Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid in the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases from renal cell carcinoma: Comparison between France, Germany, and the United Kingdom

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5106-5106
Author(s):  
M. F. Botteman ◽  
S. Kaura
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Zoledronic Acid ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Skeletal Related Events ◽  
The Uk

5106 Background: Zoledronic acid (ZOL) significantly reduces the risk of new skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients (pts) with bone metastases from RCC. This study assessed and compared the cost-effectiveness of ZOL in pts with RCC from French, German, and United Kingdom (UK) societal perspectives. Methods: This analysis was based on a retrospective analysis of RCC pts with bone metastases who were enrolled in a 9-mo trial of ZOL or placebo (PBO) plus concomitant antineoplastic therapy. A model was developed to simulate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) experienced by study pts. The model included data and assumptions regarding SRE incidence, mortality, drug and administration costs, SRE costs, reduced quality of life (QOL) because of SREs and bone pain, and therapy duration. SRE costs were estimated using diagnosis-related group tariff information and published literature. Consistent with similar economic analyses, it was assumed that QOL decreased 20% to 80% (depending on SRE type) for 1 mo after each SRE experienced. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the effects of alternate assumptions, with < 30,000/QALY considered cost-effective. Results: Compared with PBO-treated pts (n = 19), ZOL-treated pts (n = 27) experienced 1.07 fewer SREs/pt and gained discounted QALYs of approximately 0.1563 in France and Germany and 0.1575 in the UK. Discounted SRE-related costs were substantially lower among pts treated with ZOL vs PBO (-4,196 in France, -3,880 in Germany, and -3,355 in the UK). After including drug therapy costs, ZOL saved 1,358, 1,223, and 719 per pt in France, Germany, and the UK, respectively. In multivariate sensitivity analyses, ZOL saved costs in 67% to 77% of cases, depending on the country. ZOL resulted in a cost per QALY gained < 30,000 in approximately 93% of cases. Conclusions: Treatment with ZOL reduces SREs, improves QOL, and lowers health-related costs compared with PBO in French, German, and UK pts with bone metastases from RCC. Use of ZOL in these populations therefore provides health-related cost savings and is a cost-effective use of healthcare resources. [Table: see text]

Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid versus placebo in the management of skeletal metastases in lung cancer patients (LC pts): Comparison across three European countries

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8081-8081
Author(s):  
J. Stephens ◽  
S. Kaura ◽  
M. F. Botteman
Keyword(s):  
Zoledronic Acid ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Diagnosis Related Groups ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Skeletal Metastases ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Economic Analyses ◽  
The Uk

8081 Background: Zoledronic acid (ZOL) reduces the risk of skeletal-related events (SREs) in LC pts with bone metastases. The present retrospective analysis compared the economic impact of ZOL in LC pts in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom (UK). Methods: Estimated direct costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) experienced by LC pts with bone metastases receiving placebo (PBO) or ZOL were modeled and compared. Overall survival (OS), SRE incidence, and number of infusions administered were obtained from a 21-mo randomized clinical trial comparing the proportion of pts who experienced an on-study SRE with 4 mg ZOL or PBO every 3 wk (Rosen et al. JCO. 2003). Costs of treatments and SREs were estimated using national reimbursement listings (eg, diagnosis-related groups), private databases, and published literature. Mean number of SREs was calculated by multiplying mean SRE rate by OS for LC pts in the study. For QALYs, OS was multiplied by a utility factor of 0.53. Consistent with similar economic analyses, it was assumed that quality of life (QOL) decreased 20% to 80% (depending on the SRE type) for 1 mo after each SRE experienced. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the effects of alternate scenarios, with < €30,000/QALY considered cost-effective. Results: During the median OS of 179 days, PBO pts (n = 120) experienced a mean of 2.07 SREs vs 1.32 SREs among ZOL pts (n = 124). QALYs were estimated at 0.352/pt (ZOL pts) and 0.335/pt (PBO pts). Use of ZOL resulted in a net increase of 0.017 QALY/pt vs PBO. ZOL drug-related costs were €1,610, €1,510 and €1,597 per pt in France, Germany, and the UK, respectively. Use of ZOL resulted in reductions in SRE costs of €2,221, €2,031, and €2,014 per pt, respectively. Overall, ZOL saved €598 per pt in France, €521 in Germany, and €417 in the UK. In sensitivity analyses, ZOL was cost-effective under a variety of scenarios (total range, -€98,356 to +€34,052 per QALY). Conclusions: ZOL leads to fewer SREs, better estimated QOL, and lower estimated costs relative to PBO in German, French, and UK LC pts with bone metastases. Use of ZOL in these populations is therefore cost-saving and highly cost-effective. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Newborn Screening for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency in the UK

