A cost-effectiveness analysis of primary prophylaxis (PP) versus secondary prophylaxis (SP) with biosimilar myeloid growth factors (MGFs) for preventing chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients at intermediate risk.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 107-107
Author(s):  
Gary H. Lyman ◽  
Dylan Mezzio ◽  
Edward C. Li ◽  
Kim Campbell ◽  
Sanjeev Balu
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Secondary Prophylaxis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Hospitalization Costs

107 Background: Historically, PP with a MGF was recommended in patients with a ≥40% risk for developing chemotherapy-induced FN, based on clinical and regimen-related factors. Previous economic studies provided evidence to lower the threshold to 20%, the current high-risk threshold listed by practice guidelines. Biosimilar MGFs, such as filgrastim-sndz or LA-EP2006 (a proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar), offer an opportunity to evaluate whether it is cost-effective to further lower the threshold for intermediate-risk regimens (i.e., 10-20% FN risk). Methods: A Markov model was constructed to evaluate the total costs and clinical outcomes of biosimilar or reference MGFs when used as PP vs. SP in patients 55 years old with NHL receiving 6 cycles of R-CHOP chemotherapy (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) with no additional FN risk factors. Model inputs, including MGF efficacy and acquisition costs, were estimated from publically available data and literature, as were FN hospitalization costs and clinical utilities. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for cost per FN event avoided, life-year saved (LYS), and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from a payer perspective within the United States. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: Use of filgrastim-sndz as PP vs. SP provided an additional 0.130 QALYs (0.144 LYS) at an incremental cost of $5,999. The ICERs were $50,676, $41,761, and $46,207 for cost per FN event avoided, cost per LYS, and cost per QALY gained, respectively. Using LA-EP2006 as PP vs. SP provided an additional 0.166 QALYs (0.184 LYS) at an incremental cost of $17,648. The ICERs were $123,840, $95,963, and $106,265 for cost per FN event avoided, cost per LYS, and cost per QALY gained, respectively. Conclusions: Within NHL patients receiving R-CHOP at an intermediate risk for FN, PP with filgrastim-sndz and LA-EP2006 are cost-effective compared to their respective use as SP based on a cost-effectiveness threshold of $150,000/QALY.

Cost-effectiveness of filgrastim-sndz as primary prophylaxis (PP) versus secondary prophylaxis (SP) to prevent chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients at intermediate risk.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19401-e19401
Author(s):  
Edward C. Li ◽  
Dylan Mezzio ◽  
Andrew Spargo ◽  
Kimberley J. Campbell ◽  
Gary H. Lyman
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Secondary Prophylaxis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Nsclc Patients

e19401 Background: Patients with nonmetastatic NSCLC receiving platinum-based chemotherapy are at an intermediate risk (10-20%) of developing FN; clinical practice guidelines recommend assessing whether these patients have FN risk factors before considering myeloid growth factor (MGF) prophylaxis. Most NSCLC patients receiving chemotherapy have ≥1 FN risk factors, and while PP leads to lower rates of FN across all cycles, it is more costly compared to SP. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of PP vs. SP using a biosimilar MGF, filgrastim-sndz, in NSCLC patients at intermediate risk of FN. Methods: A Markov model with a lifetime horizon was constructed to evaluate the total costs and clinical outcomes of using filgrastim-sndz as PP vs. SP in NSCLC patients 61 years old receiving adjuvant carboplatin/paclitaxel every 3 weeks for 4 cycles. Separate analyses were conducted for patients with 0 FN risk factors (0RF) and with ≥1 FN risk factors (1+RF), representing 11.3% and 18% baseline FN risk, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for cost per FN event avoided, life-year saved (LYS), and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from a United States payer perspective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted. Results: For patients with 0RF, use of filgrastim-sndz as PP vs. SP provided an additional 0.056 QALYs (0.079 LYS) at an incremental cost of $3,266. The ICERs were $46,815, $41,555, and $58,531 for cost per FN event avoided, cost per LYS, and cost per QALY gained, respectively. For patients with 1+RF, PP vs. SP added 0.090 QALYs (0.127 LYS) at an incremental cost of $1,605. The ICERs were $13,970, $12,644, and $17,805 for cost per FN event avoided, cost per LYS, and cost per QALY gained, respectively. In the PSA, the likelihood of cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained was 31.7% for patients with 0RF and 96.6% for 1+RF. Conclusions: For NSCLC patients at intermediate risk of FN receiving adjuvant carboplatin/paclitaxel with 1+RF, PP with filgrastim-sndz compared to SP is cost-effective based on a WTP threshold of $50,000/QALY. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Primary Prophylaxis With Biosimilar Filgrastim for Patients at Intermediate Risk for Febrile Neutropenia: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. OP.20.01047
Author(s):  
Edward Li ◽  
Dylan J. Mezzio ◽  
David Campbell ◽  
Kim Campbell ◽  
Gary H. Lyman
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Febrile Neutropenia ◽  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Biosimilar Filgrastim

