scholarly journals Sustained acoustic medicine as a non-surgical and non-opioid knee osteoarthritis treatment option: a health economic cost-effectiveness analysis for symptom management

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas M. Best ◽  
Stephanie Petterson ◽  
Kevin Plancher
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Symptom Management ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Treatment Pathways ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis (OA) and presenting with symptoms are seeking conservative treatment options to reduce pain, improve function, and avoid surgery. Sustained acoustic medicine (SAM), a multi-hour treatment has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes for patients with knee OA. The purpose of this analysis was to compare the costs and effectiveness of multi-hour SAM treatment versus the standard of care (SOC) over a 6-month timeframe for OA symptom management. Methods A decision tree analysis was used to compare the costs and effectiveness of SAM treatment versus SOC in patients with OA. Probabilities of success for OA treatment and effectiveness were derived from the literature using systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Costs were derived from Medicare payment rates and manufacturer prices. Functional effectiveness was measured as the effect size of a therapy and treatment pathways compared to a SOC treatment pathway. A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine which cost variables had the greatest effect on deciding which option was the least costly. An incremental cost-effectiveness plot comparing SAM treatment vs. SOC was also generated using 1000 iterations of the model. Lastly, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as the (cost of SAM minus cost of SOC) divided by (functional effectiveness of SAM minus functional effectiveness of SOC). Results Base case demonstrated that over 6 months, the cost and functional effectiveness of SAM was $8641 and 0.52 versus SOC at: $6281 and 0.39, respectively. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that in order for SAM to be the less expensive option, the cost per 15-min session of PT would need to be greater than $88, or SAM would need to be priced at less than or equal to $2276. Incremental cost-effectiveness demonstrated that most of the time (84%) SAM treatment resulted in improved functional effectiveness but at a higher cost than SOC. Conclusion In patients with osteoarthritis, SAM treatment demonstrated improved pain and functional gains compared to SOC but at an increased cost. Based on the SAM treatment ICER score being ≤ $50,000, it appears that SAM is a cost-effective treatment for knee OA.

scholarly journals Sustained Acoustic Medicine as a Non-surgical and Non-opioid Knee Osteoarthritis Treatment Option: A Health Economic Cost-effectiveness Analysis for Symptom Management 

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas M Best ◽  
Stephanie Petterson ◽  
Kevin Plancher
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Economic Cost ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Treatment Pathways ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background: Patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis (OA) and presenting with symptoms are seeking conservative treatment options to reduce pain, improve function, and avoid surgery. Sustained acoustic medicine (SAM), a multi-hour treatment has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes for patients with knee OA. The purpose of this analysis was to compare the costs and effectiveness of multi-hour SAM treatment versus the standard of care (SOC) over a 6-month timeframe for OA symptom management.Methods: A decision tree analysis was used to compare the costs and effectiveness of SAM treatment versus SOC in patients with OA. Probabilities of success for OA treatment and effectiveness were derived from the literature using systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Costs were derived from Medicare payment rates and manufacturer prices. Functional effectiveness was measured as the effect size of a therapy and treatment pathways compared to a SOC treatment pathway. A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine which cost variables had the greatest effect on deciding which option was the least costly. An incremental cost effectiveness plot comparing SAM treatment vs. SOC was also generated using 1,000 iterations of the model. Lastly, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as the (cost of SAM minus cost of SOC) divided by (functional effectiveness of SAM minus functional effectiveness of SOC). Results: Base case demonstrated that over 6 months, the cost and functional effectiveness of SAM was $8,641 and 0.52 versus SOC at: $6,281 and 0.39, respectively. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that in order for SAM to be the less expensive option, the cost per 15-minute session of PT would need to be greater than $88, or SAM would need to be priced at less than or equal to $2,276. Incremental cost effectiveness demonstrated that most of the time (84%), SAM treatment resulted in improved functional effectiveness but at a higher cost than SOC.Conclusion: In patients with osteoarthritis, SAM treatment demonstrated improved pain and functional gains compared to SOC but at an increased cost. Based on the SAM treatment ICER score being ≤$50,000, it appears that SAM is a cost-effective treatment for knee OA.

