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]

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of Vaborem in Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) -Klebsiella pneumoniae infections in Italy

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Saverio Mennini ◽  
Mario Gori ◽  
Ioanna Vlachaki ◽  
Francesca Fiorentino ◽  
Paola La Malfa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Klebsiella Pneumoniae ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Carbapenem Resistant ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years

Abstract Background Vaborem is a fixed dose combination of vaborbactam and meropenem with potent activity against target Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) pathogens, optimally developed for Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC). The study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Vaborem versus best available therapy (BAT) for the treatment of patients with CRE-KPC associated infections in the Italian setting. Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted based on a decision tree model that simulates the clinical pathway followed by physicians treating patients with a confirmed CRE-KPC infection in a 5-year time horizon. The Italian National Health System perspective was adopted with a 3% discount rate. The clinical inputs were mostly sourced from the phase 3, randomised, clinical trial (TANGO II). Unit costs were retrieved from the Italian official drug pricing list and legislation, while patient resource use was validated by a national expert. Model outcomes included life years (LYs) and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, incremental costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results Vaborem is expected to decrease the burden associated with treatment failure and reduce the need for chronic renal replacement therapy while costs related to drug acquisition and long-term care (due to higher survival) may increase. Treatment with Vaborem versus BAT leads to a gain of 0.475 LYs, 0.384 QALYs, and incremental costs of €3549, resulting in an ICER and ICUR of €7473/LY and €9246/QALY, respectively. Sensitivity analyses proved the robustness of the model and also revealed that the probability of Vaborem being cost-effective reaches 90% when willingness to pay is €15,850/QALY. Conclusions In the Italian setting, the introduction of Vaborem will lead to a substantial increase in the quality of life together with a minimal cost impact, therefore Vaborem is expected to be a cost-effective strategy compared to BAT.

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 ANALISIS EFEKTIVITAS BIAYA PADA PASIEN ANAK DEMAM TIFOID DI RUMAH SAKIT BHAYANGKARA MANADO

PHARMACON ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 335
Author(s):  
Agatha Agnes ◽  
Gayatri Citraningtyas ◽  
Sri Sudewi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Typhoid Fever ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Record Data

ABSTRACT Typhoid fever is an endemic disease which it incidence rate is still high in Indonesian. Administering antibiotic therapy can do treatment of typhoid fever. This study was conducted since there are several pediatric patients diagnosed with typhoid fever but have different antibiotic therapies, namely cefotaxime and ceftriaxone therapy, so it is necessary to do calculations to determine the comparison and determine which treatment is more efficient in cost and effectiveness. The method used in this study is CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis) with the design of retrieving medical record data of children with typhoid fever in Bhayangkara Manado Hospital retrospectively from January to December 2018. The samples  obtained were 28 pediatric patients, cinsisting of 12 patients using cefotaxime therapy and 16 patients using ceftriaxone therapy. The result of ACER (An Avarage Cost Effective Ratio) obtained by ceftriaxone were Rp. 526.609,-/day and cefotaxime Rp. 484.789,-/day. In this study, if patients under cefotaxime therapy want to swich treatment to ceftriaxone therapy, ICER calculation (Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio) is carried out the result are Rp.340.528,-. Keyword: Typhoid fever, Antibiotics, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis) ABSTRAK Demam tifoid merupakan penyakit endemik yang angka kejadiannya masih tinggi di Indonesia. Pengobatan demam tifoid dapat diobati dengan cara pemberian terapi antibiotik. Penelitian ini dilakukan karena ada beberapa pasien anak yang di diagnosa demam tifoid tetapi memiliki terapi antibiotik yang berbeda, yaitu terapi sefotaksim dan seftriakson  sehingga perlu dilakukan perhitungan untuk mengetahui perbandingan dan menentukan pemilihan pengobatan mana yang lebih efisien dalam biaya maupun efektivitas. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis) dengan rancangan pengambilan data rekam medik pasien anak demam tifoid di RS. Bhayangkara Manado secara retrospektif pada periode Januari – Desember 2018. Sampel yang didapat sebanyak 28 pasien anak, yang terdiri dari 12 pasien pengguna terapi sefotaksim dan 16 pasien pengguna terapi seftriakson. Hasil ACER (An Avarage Cost Effective Ratio) yang diperoleh sefotaksim Rp.526.609,-/hari dan seftriakson Rp.484.789,-/hari. Pada penelitian ini jika pasien terapi sefotaksim ingin berpindah pengobatan ke terapi seftriakson maka dilakukan perhitungan ICER (Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio) dan didapat hasil Rp.340.582,-, sehingga jika ingin berpindah pengobatan maka perlu penambahan biaya sesuai nilaI ICER.Kata Kunci : Demam Tifoid, Antibiotik, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis).

scholarly journals Evaluating the Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Rehabilitation Methods for Patients with Stroke

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farzaneh Miri ◽  
Nader Jahanmehr ◽  
Reza Goudarzi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Stroke Unit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Rehabilitation Service ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Rehabilitation Strategy ◽  
At Home

Abstract Aims: This study evaluated and compared the cost-effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions in patients with stroke in the three alternatives of hospitals, units and homes due to the fact that one of the stroke management challenges is how to provide a rehabilitation service to these patients in Iran. Methods: This is a cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of a health system. A Markov model with a 20-year time horizon in 3-month cycles was used to analyze the costs and outcomes. Cost data were collected from the 210 patients undergoing rehabilitation in the hospital, home and unit. Utility data were extracted from previously published literature with the same setting. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted by calculating ICER using TreeAge Software. Basic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also conducted at the end. Results: The average cost of rehabilitation in home strategy ($ 2306) was less than hospital ($2955) and unit ($3485) strategies. Furthermore, the utility of home strategy (26.03) was 8 units higher than hospital utility (17.99) and 19 units higher than utility of the stroke unit (7.03). The Acer values of hospital, stroke unit and home groups were $11424, $33159 and $7233 per utility, respectively. According to the results, the home-based rehabilitation strategy is cost effective compared to hospital and unit rehabilitation strategy. The results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis also showed that the ICER of home strategy is always cost-effective than the other strategies. Limitation: : limitation of the present study was the reliance on utility values of other studies. Conclusion: Rehabilitation at home is the most cost-effective strategy for stroke patients. Given the high rates of this disease in Iran and the high cost of it, it is suggested that policy makers lay the groundwork for providing these services at home.

