scholarly journals Cost yield of different treatment strategies against Clonorchis sinensis infection

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Men-Bao Qian ◽  
Chang-Hai Zhou ◽  
Hui-Hui Zhu ◽  
Ying-Dan Chen ◽  
Xiao-Nong Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adult Female ◽  
Adult Male ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Individual Treatment ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Selective Chemotherapy ◽  
Very High

Abstract Background Clonorchiasis is attributed to the ingestion of raw freshwater fish harboring Clonorchis sinensis. Morbidity control is targeted through the administration of antihelminthics. This study modelled the cost yield indicated by effectiveness and utility of different treatment strategies against clonorchiasis. Methods About 1000 participants were enrolled from each of 14 counties selected from four provincial-level administrative divisions namely Guangxi, Guangdong, Heilongjiang and Jilin in 2017. Fecal examination was adopted to detect C. sinensis infection, while behavior of ingesting raw freshwater fish was enquired. Counties were grouped into four categories based on prevalence, namely low prevalence group (< 1%), moderate prevalence group (1–9.9%), high prevalence group (10–19.9%) and very high prevalence group (≥ 20%), while population were divided into three subgroups, namely children aged below 14 years old, adult female and adult male both aged over 14 years old. The average of cost effectiveness indicated by the cost to treat single infected cases with C. sinensis and of cost utility indicated by the cost to avoid per disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) caused by C. sinensis infection was calculated. Comparisons were performed between three treatment schedules, namely individual treatment, massive and selective chemotherapy, in which different endemic levels and populations were considered. Results In selective chemotherapy strategy, the cost to treat single infected case in very high prevalence group was USD 10.6 in adult male, USD 11.6 in adult female, and USD 13.2 in children. The cost increased followed the decrease of endemic level. In massive chemotherapy strategy, the cost per infected case in very high prevalence group was USD 14.0 in adult male, USD 17.1 in adult female, USD 45.8 in children, which were also increased when the endemic level decreased. In individual treatment strategy, the cost was USD 12.2 in adult male, USD 15.0 in adult female and USD 41.5 in children in very high prevalence group; USD 19.2 in adult male, USD 34.0 in adult female, and USD 90.1 in children in high prevalence group; USD 30.4 in adult male, USD 50.5 in adult female and over USD 100 in children in moderate prevalence group; and over USD 400 in any population in low prevalence group. As to cost utility, the differences by treatment strategies, populations and endemic levels were similar to those in cost effectiveness. Conclusions Both cost effectiveness and cost utility indicators are highly impacted by the prevalence and population, as well as the treatment schedules. Adults especially men in the areas with a prevalence over 10% should be prioritized, in which selective chemotherapy was best and massive chemotherapy was also cost effective. In moderate endemic areas, the yield is not ideal, but selective chemotherapy for adult male may also be adopted. In low endemic areas, all strategies were high costly and new strategies need to be developed. Graphical Abstract

scholarly journals Cost per DALY averted in low, middle- and high-income countries: evidence from the global burden of disease study to estimate the cost-effectiveness thresholds

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajabali Daroudi ◽  
Ali Akbari Sari ◽  
Azin Nahvijou ◽  
Ahmad Faramarzi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Inverse Correlation ◽  
Gdp Per Capita ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Capita Health Expenditure ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Healthcare Interventions ◽  
Disease Study ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Very High

Abstract Background Determining the cost-effectiveness thresholds for healthcare interventions has been a severe challenge for policymakers, especially in low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to estimate the cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted for countries with different levels of Human Development Index (HDI) and Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Methods The data about DALYs, per capita health expenditure (HE), HDI, and GDP per capita were extracted for 176 countries during the years 2000 to 2016. Then we examined the trends on these variables. Panel regression analysis was performed to explore the correlation between DALY and HE per capita. The results of the regression models were used to calculate the cost per DALY averted for each country. Results Age-standardized rate (ASR) DALY (DALY per 100,000 population) had a nonlinear inverse correlation with HE per capita and a linear inverse correlation with HDI. One percent increase in HE per capita was associated with an average of 0.28, 0.24, 0.18, and 0.27% decrease on the ASR DALY in low HDI, medium HDI, high HDI, and very high HDI countries, respectively. The estimated cost per DALY averted was $998, $6522, $23,782, and $69,499 in low HDI, medium HDI, high HDI, and very high HDI countries. On average, the cost per DALY averted was 0.34 times the GDP per capita in low HDI countries. While in medium HDI, high HDI, and very high HDI countries, it was 0.67, 1.22, and 1.46 times the GDP per capita, respectively. Conclusions This study suggests that the cost-effectiveness thresholds might be less than a GDP per capita in low and medium HDI countries and between one and two GDP per capita in high and very high HDI countries.