Cost-effectiveness of dual-mobility components in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures

2021 ◽  
Vol 103-B (12) ◽  
pp. 1783-1790
Author(s):  
Spencer Montgomery ◽  
Jonathan Bourget-Murray ◽  
Daniel Z. You ◽  
Leo Nherera ◽  
Amir Khoshbin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Physiological Age ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures

Aims Total hip arthroplasty (THA) with dual-mobility components (DM-THA) has been shown to decrease the risk of dislocation in the setting of a displaced neck of femur fracture compared to conventional single-bearing THA (SB-THA). This study assesses if the clinical benefit of a reduced dislocation rate can justify the incremental cost increase of DM-THA compared to SB-THA. Methods Costs and benefits were established for patients aged 75 to 79 years over a five-year time period in the base case from the Canadian Health Payer’s perspective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the base case model conclusions. Results DM-THA was found to be cost-effective, with an estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAD $46,556 (£27,074) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Sensitivity analysis revealed DM-THA was not cost-effective across all age groups in the first two years. DM-THA becomes cost-effective for those aged under 80 years at time periods from five to 15 years, but was not cost-effective for those aged 80 years and over at any timepoint. To be cost-effective at ten years in the base case, DM-THA must reduce the risk of dislocation compared to SB-THA by at least 62%. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed DM-THA was 58% likely to be cost-effective in the base case. Conclusion Treating patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture using DM-THA components may be cost-effective compared to SB-THA in patients aged under 80 years. However, future research will help determine if the modelled rates of adverse events hold true. Surgeons should continue to use clinical judgement and consider individual patients’ physiological age and risk factors for dislocation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(12):1783–1790.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF IVABRADINE IN TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH HEART FAILURE IN IRAN

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 576-583 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saeed Taheri ◽  
Elham Heidari ◽  
Mohammad Ali Aivazi ◽  
Mehran Shams-Beyranvand ◽  
Mehdi Varmaghani
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Transition Probabilities ◽  
Drug Acquisition ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Baseline Heart Rate ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Objectives:This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of ivabradine plus standard of care (SoC) in comparison with current SoC alone from the Iranian payer perspective.Methods:A cohort-based Markov model was developed to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over a 10-year time horizon in a cohort of 1,000 patients. The baseline transition probabilities between New York Heart Association (NYHA), mortality rate, and hospitalization rate were extracted from the literature. The effect of ivabradine on mortality, hospitalization, and NYHA improvement or worsening were retrieved from the SHIFT study. The effectiveness was measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) using the utility values derived from Iranian Heart Failure Quality of Life study. Direct medical costs were obtained from hospital records and national tariffs. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to show the robustness of the model.Results:Ivabradine therapy was associated with an incremental cost per QALY of USD $5,437 (incremental cost of USD $2,207 and QALYs gained 0.41) versus SoC. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that ivabradine is expected to have a 60 percent chance of being cost-effective accepting a threshold of USD $6,550 per QALY. Furthermore, deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that the model is sensitive to the ivabradine drug acquisition cost.Conclusions:The cost-effectiveness model suggested that the addition of ivabradine to SoC therapy was associated with improved clinical outcomes along with increased costs. The analysis indicates that the clinical benefit of ivabradine can be achieved at a reasonable cost in eligible heart failure patients with sinus rhythm and a baseline heart rate ≥ 75 beats per minute (bpm).

