarly journals The Cost-effectiveness of Biological Therapy Cycles in the Management of Crohn’s Disease

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 1323-1333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristian Bolin ◽  
Erik Hertervig ◽  
Edouard Louis
Keyword(s):  
Crohn’S Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Crohn's Disease ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Treatment Intensification ◽  
Tree Model ◽  
Necrosis Factor Alpha ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Objectives To examine the cost-effectiveness of continued treatment for patients with moderate-severe Crohn’s disease in clinical remission, with a combination of anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha [anti-TNFα] [infliximab] and immunomodulator therapy compared with two different withdrawal strategies: [1] withdrawal of the anti-TNFα therapy; and [2] withdrawal of the immunomodulator therapy, respectively. Methods A decision-tree model was constructed mimicking three treatment arms: [1] continued combination therapy with infliximab and immunomodulator; [2] withdrawal of infliximab; or [3] withdrawal of the immunomodulator. Relapses in each arm are managed with treatment intensification and re-institution of the de-escalated drug according to a prespecified algorithm. State-dependent relapse risks, remission probabilities, and quality of life weights were collected from previous published studies. Results Combination therapy was less costly and more efficient than the withdrawal of the immunomodulator, and more costly and more efficient than withdrawal of infliximab. Whether or not combination therapy is cost-effective, compared with the alternatives, depends primarily on current pharmaceutical prices and the willingness-to-pay per additional quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]. Conclusions Combination therapy using a combination of anti-TNFα [infliximab] and an immunomodulator is cost-effective in the treatment of Crohn’s disease compared with treatment cycles in which the immunomodulator is withdrawn. Combination treatment is cost-effective compared with treatment cycles in which infliximab is withdrawn, at prices of infliximab below€192/100 mg, given a willingness-to-pay threshold at€49 020 [Sweden] per additional QALY.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of injectable opioid treatment v. oral methadone for chronic heroin addiction

2013 ◽  
Vol 203 (5) ◽  
pp. 341-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Byford ◽  
Barbara Barrett ◽  
Nicola Metrebian ◽  
Teodora Groshkova ◽  
Maria Cary ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Heroin Addiction ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Opioid Treatment ◽  
Oral Methadone ◽  
Life Years

BackgroundDespite evidence of the effectiveness of injectable opioid treatment compared with oral methadone for chronic heroin addiction, the additional cost of injectable treatment is considerable, and cost-effectiveness uncertain.AimsTo compare the cost-effectiveness of supervised injectable heroin and injectable methadone with optimised oral methadone for chronic refractory heroin addiction.MethodMultisite, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Outcomes were assessed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Economic perspective included health, social services and criminal justice resources.ResultsIntervention costs over 26 weeks were significantly higher for injectable heroin (mean £8995 v. £4674 injectable methadone and £2596 oral methadone; P<0.0001). Costs overall were highest for oral methadone (mean £15805 v. £13410 injectable heroin and £10945 injectable methadone; P =n.s.) due to higher costs of criminal activity. In cost-effectiveness analysis, oral methadone was dominated by injectable heroin and injectable methadone (more expensive and less effective). At willingness to pay of £30 000 per QALY, there is a higher probability of injectable methadone being more cost-effective (80%) than injectable heroin.ConclusionsInjectable opioid treatments are more cost-effective than optimised oral methadone for chronic refractory heroin addiction. The choice between supervised injectable heroin and injectable methadone is less clear. There is currently evidence to suggest superior effectiveness of injectable heroin but at a cost that policy makers may find unacceptable. Future research should consider the use of decision analytic techniques to model expected costs and benefits of the treatments over the longer term.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Etoricoxib versus Celecoxib and Nonselective NSAIDs in the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis in Norway

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeroen P. Jansen ◽  
Stephanie D. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Time Horizon ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life Year ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life Years ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Ceiling Ratio ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life

Objectives. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of etoricoxib (90 mg) relative to celecoxib (200/400 mg), and the nonselective NSAIDs naproxen (1000 mg) and diclofenac (150 mg) in the initial treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in Norway.Methods. A previously developed Markov state-transition model was used to estimate costs and benefits associated with initiating treatment with the different competing NSAIDs. Efficacy, gastrointestinal and cardiovascular safety, and resource use data were obtained from the literature. Data from different studies were synthesized and translated into direct costs and quality adjusted life years by means of a Bayesian comprehensive decision modeling approach.Results. Over a 30-year time horizon, etoricoxib is associated with about 0.4 more quality adjusted life years than the other interventions. At 1 year, naproxen is the most cost-saving strategy. However, etoricoxib is cost and quality adjusted life year saving relative to celecoxib, as well as diclofenac and naproxen after 5 years of follow-up. For a willingness-to-pay ceiling ratio of 200,000 Norwegian krones per quality adjusted life year, there is a >95% probability that etoricoxib is the most-cost-effective treatment when a time horizon of 5 or more years is considered.Conclusions. Etoricoxib is the most cost-effective NSAID for initiating treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in Norway.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document