scholarly journals Cost-utility analysis of a consensus and evidence-based medication review to optimize and potentially reduce psychotropic drug prescription in institutionalized dementia patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mireia Massot Mesquida ◽  
Frans Folkvord ◽  
Gemma Seda ◽  
Francisco Lupiáñez-Villanueva ◽  
Pere Torán Monserrat
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Psychotropic Drugs ◽  
Medication Review ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Dementia Patients ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Growing evidence shows the effects of psychotropic drugs on the evolution of dementia. Until now, only a few studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of psychotropic drugs in institutionalized dementia patients. This study aims to assess the cost-utility of intervention performed in the metropolitan area of Barcelona (Spain) (MN) based on consensus between specialized caregivers involved in the management of dementia patients for optimizing and potentially reducing the prescription of inappropriate psychotropic drugs in this population. This analysis was conducted using the Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (MAFEIP) tool. Methods The MAFEIP tool builds up from a variety of surrogate endpoints commonly used across different studies in order to estimate health and economic outcomes in terms of incremental changes in quality adjusted life years (QALYs), as well as health and social care utilization. Cost estimates are based on scientific literature and expert opinion; they are direct costs and include medical visits, hospital care, medical tests and exams and drugs administered, among other concepts. The healthcare costs of patients using the intervention were calculated by means of a medication review that compared patients’ drug-related costs before, during and after the use of the intervention conducted in MN between 2012 and 2014. The cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of a health care system with a time horizon of 12 months. Results The tool calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the intervention, revealing it to be dominant, or rather, better (more effective) and cheaper than the current (standard) care. The ICER of the intervention was in the lower right quadrant, making it an intervention that is always accepted even with the lowest given Willingness to Pay (WTP) threshold value (€15,000). Conclusions The results of this study show that the intervention was dominant, or rather, better (more effective) and cheaper than the current (standard) care. This dominant intervention is therefore recommended to interested investors for systematic application.

scholarly journals Addition of Flucytosine to Fluconazole for the Treatment of Cryptococcal Meningitis in Africa: A Multicountry Cost-effectiveness Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tinevimbo Shiri ◽  
Angela Loyse ◽  
Lawrence Mwenge ◽  
Tao Chen ◽  
Shabir Lakhi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cryptococcal Meningitis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Immunodeficiency Virus ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Costing Analysis ◽  
Very High

Abstract Background Mortality from cryptococcal meningitis remains very high in Africa. In the Advancing Cryptococcal Meningitis Treatment for Africa (ACTA) trial, 2 weeks of fluconazole (FLU) plus flucytosine (5FC) was as effective and less costly than 2 weeks of amphotericin-based regimens. However, many African settings treat with FLU monotherapy, and the cost-effectiveness of adding 5FC to FLU is uncertain. Methods The effectiveness and costs of FLU+5FC were taken from ACTA, which included a costing analysis at the Zambian site. The effectiveness of FLU was derived from cohorts of consecutively enrolled patients, managed in respects other than drug therapy, as were participants in ACTA. FLU costs were derived from costs of FLU+5FC in ACTA, by subtracting 5FC drug and monitoring costs. The cost-effectiveness of FLU+5FC vs FLU alone was measured as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A probabilistic sensitivity analysis assessed uncertainties and a bivariate deterministic sensitivity analysis examined the impact of varying mortality and 5FC drug costs on the ICER. Results The mean costs per patient were US $847 (95% confidence interval [CI] $776–927) for FLU+5FC, and US $628 (95% CI $557–709) for FLU. The 10-week mortality rate was 35.1% (95% CI 28.9–41.7%) with FLU+5FC and 53.8% (95% CI 43.1–64.1%) with FLU. At the current 5FC price of US $1.30 per 500 mg tablet, the ICER of 5FC+FLU versus FLU alone was US $65 (95% CI $28–208) per life-year saved. Reducing the 5FC cost to between US $0.80 and US $0.40 per 500 mg resulted in an ICER between US $44 and US $28 per life-year saved. Conclusions The addition of 5FC to FLU is cost-effective for cryptococcal meningitis treatment in Africa and, if made available widely, could substantially reduce mortality rates among human immunodeficiency virus–infected persons in Africa.