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Second-Line Therapies in Adult Patients with Chronic Immune Thrombocytopenia

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 751-751
Author(s):  
George Goshua ◽  
Pranay Sinha ◽  
Lauren Pischel ◽  
Alfred Ian Lee ◽  
Adam Cuker
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Treatment Pathways ◽  
Treatment Pathway ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Introduction: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by accelerated platelet clearance and impaired platelet production. Up to 75% of cases in adults assume a chronic course. Standard second-line treatment options include rituximab, thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs), and splenectomy. The 2019 American Society of Hematology (ASH) guidelines provide three dichomotous evaluations of these treatments with conditional recommendations for 1) splenectomy or TPO-RA, 2) rituximab over splenectomy, and 3) TPO-RA over rituximab. The guideline panel noted that there were no studies available to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these therapies. We sought to address this knowledge gap by conducting the first cost-effectiveness analysis of second-line therapies for chronic ITP. Methods: We built a Markov model comparing the cost-effectiveness of all six treatment pathways utilizing rituximab, TPO-RA (romiplostim or eltrombopag), and splenectomy. We assumed a median age of 50 at diagnosis and a 20-year time-horizon. Costs were assessed from the health system perspective. Effectiveness was calculated in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The costs of splenectomy treatment included the cost of surgery, postoperative care, accessory spleen imaging and repeat splenectomy, treatment for post-splenectomy sepsis and thromboembolism. The annual risks of post-splenectomy sepsis and thromboembolism were assumed to be the highest reported, every post-splenectomy infectious complication was assumed to be severe septic shock, and patients with thromboembolism accrued the costs of indefinite anticoagulation. To minimize bias against TPO-RAs, TPO-RA therapy was assumed to have no adverse events, a constant high overall response without any loss of effectiveness, and the highest reported rate of successful TPO-RA therapy discontinuation after two years, which we assumed to be permanent. Rituximab treatment was assumed to have no adverse events and overall response rates as previously reported. Cost-effectiveness of each treatment pathway was calculated as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), calculated as ratio of costs to QALYs. The ICER was compared against a 2019 US willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $195,300. We then performed one-way deterministic sensitivity analyses varying all parameters including the costs of splenectomy, TPO-RA, rituximab, splenectomy complications, splenectomy complete response rates, TPO-RA and rituximab overall response rates, utilities of the well and diseases states, annual post-splenectomy septic shock mortality and perioperative splenectomy mortality. We concluded with a probabilistic sensitivity analysis running 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. Results: The most cost-effective treatment pathway was #5 (splenectomy->rituximab->TPO-RA; Figure). The next most cost-effective pathway was #4 (rituximab followed by splenectomy and then TPO-RA therapy), with an ICER of $369,289. All four remaining treatment pathways (#1-3, 6) utilizing TPO-RA therapy early (first or second) had an ICER above $1 million, far above the US WTP of $195,300, and/or were dominated. Of these, pathways #1 and #3 were externally dominated and #2 was absolutely dominated. No parameter change in one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis in any of the 4 pathways featuring TPO-RA early brought down the ICER to under $1 million. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, pathway #5 was favored in 100% of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. The cost of TPO-RA would have to be decreased to under $20,000 annually (e.g., >80% reduction in the cost of eltrombopag or romiplostim) before it could become cost-effective in any TPO-early treatment pathway. Conclusion: Four treatment pathways (#1-#4) are consistent and two pathways (#5-#6) are at variance with the ASH guidelines. Although it does not align with the ASH guidelines, pathway #5 (splenectomy->rituximab->TPO-RA) was most cost-effective. Over a 20-year time-horizon, all pathways featuring early use of a TPO-RA exceeded an ICER >$1 million or were dominated. Because our model was designed to maximize the cost-effectiveness of TPO-RA, it is likely that the actual ICER of pathways featuring early use of TPO-RA are higher than what we report here. Preferred second-line treatment strategies in adults with chronic ITP may be worth considering in light of our findings. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Cuker: Synergy: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Alexion: Research Funding; UpToDate: Patents & Royalties; Novartis: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Spark Therapeutics: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists for Venous Thromboembolism in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ke-Xin Sun ◽  
Bin Cui ◽  
Shan-Shan Cao ◽  
Qi-Xiang Huang ◽  
Ru-Yi Xia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Markov Model ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost

Background: The drug therapy of venous thromboembolism (VTE) presents a significant economic burden to the health-care system in low- and middle-income countries. To understand which anticoagulation therapy is most cost-effective for clinical decision-making , the cost-effectiveness of apixaban (API) versus rivaroxaban (RIV), dabigatran (DAB), and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), followed by vitamin K antagonist (VKA), in the treatment of VTE in China was assessed.Methods: To access the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), a long-term cost-effectiveness analysis was constructed using a Markov model with 5 health states. The Markov model was developed using patient data collected from the Xijing Hospital from January 1, 2016 to January 1, 2021. The time horizon was set at 30 years, and a 6-month cycle length was used in the model. Costs and ICERs were reported in 2020 U.S. dollars. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were used to test the uncertainties. A Chinese health-care system perspective was used.Results: In the base case, the data of 231 VTE patients were calculated in the base case analysis retrospectively. The RIV group resulted in a mean VTE attributable to 95% effective treatment. API, DAB, and VKA have a negative ICER (−187017.543, −284,674.922, and −9,283.339, respectively) and were absolutely dominated. The Markov model results confirmed this observation. The ICER of the API and RIV was negative (−216176.977), which belongs to the absolute inferiority scheme, and the ICER value of the DAB and VKA versus RIV was positive (110,577.872 and 836,846.343). Since the ICER of DAB and VKA exceeds the threshold, RIV therapy was likely to be the best choice for the treatment of VTE within the acceptable threshold range. The results of the sensitivity analysis revealed that the model output varied mostly with the cost in the DAB on-treatment therapy. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis of 1,000 patients for 30 years, RIV has 100% probability of being cost-effective compared with other regimens when the WTP is $10973 per QALY. When WTP exceeded $148,000, DAB was more cost-effective than RIV.Conclusions: Compared with LMWH + VKA and API, the results proved that RIV may be the most cost-effective treatment for VTE patients in China. Our findings could be helpful for physicians in clinical decision-making to select the appropriate treatment option for VTE.

scholarly journals ANALISIS EFEKTIVITAS BIAYA PASIEN PNEUMONIA BALITA RAWAT INAP DI RUMAH SAKIT BHAYANGKARA MANADO

PHARMACON ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 968
Author(s):  
Monica D. Lestari ◽  
Gayatri Citraningtyas ◽  
Hosea Jaya Edi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Retrospective Data Collection ◽  
Keywords Antibiotics ◽  
The Cost

ABSTRACTPneumonia is an infectious disease in the lower respiratory tract that affects the lung tissue. Ceftriaxone and Gentamicin antibiotics are the most numerous and good for use in the treatment of pneumonia, but of the two antibiotics is not yet known the options for more cost effective treatment, so it needs to be done the cost effectiveness analysis in order to facilitate the selection of more cost-effective treatment options especially in toddler. This study aims to determine which therapies are more cost-effective than the use of antibiotics Ceftriaxone and Gentamicin in pneumonia patients in the January-December 2018 period in the Bhayangkara Manado Hospital using descriptive research methods with retrospective data collection. The sample in this study were 22 patients, 12 patients using ceftriaxone antibiotics and 10 patients using gentamicin antibiotics. The results showed that pneumonia treatment in infants using Ceftriaxone antibiotics was more cost-effective with ACER ceftriaxone value of Rp. 503,872 / day and ICER value of Rp. 145,588 / day. Keywords : Antibiotics, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis), Pharmacoeconomy, Toddler Pneumonia. ABSTRAKPneumonia merupakan penyakit infeksi pada saluran pernapasan bagian bawah yang mengenai jaringan paru. Antibiotik Seftriakson dan Gentamisim yang paling banyak dan baik untuk digunakan dalam pengobatan pneumonia, namun dari kedua antibiotik tersebut belum diketahui pilihan terapi yang lebih cost-effective, sehingga perlu dilakukan analisis efektivitas biaya agar dapat mempermudah dalam pemilihan alternatif pengobatan yang lebih cost-effective khususnya pada balita. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menentukan terapi yang lebih cost-effective dari penggunaan antibiotik Seftriakson dan Gentamisin pada pasien pneumonia rawat inap periode Januari-Desember 2018 di Rumah Sakit Bhayangkara Manado dengan menggunakan metode penelitian deskriptif dengan pengambilan data secara retrospektif. Sampel pada penelitian ini sebanyak 22 pasien yaitu 12 pasien menggunakan antibiotik Seftriakson dan 10 pasien menggunakan antibiotik Gentamisin. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pengobatan pneumonia pada balita menggunakan antibiotik Seftriakson lebih cost-effective dengan nilai ACER seftriakson sebesar Rp. 503,872/hari dan nilai ICER sebesar Rp. 145.588/hari. Kata Kunci : Pneumonia Balita, Antibiotik, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis), Farmakoekonomi