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Bessey ◽  
James Chilcott ◽  
Joanna Leaviss ◽  
Carmen de la Cruz ◽  
Ruth Wong
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Severe Combined Immunodeficiency ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Combined Immunodeficiency ◽  
Tree Model ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

Severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) can be detected through newborn bloodspot screening. In the UK, the National Screening Committee (NSC) requires screening programmes to be cost-effective at standard UK thresholds. To assess the cost-effectiveness of SCID screening for the NSC, a decision-tree model with lifetable estimates of outcomes was built. Model structure and parameterisation were informed by systematic review and expert clinical judgment. A public service perspective was used and lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were discounted at 3.5%. Probabilistic, one-way sensitivity analyses and an exploratory disbenefit analysis for the identification of non-SCID patients were conducted. Screening for SCID was estimated to result in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £18,222 with a reduction in SCID mortality from 8.1 (5–12) to 1.7 (0.6–4.0) cases per year of screening. Results were sensitive to a number of parameters, including the cost of the screening test, the incidence of SCID and the disbenefit to the healthy at birth and false-positive cases. Screening for SCID is likely to be cost-effective at £20,000 per QALY, key uncertainties relate to the impact on false positives and the impact on the identification of children with non-SCID T Cell lymphopenia.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of an insertable cardiac monitor in a high-risk population in the UK

Open Heart ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e001037 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia I Rinciog ◽  
Laura M Sawyer ◽  
Alexander Diamantopoulos ◽  
Mitchell S V Elkind ◽  
Matthew Reynolds ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
High Risk Population ◽  
Risk Population ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Cost

ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs) compared with standard of care (SoC) for detecting atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients at high risk of stroke (CHADS2 >2), using a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective.MethodsUsing patient characteristics and clinical data from the REVEAL AF trial, a Markov model assessed the cost-effectiveness of detecting AF with an ICM compared with SoC. Costs and benefits were extrapolated across modelled patient lifetime. Ischaemic and haemorrhagic strokes, intracranial and extracranial haemorrhages and minor bleeds were modelled. Diagnostic and device costs were included, plus costs of treating stroke and bleeding events and costs of oral anticoagulants (OACs). Costs and health outcomes, measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), were discounted at 3.5% per annum. One-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were undertaken.ResultsThe total per-patient cost for ICM was £13 360 versus £11 936 for SoC (namely, annual 24 hours Holter monitoring). ICMs generated a total of 6.50 QALYs versus 6.30 for SoC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £7140/QALY gained, below the £20 000/QALY acceptability threshold. ICMs were cost-effective in 77.4% of PSA simulations. The number of ICMs needed to prevent one stroke was 21 and to cause a major bleed was 37. ICERs were sensitive to assumed proportions of patients initiating or discontinuing OAC after AF diagnosis, type of OAC used and how intense the traditional monitoring was assumed to be under SoC.ConclusionsThe use of ICMs to identify AF in a high-risk population is cost-effective for the UK NHS.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of tranexamic acid for the treatment of traumatic brain injury, based on the results of the CRASH-3 randomised trial: a decision modelling approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. e002716
Author(s):  
Jack Williams ◽  
Ian Roberts ◽  
Haleema Shakur-Still ◽  
Fiona E Lecky ◽  
Rizwana Chaudhri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Tranexamic Acid ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Markov Decision Model ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Cost