PURPOSE: Temporary COVID-19 guideline recommendations have recently been issued to expand the use of colony-stimulating factors in patients with cancer with intermediate to high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis (PP) with biosimilar filgrastim-sndz in patients with intermediate risk of FN compared with secondary prophylaxis (SP) over three different cancer types. METHODS: A Markov decision analytic model was constructed from the US payer perspective over a lifetime horizon to evaluate PP versus SP in patients with breast cancer, non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Cost-effectiveness was evaluated over a range of willingness-to-pay thresholds for incremental cost per FN avoided, life year gained, and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analyses evaluated uncertainty. RESULTS: Compared with SP, PP provided an additional 0.102-0.144 LYs and 0.065-0.130 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ranged from $5,660 in US dollars (USD) to $20,806 USD per FN event avoided, $5,123 to $31,077 USD per life year gained, and $7,213 to $35,563 USD per QALY gained. Over 1,000 iterations, there were 73.6%, 99.4%, and 91.8% probabilities that PP was cost-effective at a willingness to pay of $50,000 USD per QALY gained for breast cancer, NSCLC, and NHL, respectively. CONCLUSION: PP with a biosimilar filgrastim (specifically filgrastim-sndz) is cost-effective in patients with intermediate risk for FN receiving curative chemotherapy regimens for breast cancer, NSCLC, and NHL. Expanding the use of colony-stimulating factors for patients may be valuable in reducing unnecessary health care visits for patients with cancer at risk of complications because of COVID-19 and should be considered for the indefinite future.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) versus cisplatin-based chemotherapy (CBC) in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 419-419
Author(s):  
Ali Raza Khaki ◽  
Yong Shan ◽  
Richard Nelson ◽  
Sapna Kaul ◽  
John L. Gore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Pathologic Complete Response ◽  
Weighted Average ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

419 Background: Multiple single-arm clinical trials have shown promising pathologic complete response (pCR) rates with neoadjuvant ICIs in MIBC. However, ICIs remain costly. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing neoadjuvant ICIs with CBC. Methods: We applied a decision analytic simulation model with a health care payer perspective and two-year time horizon to compare neoadjuvant ICIs vs CBC. For the primary analysis we compared pembrolizumab with dose dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (ddMVAC). We performed a secondary analysis with gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) as CBC and exploratory analyses with atezolizumab or nivolumab/ipilimumab as ICIs (vs both ddMVAC and GC). We input pCR rates from trials (ICIs) or a weighted average of prior studies (CBC) and costs from average sales price. Outcomes of interest included costs, 2-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of cost per 2-year RFS. A threshold analysis estimated a pCR rate or price reduction for ICI to be cost-effective and one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Results of the cost effectiveness analysis are shown in the table. The incremental cost of pembrolizumab compared with ddMVAC was $8,042 resulting in an incremental improvement of 0.66% in 2-year RFS for an ICER of $1,218,485 per 2-year RFS. A pCR of 71% or a 26% reduction in cost of pembrolizumab would render it more cost-effective with an ICER of $100,000 per 2-year RFS. GC required a 96% pembrolizumab cost reduction to achieve an ICER of $100,000 per 2-year RFS. Atezolizumab appeared to be more cost-effective than ddMVAC, even though the 2yr RFS was 0.66% worse. Conclusions: ICIs were not cost-effective as neoadjuvant therapies, except when atezolizumab was compared with ddMVAC. Pembrolizumab would approach cost-effective thresholds with 26% or 96% reduction in cost when compared to ddMVAC and GC, respectively. Randomized clinical trials, larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are required to better understand the value of ICIs as neoadjuvant treatments. [Table: see text]