scholarly journals Cost Needed to Treat (CNT) and Number Needed to Treat (NNT) analysis of drugs for treatment of heart failure in India

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Mullavelil ◽  
V George ◽  
A Thannikkal ◽  
R Aravindakshan ◽  
D John ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Neprilysin Inhibitor ◽  
Long Term Treatment ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Threshold ◽  
Effectiveness Threshold

Abstract Background Only little attention has been paid to treatment strategies of chronic disease conditions that require long term treatment and repeated hospitalizations Purpose Our aim was to review cost-effectiveness of guideline directed medical therapy of heart failure in India and identify drugs that can be made available free of cost or at subsidized rates to the patient population. Methods Data extracted from ten landmark trials in heart failure was used to compute Number Needed to Treat (NNT) and Cost Needed to Treat (CNT) of drugs used in heart failure, to prevent cardiovascular mortality and heart failure re-hospitalization using HDS Plotter- Incremental Cost Effectiveness Calculator. Since various brands (i.e. trade names) with wide cost range are available in Indian market, the average retail price in Indian Rupees for year 2019 was considered and converted to US dollars and used for the analysis.NNT and CNT of each drug was computed and the cost-effectiveness was analyzed. WHO recommendation of three times per capita GDP was used as the cost effectiveness threshold. Results Medications that were labeled as class I for the treatment of heart failure, were included in our analysis. Ivabradine, Valsartan and Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin inhibitor (ARNi) did not meet the cost effectiveness criteria for preventing cardio-vascular mortality. For prevention of heart failure re-hospitalization, all drugs except ARNi, met the cost effectiveness threshold. Conclusion Any future research would need to consider compliance factor along with Willingness to Pay (WTP) to understand the real acceptance of these drugs on the ground in India. Log prices (in US$) of various HF drugs Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of treatment optimisation with biomarkers for immunotherapy in solid tumours: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e048141
Author(s):  
Sara Mucherino ◽  
Valentina Lorenzoni ◽  
Valentina Orlando ◽  
Isotta Triulzi ◽  
Marzia Del Re ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Solid Tumours ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Monetary Benefit ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Net Monetary Benefit

IntroductionThe combination of biomarkers and drugs is the subject of growing interest both from regulators, physicians and companies. This study protocol of a systematic review is aimed to describe available literature evidences about the cost-effectiveness, cost-utility or net-monetary benefit of the use of biomarkers in solid tumour as tools for customising immunotherapy to identify what further research needs.Methods and analysisA systematic review of the literature will be carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines. PubMed and Embase will be queried from June 2010 to June 2021. The PICOS model will be applied: target population (P) will be patients with solid tumours treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the interventions (I) will be test of the immune checkpoint predictive biomarkers; the comparator (C) will be any other targeted or non-targeted therapy; outcomes (O) evaluated will be health economic and clinical implications assessed in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, net health benefit, net monetary benefit, life years gained, quality of life, etc; study (S) considered will be economic evaluations reporting cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, net-monetary benefit. The quality of the evidence will be graded according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review will assess the cost-effectiveness implications of using biomarkers in the immunotherapy with ICIs, which may help to understand whether this approach is widespread in real clinical practice. This research is exempt from ethics approval because the work is carried out on published documents. We will disseminate this protocol in a related peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020201549.

Health economics and health promotion

2018 ◽  
pp. 113-140
Author(s):  
Colin Palfrey
Keyword(s):  
Health Promotion ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Economics ◽  
Conjoint Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Value For Money ◽  
Cost Minimisation ◽  
The Cost

This chapter examines the techniques used by health economists to evaluate the value for money of health promotion initiatives. It first provides an overview of concepts related to economics and health economics, including efficiency, equality, equity and accessibility. Efficiency can be evaluated in terms of cost-minimisation, cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit and cost-utility. The chapter then considers the various rationing strategies by which the NHS can try to reduce expenditure, the use of QALYs to compare the cost-effectiveness of health promotion projects, and conjoint analysis. It also explains how health economists calculate the cost to society of unhealthy lifestyles such as obesity and smoking, and goes on to tackle the question of prevention vs cure in health promotion, the expenditure on the NHS, and the limitations of health economics in evaluation of health promotion endeavours. The chapter concludes with an assessment of how to estimate the costs of health promotion.