IntroductionAn estimated 69 million traumatic brain injuries (TBI) occur each year worldwide, with most in low-income and middle-income countries. The CRASH-3 randomised trial found that intravenous administration of tranexamic acid within 3 hours of injury reduces head injury deaths in patients sustaining a mild or moderate TBI. We examined the cost-effectiveness of tranexamic acid treatment for TBI.MethodsA Markov decision model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of treatment with and without tranexamic acid, in addition to current practice. We modelled the decision in the UK and Pakistan from a health service perspective, over a lifetime time horizon. We used data from the CRASH-3 trial for the risk of death during the trial period (28 days) and patient quality of life, and data from the literature to estimate costs and long-term outcomes post-TBI. We present outcomes as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and 2018 costs in pounds for the UK, and US dollars for Pakistan. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) per QALY gained were estimated, and compared with country specific cost-effective thresholds. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed.ResultsTranexamic acid was highly cost-effective for patients with mild TBI and intracranial bleeding or patients with moderate TBI, at £4288 per QALY in the UK, and US$24 per QALY in Pakistan. Tranexamic acid was 99% and 98% cost-effective at the cost-effectiveness thresholds for the UK and Pakistan, respectively, and remained cost-effective across all deterministic sensitivity analyses. Tranexamic acid was even more cost-effective with earlier treatment administration. The cost-effectiveness for those with severe TBI was uncertain.ConclusionEarly administration of tranexamic acid is highly cost-effective for patients with mild or moderate TBI in the UK and Pakistan, relative to the cost-effectiveness thresholds used. The estimated ICERs suggest treatment is likely to be cost-effective across all income settings globally.

Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid vs. pamidronate in the management of hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients with bone metastases

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 14660-14660 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Botteman ◽  
V. Barghout ◽  
K. El Ouagari
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Zoledronic Acid ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Bisphosphonate Therapy ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Cumulative Number ◽  
Life Years