Cost-effectiveness of once weekly carfilzomib 70 mg/m2 plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma in the United States.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18356-e18356
Author(s):  
Shaji Kumar ◽  
Istvan Majer ◽  
Sumeet Panjabi ◽  
Jean Malacan ◽  
Rohan Medhekar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Lifetime Costs

e18356 Background: Carfilzomib plus dexamethasone (Kd) dosed once weekly at 70 mg/m2 (QW Kd70) was recently approved in the US for treating patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). To assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of QW Kd70 vs twice weekly Kd dosed at 27 mg/m2 (BIW Kd27), data from the phase 3 ARROW trial, which directly compared these regimens in patients with 2-3 prior lines of therapy were used. Methods: A partitioned survival model was developed for the CE analysis. Time to treatment discontinuation, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were estimated from the ARROW trial. Long-term OS was extrapolated using Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registry data after matching characteristics of patients in the registry and ARROW trial. Direct costs were estimated from a US health care payer perspective. Utilities collected in the ARROW trial using the five-level version of the EuroQol questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) were applied to estimate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Uncertainty was explored using sensitivity analyses. Two subgroups of patients refractory to lenalidomide or bortezomib were assessed. Main outcomes were mean life-years (LYs), QALYs, lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: For QW Kd70 and BIW Kd27, the model predicted mean LYs of 4.17 and 3.07 years, QALYs of 2.98 and 2.03 years, and mean total lifetime costs of $444,563 and $373,364, respectively. The incremental LYs gain, QALY gain, and incremental costs of QW Kd70 vs BIW Kd27 were estimated to be 1.10 years, 0.95 year, and $71,199, respectively, resulting in an ICER of $64,595 per LY gained and $75,204 per QALY gained. For patients refractory to lenalidomide and bortezomib, similar results were found with ICERs of $79,988 and $76,793, respectively. Conclusions: In line with ARROW trial results, this CE analysis showed that QW Kd70 is expected to provide considerable additional benefit in terms of LYs and QALYs gained compared with BIW Kd27. In the RRMM setting, QW Kd70 is cost-effective with ICERs below accepted willingness to pay thresholds in US and represents an efficient utilization of the health care budget.

scholarly journals Cost‑effectiveness analysis of hexaminolevulinate (Hexvix®) guided cystoscopy in Non‑Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer patients (NMIBC) in Italy

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Bennison ◽  
Stephanie Stephens ◽  
Giario Natale Conti
Keyword(s):  
Bladder Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Bladder Tumour ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer ◽  
Muscle Invasive

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incremental cost‑effectiveness of hexaminolevulinate (Hexvix®) + Blue Light (H+BL) cystoscopy (compared to white light cystoscopy only) when used at initial transurethral resection of the bladder tumour (TURBT) for patients diagnosed with non‑muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) in Italy.METHODS: A cost‑effectiveness model has been developed to estimate the incremental cost‑effectiveness of introducing H+BL at initial TURBT for patients diagnosed with NMIBC in Italy. The model consists of two parts: 1) a short term decision tree which estimates the outcome of the initial diagnostic procedure, and 2) a Markov cohort model which is used to estimate long term outcomes through extrapolation based on data and assumptions about patient management, the natural history of the disease and the empirical efficacy of H+BL in improving diagnosis detection and reducing recurrence. Cost‑effectiveness results are expressed as incremental costs per QALY gained. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses are conducted to test the robustness of the model to changes in inputs and assumptions.RESULTS: Base case results suggest that Hexvix® is a dominant strategy when used in the resection of NMIBC. Hexvix® is expected to be associated with 0.070 incremental QALYs, with cost savings of € 435 per patient. Sensitivity analyses suggest that the cost of Hexvix® and the relative risk of recurrence in intermediate and low risk groups are key drivers in the model. Probabilistic analyses indicate that Hexvix® is expected to be cost‑effective in >99% of iterations, assuming a willingness to pay threshold of € 25,000 per QALY.CONCLUSION: In conclusion, Hexvix® is expected to be a cost‑effective strategy when used in the resection of NMIBC in Italy. 

scholarly journals Comparison of Primary and Secondary Prophylaxis Using PEGylated Recombinant Human Granulocyte–Stimulating Factor as a Cost-Effective Measure in Malignant Neoplasms: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiuji Wu ◽  
Qiu Li ◽  
Jun Zhang ◽  
Zhumei Luo ◽  
Jin Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Febrile Neutropenia ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Secondary Prophylaxis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Malignant Neoplasms ◽  
Effective Measure ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Stimulating Factor