Advanced HIV Infection Treated with Zidovudine Monotherapy: Lifetime Values of Absolute Cost—Effectiveness as a Pharmacoeconomic Reference for Future Studies Evaluating Antiretroviral Combination Treatments

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (12) ◽  
pp. 1447-1454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Messori ◽  
Paola Becagli ◽  
Valeria Berto ◽  
Sabrina Trippoli ◽  
Maria Font ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hiv Infection ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Antiretroviral Drugs ◽  
Average Lifetime ◽  
Combined Method ◽  
Zidovudine Monotherapy ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
Triple Treatment ◽  
The Cost

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the cost and the effectiveness of zidovudine monotherapy in patients with advanced HIV infection and to derive preliminary data on the cost—effectiveness of the triple treatment with saquinavir plus zalcitabine plus zidovudine compared with zidovudine alone. DESIGN: We used a combined method of survival analysis utilizing both the quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWIST) method and the Gompertz approach. This combined method was applied to assess the absolute cost-effectiveness and cost—utility ratios of zidovudine monotherapy and to perform a preliminary incremental cost—effectiveness comparison of saquinavir plus zalcitabine plus zidovudine versus zidovudine alone. The clinical material used in our study was derived from two reports on the treatment of advanced HIV infection. Data of lifetime costs of HIV infection were obtained from published information. RESULTS: In patients with advanced HIV infection treated with zidovudine monotherapy, lifetime survival was 252.1 discounted person-years per 100 patients. Using an average lifetime cost of $93 000 (discounted) per individual, the absolute ratio of cost—effectiveness for zidovudine monotherapy was $36 980 per life-year, while the absolute cost—utility ratio was $47 112 per quality-adjusted life-year. In the comparative analysis of saquinavir plus zalcitabine plus zidovudine versus zidovudine alone, our calculations showed that the administration of the triple treatment can have an “average” cost—effectiveness, provided that mean lifetime survival per patient (discounted) is improved to at least 3.68 years (with an average survival gain of at least 14 mo per patient). CONCLUSIONS: The values of absolute cost—effectiveness and cost—utility ratios for zidovudine monotherapy are a useful reference point for further pharmacoeconomic studies in the area of antiretroviral drugs.

scholarly journals UR4 THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF VARIOUS TREATMENT STRATEGIES FORABNORMAL UTERINE BLEEDING

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. A17-A18
Author(s):  
J Trussell ◽  
Z Liu ◽  
A Guo ◽  
QV Doan ◽  
RW Dubois ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Uterine Bleeding ◽  
The Cost

Cost-effectiveness studies in ovarian cancer

2003 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. 212-219
Author(s):  
T. D. Szucs ◽  
P. Wyss ◽  
K. J. Dedes
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Chemotherapy Drugs ◽  
Pain And Suffering ◽  
Acquisition Costs ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Effectiveness Studies ◽  
The Impact

Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths. The costs associated with this cancer impact both on the affected individual and on the health system. Screening is currently unproven as a strategy for improving outcomes for women with ovarian cancer. Randomized controlled trials, however, are underway, estimating any impact of screening with ultrasound and CA125 on ovarian cancer mortality. Paclitaxel and carboplatin combination, the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for ovarian cancer, has not been compared with cisplatin and cyclophosphamide regarding the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility, but for paclitaxel and cisplatin, numerous studies have addressed these issues. The estimated incremental costs resulting from these studies fall well within the generally accepted range for new therapies. Although acquisition costs of new chemotherapy drugs exceed those of older drugs, the impact of costly drugs on total costs may be cost saving due to less costs related to supportive and palliative care. The most important costs for the patient, the pain and suffering associated with ovarian cancer and its treatment, are hard to quantify. Nevertheless, patients' quality of life must be considered when making a clinical decision to treat this disease. A review of available cost-effectiveness studies is presented and discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document