14660 Background: Canadian guidelines recommend zoledronic acid (ZA) (4 mg every 3 weeks) in patients with hormone HRPC and asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic bone metastases to reduce skeletal-related events (SRE). However, IV pamidronate (90 mg every 3 weeks) (PA) is also routinely used in this setting in spite of no significant improvement in occurrence of SRE or pain compared to NT. Objectives: To assess the cost effectiveness of ZA, PA, or no bisphosphonate therapy (NT) in the management of prostate cancer patients with bone metastases in Canada. Methods: A literature-based decision analytic model was developed to estimate the incremental cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) associated with the 3 treatment options. The model included assumptions about SREs, mortality, drug and administration costs, cost of SREs, reduced quality of life due to SRE and bone pain, and therapy duration. Sensitivity analyses considered several scenarios in which various assumptions were used regarding treatment efficacy and QALY gains due to pain relief and SRE prevention. All costs were expressed in Canadian dollars (2004). Results: The cumulative number of SREs over a patient’s remaining lifetime (1.9 years) was estimated at 2.69 for PA and NT patients and 1.76 for ZA. Total discounted costs were $11,918 for NT, $17,593 for PA, and $19,312 for ZA. Compared with patients receiving NT or PA, quality-adjusted survival increased by 0.094 (range depending on scenario considered: 0.072 to 0.106) QALY per patient for those on ZA compared to PA or NT. Compared to NT, ZA resulted in a cost per QALY gained of $78,366 (range: $50,717 to $101,831). Compared to PA, ZA resulted in a cost per QALY gained of $18,343 (range: $2917 to $23,835) per QALY gained. PA was more expensive than NT but did not improve patient-related outcomes. Conclusions: For HRPC patients with bone metastasis, zoledronic acid appears to be the only clinically valuable and economically acceptable option in Canada with a cost effectiveness likely better than previously reported. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Is single-inhaler triple therapy for COPD cost-effective in the UK? The IMPACT trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 00333-2021
Author(s):  
Alan Martin ◽  
Dhvani Shah ◽  
Kerigo Ndirangu ◽  
Glenn A Anley ◽  
Gabriel Okorogheye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Triple Therapy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundThe IMPACT trial demonstrated superior outcomes following 52 weeks of once-daily single-inhaler treatment with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 μg compared with once-daily FF/VI (100/25 μg) or UMEC/VI (62.5/25 μg). This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI compared with FF/VI or UMEC/VI for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from a United Kingdom National Health Service perspective.MethodsPatient characteristics and treatment effects from IMPACT were populated into a hybrid decision tree/Markov economic model. Costs (GB£ inflated to 2018 equivalents) and health outcomes were modelled over a lifetime horizon, with a discount rate of 3.5% per annum applied to both. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of key assumptions and input parameters.ResultsCompared with FF/VI and UMEC/VI, FF/UMEC/VI provided an additional 0.296 and 0.145 life years (LYs; discounted), and 0.275 and 0.118 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), at an additional cost of £1129 and £760, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for FF/UMEC/VI were £4104/QALY and £3809/LY gained versus FF/VI and £6418/QALY and £5225/LY gained versus UMEC/VI. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000/QALY, the probability that FF/UMEC/VI was cost-effective was 96% versus FF/VI and 74% versus UMEC/VI. Results were similar in a subgroup reflecting patients recommended triple therapy in the 2019 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence COPD guideline.ConclusionsFF/UMEC/VI single-inhaler triple therapy improved health outcomes and was a cost-effective option compared with FF/VI or UMEC/VI for patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations in the UK at recognised cost-effectiveness threshold levels.

Ixazomib (IXA), carfilzomib (CAR), elotuzumab (ELO) or daratumumab (DAR) with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (LEN+DEX) versus LEN+DEX only in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM): A comparative cost-effectiveness analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8043-8043
Author(s):  
Mavis Obeng-Kusi ◽  
Daniel Arku ◽  
Neda Alrawashdh ◽  
Briana Choi ◽  
Nimer S. Alkhatib ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Treatment Comparison ◽  
Comparative Cost ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years

8043 Background: IXA, CAR, ELO and DARin combination with LEN+DEXhave been found superior in efficacy compared to LEN+DEX in the management of R/R MM. Applying indirect treatment comparisons from a network meta-analysis (NMA), this economic evaluation aimed to estimate the comparative cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of these four triplet regimens in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: In the absence of direct treatment comparison from a single clinical trial, NMA was used to indirectly estimate the comparative PFS benefit of each regimen. A 2-state Markov model simulating the health outcomes and costs was used to evaluate PFS life years (LY) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) with the triplet regimens over LEN+DEX and expressed as the incremental cost-effectiveness (ICER) and cost-utility ratios (ICUR). Probability sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the influence of parameter uncertainty on the model. Results: The NMA revealed that DAR+LEN+DEX was superior to the other triplet therapies, which did not differ statistically amongst them. As detailed in the Table, in our cost-effectiveness analysis, all 4 triplet regimens were associated with increased PFSLY and PFSQALY gained (g) over LEN+DEX at an additional cost. DAR+LEN+DEX emerged the most cost-effective with ICER and ICUR of $667,652/PFSLYg and $813,322/PFSQALYg, respectively. The highest probability of cost-effectiveness occurred at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $1,040,000/QALYg. Conclusions: Our economic analysis shows that all the triplet regimens were more expensive than LEN +DEX only but were also more effective with respect to PFSLY and PFSQALY gained. Relative to the other regimens, the daratumumab regimen was the most cost-effective.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Cost-utility Analysis of Second-generation Direct-acting Antivirals for Hepatitis C