Purpose: The aim of the study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PEGylated recombinant human granulocyte–stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF) as a means of achieving primary and secondary prophylaxis against chemotherapy-induced neutropenia cancer cases.Methods: Individuals who underwent PEG-rhG-CSF therapeutics were monitored for 12 months, together with thorough examination of individual medical records for extracting medical care costs. Both prophylaxis-based therapeutic options (primary/secondary) were scrutinized for cost-effectiveness, using a decision-making analysis model which derived the perspective of Chinese payers. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess the robustness of the model.Results: In summary, 130 clinical cases treated using PEG-rhG-CSF prophylaxis were included in this study: 51 within the primary prophylaxis (PP) group and 79 within the secondary prophylaxis (SP) group. Compared with SP, PP-based PEG-rhG-CSF successfully contributed to a 14.3% reduction in febrile neutropenia. In general, PP was estimated to reduce costs by $4,701.81 in comparison to SP, with a gain of 0.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Equivalent results were found in differing febrile neutropenia (FN) risk subgroups. Sensitivity analyses found the model outputs to be most affected for the average time of hospitalization and for the cost of FN.Conclusion: From the perspective of Chinese payers, PP with PEG-rhG-CSF should be considered cost-effective compared to SP strategies in patients who received chemotherapy regimens with a middle- to high-risk of FN.

Cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis (PP) with colony-simulating factor (CSF) when compared with secondary prophylaxis (SP) in elderly patients with diffuse aggressive lymphoma undergoing curative chemotherapy

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6558-6558
Author(s):  
K. K. Chan ◽  
K. R. Imrie ◽  
S. M. Alibhai
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Cost Minimization ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Aggressive Lymphoma ◽  
Base Case ◽  
The Cost

6558 Background: The 2006 ASCO guideline recommends PP with CSF for elderly patients with diffuse aggressive lymphoma, partially based on previous cost-minimization analyses showing that CSF saved costs when compared with no CSF by reducing hospitalization from febrile neutropenia (FN) when the risk of FN was > 20%. However, these studies examined only one cycle of chemotherapy and did not account for costs of CSF in subsequent cycles, did not consider SP, and did not consider patients’ preferences. Methods: We conducted a cost-utility analysis to compare PP with SP in this setting using a Markov model for a time horizon of 8 cycles of chemotherapy with a government payer perspective. Costs were adjusted to 2006 $CAD. Ontario health economic data were used. The cost of hospitalization for FN was obtained from Ontario Case Costing Initiative. Data for efficacies of CSF, probabilities and utilities were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using a threshold of $100,000/QALY. Results: The base case costs for PP and SP were $22,077 and $17,641. The QALYs of PP and SP were 0.254 and 0.248. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio of PP to SP was $739,999/QALY. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that in order for PP to be cost-effective, the cost of hospitalization per episode of FN had to be > $31,138 (i.e. 2.5 times > base case), the cost of CSF per cycle had to be < $896 (base case = $1,960), the risk of FN in the 1st cycle had to be > 48% (base case = 24%), or the relative risk reduction of FN with CSF had to be > 97% (base case = 41%). Our result was robust to all other cost, probability and utility variables. First order microsimulation showed that < 17% of simulations were cost-effective. Conclusions: PP is not cost-effective when compared with SP for this population under most assumptions. PP only becomes attractive in places where the cost of hospitalization for FN is much more than that of Ontario, or the cost of CSF is under $896 per cycle. The costs of CSF and hospitalization in all cycles (instead of just one cycle) should be accounted for in any economic evaluation of CSF. Current guidelines recommending PP in this population should be revisited. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

CyberKnife for prostate cancer: Is it cost-effective?

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 87-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Parthan ◽  
N. Pruttivarasin ◽  
D. Taylor ◽  
D. Davies ◽  
G. Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Societal Perspective ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Lifetime Costs

87 Background: The study assessed the cost-effectiveness of CyberKnife (CK) compared to surgery and radiation therapy for the treatment of prostate cancer (PC) from a third-party and societal perspective. Methods: For patients > 65 yrs with localized PC, a Markov model compared treatment with CK, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), surgery or proton therapy (PT). Following treatment, patients were at risk of long-term toxicity: genitourinary (GU); gastrointestinal (GI); and sexual dysfunction (SD). Long-term toxicity was defined as adverse events >grade 2 on Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scale occurring at least 12 months following treatment. Markov states included all possible combinations of GI, GU, and SD long-term toxicities, no toxicity, and death. During each year patients remained in the same Markov state or died. Costs and utilities were assigned using published sources. Toxicity probabilities were derived using meta-analytical techniques to pool results from multiple studies. It was assumed that long-term disease control would not differ across treatments. The model projected expected lifetime costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) for each treatment and incremental cost-effectiveness of CK vs comparators as cost per QALY gained. Costs from societal perspective included lost productivity. Extensive sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: Surgery was the least expensive treatment option followed by CK. CK patients had higher expected QALYs (8.11) than other treatment options (7.72- 8.06). From a payer perspective, total lifetime costs were $25,904, $22,295, $38,915, and $58,100 for CK, surgery, IMRT and PT, respectively. Incremental cost per QALY gained for CK versus Surgery was $9,200/QALY. Compared to IMRT and PT, CK was less costly and resulted in higher QALYs (dominance). At a threshold of $50,000/QALY, CK was cost effective in 86%, 79%, and 91% of simulations compared to surgery, IMRT, and PT, respectively. From a societal perspective, CK costs $4,200/QALY compared to surgery and remained dominant vs IMRT and PT. Results were most sensitive to costs of surgery and CK. Conclusions: Initial CK costs are higher than surgery, but CK patients have better quality of life. CK patients have lower lifetime costs and higher QALYs than IMRT and PT patients. [Table: see text]