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of Ruxolitinib vs Best Available Therapy in the Treatment of Myelofibrosis in Spain

10.36469/9808 ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-174
Author(s):  
María Teresa Gómez-Casares ◽  
Juan Carlos Hernández-Boluda ◽  
Antonio Jiménez-Velasco ◽  
Joaquin Martínez-López ◽  
María Giovanna Ferrario ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Societal Perspective ◽  
Primary Myelofibrosis ◽  
Janus Kinase ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Introduction: Primary myelofibrosis (MF) is a rare hematologic disease belonging to the group of Philadelphia-negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms. Identification of the Janus Kinase (JAK) gene mutations inaugurated a new era in the targeted therapy of myeloproliferative diseases. Ruxolitinib is the first JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor specifically approved for the treatment of disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adult patients with primary myelofibrosis. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ruxolitinib vs best available therapy (BAT) in MF patients in Spain. Methods: A decision-tree and Markov model were adapted to the Spanish setting to assess the cost-effectiveness of ruxolitinib vs. BAT on a lifetime horizon (≤15 years) from the societal perspective, while healthcare system perspective was included in the one-way sensitivity analysis. The population was assumed to be similar to that of the COMFORT-II clinical trial (CT), which was also the source of treatment efficacy data. BAT composition was derived from the same CT and validated with Spanish experts. Utilities were derived from the COMFORT-I CT. Costs included treatment, management, hospitalizations, emergency and outpatient visits, as well as adverse events and end-of-life costs. Additionally, costs associated to productivity loss were taken into account. Resource use was validated with experts and costs were extracted from Spanish sources. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was also performed to evaluate the consistency of the results under the uncertainty or variability of the input data. Results: Patients on ruxolitinib accumulated 6.1 life years gained (LYGs), resulting in 73% extra life-years compared to patients treated with BAT (3.5LYs gained). Ruxolitinib provided 4.4 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with a 99% improvement compared to BAT (2.2 QALYs). This analysis gave an incremental cost of €47 199 per LYG and an incremental cost of €55 616 per QALY gained from the societal perspective. Conclusions: Ruxolitinib would be cost-effective in Spain according to the end-of-life criteria defined by the NICE and commonly referred for Spain (cost-effectiveness threshold of €61 500/QALY), in line with results published for other European countries.