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdollah Poursamad ◽  
Zahra Goudarzi ◽  
Iman Karimzadeh ◽  
Nahid Jallaly ◽  
Khosro Keshavarz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Genotype 1 ◽  
Medication Regimen ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Medication Therapy ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Study Results

Background: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) can lead to increased mortality, disability, and liver transplantation if left untreated, and it is associated with a possible increase in disease burden in the future, all of which would surely have a significant impact on the health system. New antiviral regimens are effective in the treatment of the disease yet expensive. Objectives: The purpose of the present study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of three medication regimens, namely, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF), velpatasvir/sofosbuvir, and daclatasvir/sofosbuvir (DCV/SOF) for HCV patients with genotype 1 in Iran. Methods: A Markov model with a lifetime horizon was developed to predict the costs and outcomes of the three mentioned medication therapy strategies. The final outcome of the study was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), which was obtained using the previously published studies. The study was conducted from the perspective of the Health Ministry; therefore, only direct medical costs were estimated. The results were provided as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY. Ultimately, the one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to measure the strength of study results. Results: The results showed that the QALYs for LDV/SOF, DCV/SOF, and VEL/SOF were 13.25, 13.94, and 14.61, and the costs were 4,807, 7,716, and 4,546$, respectively. The VEL/SOF regimen had lower costs and higher effectiveness than the LDV/SOF and DCV/SOF regimens, making it a dominant strategy. The tornado diagram results showed that the study results had the highest sensitivity to chronic hepatitis C (CHC) and compensated cirrhosis (CC) state costs. Moreover, the scatter plots showed that the VEL/SOF was the dominant therapeutic strategy in 73% of the simulations compared to LDV/SOF and 66% of the simulations compared to DCV/SOF; moreover, it was in the acceptable region in 92% of the simulations and below the threshold. Therefore, it was considered the most cost-effective strategy. Moreover, the results showed that DCV/SOF was in the acceptable region below the threshold in 69% of the simulations compared to LDV/SOF. Therefore, the DCV/SOF regimen was more cost-effective than LDV/SOF. Conclusions: According to the present study results, it is suggested that the VEL/SOF regimen be used as the first line of therapy in patients with HCV genotype 1. Moreover, DCV/SOF can be the second-line medication regimen.

scholarly journals Cladribine tablets are a cost-effective strategy in high-disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis patients in Iran

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nayyereh Ayati ◽  
Lora Fleifel ◽  
Mohammad Ali Sahraian ◽  
Shekoufeh Nikfar
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
High Disease Activity ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Multiple Sclerosis Patients ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis

Background: Cladribine tablets are the foremost oral immune-reconstitution therapy for high disease activity relapsing multiple sclerosis (HDA-RMS). We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of cladribine tablets compared to natalizumab in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran. Methods: A 5-year cohort-based Markov model was developed with 11 expanded disability status score (EDSS) health states, including patients with HDA-RMS as on and off-treatment. All costs were identified from the literature and expert opinion and were measured in Iranian Rial rates, changed to the 2020 USD rate and were discounted by 7.2%. Quality adjusted life years (QALY), discounted by 3.5%, and life years gained (LYG) were adopted to measure efficacy. The final results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio that was compared to a national willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of 1 to 3 gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (D/PSA) were employed to evaluate uncertainty. Results: Cladribine tablets dominated natalizumab and yielded 6,607 USD cost-saving and 0.003 additional QALYs per patient. LYG was comparable. The main cost component was drug acquisition cost in both arms. DSA indicated the sensitivity of the results to the cost discount rates and also the patients’ body weight; while they were less sensitive to the main clinical variables. PSA indicated that cladribine tablets were cost-effective in Iran, with a probability of 57.5% and 58.6% at lower and higher limits of threshold, respectively. Conclusion: Cladribine tablets yielded higher QALYs and lower costs compared to natalizumab, in patients with HDA-RMS in Iran.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document