Standardizing the Response to Category II Tracings during Induction with Oxytocin: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 1255-1263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah Savitsky ◽  
Blake Zwerling ◽  
Justin Williams ◽  
Alison Cahill ◽  
Aaron Caughey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Fetal Heart Rate ◽  
Fetal Heart ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Cesarean Deliveries

Background Oxytocin is one of the most frequently used medications in obstetrics. It is generally considered to be safe and effective for induction and augmentation of labor but has been implicated in uterine hyperstimulation and adverse fetal outcomes. The management of labor with oxytocin in response to changes in fetal status remains an area of debate. Objective This study sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of reducing or ceasing oxytocin administration in response to Category II fetal heart rate tracings. Study Design A decision-analytic model was built using TreeAge 2016 software (TreeAge Software Inc.) with probabilities, costs, and utilities derived from the literature. Primary outcomes included cerebral palsy (CP), neonatal mortality, and mode of delivery. Secondary outcomes included cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY; cost-effectiveness threshold set at $100,000/QALY), admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and low 5-minute Apgar score (<7). Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the robustness of our baseline assumptions. Results In a theoretical cohort of 900,000 women (estimated number of women undergoing induction at term in the United States), decreasing or stopping oxytocin in response to Category II tracings prevented 12,510 NICU admissions, 4,410 low Apgar scores, 204 neonatal deaths, and 126 cases of CP. However, there were 81,900 more cesarean deliveries. The strategy cost $356 million more, but was cost-effective with an ICER of $9,881.5 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the intervention would be cost-effective up to a cesarean rate of 54%. Conclusion Decreasing or stopping oxytocin in response to Category II fetal heart rate tracings is cost-effective. This intervention increases the rate of cesarean deliveries but reduces neonatal morbidity and mortality. Further work on this guideline should be performed to ascertain how the approach using different aspects of the Category II tracing to guide care might lead to similar improved outcomes without increasing the cesarean delivery rate.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase cervical screening uptake at first invitation (STRATEGIC)

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Apostolos Tsiachristas ◽  
Matthew Gittins ◽  
Henry Kitchener ◽  
Alastair Gray
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Screening Uptake ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Nurse Navigator ◽  
Lifetime Costs ◽  
Intervention Costs

Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of strategies to increase cervical cancer screening uptake at first invitation (STRATEGIC trial). Methods We performed an economic analysis alongside the STRATEGIC trial, comparing each of seven novel interventions for improving cervical screening uptake with control general practices in Greater Manchester and Grampian (United Kingdom). A template was developed to measure the intervention costs. Trial estimates of screening uptake were combined with data from the literature to estimate healthcare costs of each intervention. The added lifetime costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) of attending cervical screening were estimated by a systematic literature review, with relevant results pooled and weighted by study quality. Trial results and estimated lifetime costs and benefits of screening were then combined in a decision analytic model, giving an incremental cost per QALY gained for each intervention. Uncertainty was addressed in probabilistic and univariate sensitivity analyses. Results Intervention costs per screening round per woman attending varied from about £1.20 (2014 UK) for the nurse navigator intervention to £62 for the unrequested HPV self-sampler kit. The meta-analysis revealed a lifetime discounted benefit from screening of 0.043 QALYs per woman attending, at an additional lifetime discounted cost of £234. The incremental cost per QALY gained in all interventions was below £13,000. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that only unrequested self-sampling and timed appointments have a high probability of being cost-effective. Conclusions Unrequested self-sampling and timed appointments are likely to be cost-effective interventions. Further research is required on the duration of effects and on implementing combinations of interventions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document