scholarly journals Economic evaluation of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haiqiang SANG ◽  
Yaohui JIANG ◽  
Zhe WANG ◽  
Rujie ZHENG
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background: In 2020, sacubitril/valsartan(formerly LCZ696) will implement the new negotiated price of medical insurance in China, and the cost of treatment will be significantly reduced. The aim of study is to evaluate the economy of sacubitril/valsartan(SAC/VAL) compared with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) (enalapril) in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in China.Method: A Markov model was developed to project clinical and economic outcomes of SAC/VAL versus enalapril for 64-year-old patients with HFrEF over 10 years from the Chinese medical and health system perspective. A cost-utility analysis was performed mostly based on data from the PARADIGM trial. Other transition probability, costs, and utilities were obtained from published literature and public databases. The primary outcome were total and incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for SAC/VAL relative to enalapril. The model was verified the uncertainty using the sensitivity analysis furtherly.Results: Compared with enalapril, SAC/VAL cost more than enalapril (¥96532 vs. ¥34560) and was more cost-effective (4.6 QALYs vs. 4.3 QALYs), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ¥185720 per QALY gained for patients with HFrEF at a WTP threshold of ¥212676 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated the robustness of the model, identifying the death on the SAC/VAL group as a significant drivers of the cost-effectiveness. At the national negotiation price (¥9.95 per 100mg), probability of SAC/VAL being cost-effective was about 53% at a WTP threshold of ¥212676 per QALY.Conclusion: SAC/VAL was associated with clinical benefit and may be cost-effective compared with an ACEI (the current standard of care) in patients with HFrEF.

scholarly journals Economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of acupuncture in the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy

2020 ◽  
pp. 096452842092028
Author(s):  
Alex Molassiotis ◽  
Bryony Dawkins ◽  
Roberta Longo ◽  
Lorna KP Suen ◽  
Hui Lin Cheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
The Cost

Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture in the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in Hong Kong. Methods A within trial cost-utility analysis with the primary endpoint for the economic evaluation being the Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) and associated Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) over 14 weeks of treatment. A secondary cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken with the endpoint being change in pain as measured on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Results Eighty-seven patients were randomised to acupuncture or usual care. Acupuncture resulted in significant improvements in pain intensity (8- and 14-week mean changes compared to usual care of −1.8 and −1.8, respectively), pain interference (8- and 14-week mean changes compared to usual care of −1.5 and −0.9, respectively) and indicators of quality of life and neurotoxicity-related symptoms. However, in the economic evaluation there was little difference in QALYs between the two arms (mean change 0.209 and 0.200 in the acupuncture and usual care arms, respectively). Also, costs yielded deterministic ICERs of HK$616,965.62, HK$824,083.44 and HK$540,727.56 per QALY gained from the health care provider perspective, the societal perspective and the patient perspective, respectively. These costs are significantly higher than the cost-effectiveness threshold of HK$180,450 that was used for the base case analysis. Conclusion While acupuncture can improve symptoms and quality of life indicators related to CIPN, it is unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment for CIPN-related pain in health care systems with limited resources. Trial registration number NCT02553863 (ClinicalTrials.gov) post-results.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of docetaxel in high-volume hormone-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaclyn Beca ◽  
Habeeb Majeed ◽  
Kelvin K.W. Chan ◽  
Sebastian J. Hotte ◽  
Andrew Loblaw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Hormone Sensitive ◽  
The Cost

Introduction: Three pivotal trials have considered the addition of docetaxel (D) chemotherapy to conventional androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC). While an initial small trial was inconclusive, two larger trials demonstrated significant clinical benefit, including pronounced survival benefits (added 17 months) among patients with high-volume metastatic disease. Given the evolving clinical evidence, the cost-effectiveness of this approach warrants exploration. Methods: The cost-effectiveness of six cycles of ADT+D compared to ADT alone to treat patients with high-volume metastatic HSPC was assessed from a Canadian public payer perspective. We included three health states: HSPC, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and death. Survival data were obtained from the CHAARTED trial, which reported outcomes specifically for high-volume disease. We used Ontario costs data and utilities from the literature. Results: In the base case analysis, ADT+D cost an additional $25 757 and produced an extra 1.06 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $24 226/QALY gained. Results from one-way sensitivity analysis across wide ranges of estimates and a range of scenarios, including an alternate model structure, produced ICERs below $35 000/QALY gained in all cases. Conclusions: The use of D with ADT in high-volume metastatic HSPC appears to be an economically attractive treatment approach. The findings were consistent with other studies and robust in sensitivity analysis across a variety of scenarios.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document