Reconstruction After Salvage Total Laryngectomy: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 019459982093626
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Acevedo ◽  
Jeffrey C. Yu ◽  
Brian Cameron ◽  
Margaret Nurimba ◽  
Joel W. Hay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Free Flap ◽  
Total Laryngectomy ◽  
Primary Closure ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Health Utilities ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Pectoralis Flap

Objective To determine the most cost-effective reconstruction method after salvage total laryngectomy. Study Design Cost-effectiveness analysis Setting Tertiary care hospitals with head and neck oncologic and reconstructive surgeons. Subjects and Methods We constructed a Markov-based decision model to compare reconstruction by primary closure to pectoralis flap and free flap after salvage total laryngectomy. The model simulated disease with transition probabilities and health utilities found in primary literature and estimated the average overall cost of each reconstructive method using Medicare billing codes. Effectiveness was compared using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to scrutinize the conclusions of our model. Reconstruction methods were compared using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). In the United States, less than $150,000 per QALY gained is considered cost-effective (2019 US dollars). Results Our base case analysis revealed that primary closure was less expensive ($44,370) and yielded more QALYs (0.91) than both pectoralis ($45,163, 0.81 QALYs) and free flap ($46,244, 0.85 QALYs), making it the most cost-effective option. Between flaps, free flap was cost-effective over pectoralis flap (ICER = $27,025/QALY gained). Sensitivity analyses showed primary closure as cost-effective 69% of the time over either flap. These conclusions were sensitive to the health utilities (quality of life) of each method of reconstruction. Conclusion Tissue flaps to augment closure after salvage total laryngectomy are not always the most cost-effective reconstructive option. The long-term morbidity of flap surgery oftentimes outweighs the benefit of lowering fistula rates after surgery. Careful consideration must be taken when advising patients of their reconstructive options.

scholarly journals ANALISIS EFEKTIVITAS BIAYA (COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS) PENGOBATAN INFEKSI SALURAN KEMIH MENGGUNAKAN ANTIBIOTIK SEFTRIAKSON DAN SEFOTAKSIM DI RS PARU ARIO WIRAWAN SALATIGA

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-26
Author(s):  
Kusumaning Wardhani ◽  
Ening Listyanti ◽  
Niken Dyahariesti ◽  
Richa Yuswantina
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Average Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

Infeksi Saluran Kemih (ISK) adalah keadaan dimana kuman bertumbuh dan berkembangbiak di dalam traktus urinarius dengan jumlah yang bermakna. ISK diobati dengan antibiotik yang menjadi salah satu kategori biaya yang signifikan dalam anggaran farmasi di rumah sakit. Antibiotik golongan Sefalosporin digunakan sebagai drug of choise dan dicari lebih cost-effective. Untuk menentukan terapi yang lebih cost-effective antara penggunaan Setriakson dan Sefotaksim pada pasien ISK di rawat inap di RS Paru Ario Wirawan Salatiga. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian deskriptif dengan pengambilan data secara retrospektif.Dianalisis dengan metode CEA dengan parameter Average Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ACER) dan Incremental Cost Effectiviness Ratio (ICER) dilihat dari outcome lama rawat inap. Sampel pada penelitian ini sebanyak 39 pasien diantaranya 22 pasien menggunakan Seftriakson dan 17 pasien menggunakan Sefotaksim. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan, nilai ACER kelas I Sefotaksim sebesar Rp. 454.353. Nilai ACER kelas II Sefotaksim sebesar Rp. 212.283 dan nilai ICER sebesar -Rp. 134.987/hari. Nilai ACER kelas III Seftriakson sebesar Rp. 268.366. Biaya antibiotik yang paling cost-effective pada kelas I adalah Sefotaksim, paling cost-effective pada kelas II adalah Sefotaksim, paling cost-effective pada kelas III adalah Seftriakson.

scholarly journals Ultra-radical surgery compared to standard surgical treatment for women with advanced ovarian cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanna Bettoli ◽  
Andrew Phillips ◽  
Sudha Sundar ◽  
Carole Cummins ◽  
Anish Bali
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Radical Surgery ◽  
Advanced Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

Objective To compare current surgical practice for women with AOC to ultra-radical surgery; to assess whether the new approach would be cost-effective under NICE guidelines of approximately £20,000/QALY. Design Cost-effectiveness analysis. Setting NHS, using data from a variety of sources. Population Patients with advanced ovarian cancer (FIGO stages IIIC-IV). Methods A decision analytic model (microsimulation model) was built to examine the Objective; deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to test the susceptibilities of the baseline model and its assumptions. Main Outcome Measures ICER (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio). Results The standard model yielded an ICER of £5325.06; this is in spite of an associated overall decrease in utility due to predicted increase in surgical mortality. The parameters with the most significant impact on the ICER are the cost of ultra-radical surgery, the utility associated with progression-free survival, and the probability of death from ultra-radical surgery. Conclusions Ultra-radical surgery is cost-effective under NICE willingness-to-pay thresholds of £20000; the costs of ultra-radical surgery are bound to decrease as centres specialise further, and its effectiveness is also likely due to increase with development of newer techniques and more surgical training.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document