scholarly journals Deceased donor kidney allocation: an economic evaluation of contemporary longevity matching practices

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameera Senanayake ◽  
Nicholas Graves ◽  
Helen Healy ◽  
Keshwar Baboolal ◽  
Adrian Barnett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Index ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Donor Kidney ◽  
Health States ◽  
Kidney Allocation ◽  
Australian Health ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Impact

Abstract BackgroundMatching survival of a donor kidney with that of the recipient (longevity matching), is used in some kidney allocation systems to maximize graft-life years. It is not part of the allocation algorithm for Australia. Given the growing evidence of survival benefit due to longevity matching based allocation algorithms, development of a similar kidney allocation system for Australia is currently underway. The aim of this research is to estimate the impact that changes to costs and health outcomes arising from ‘longevity matching’ on the Australian healthcare system. MethodsA decision analytic model to estimate cost-effectiveness was developed using a Markov process. Four plausible competing allocation options were compared to the current kidney allocation practice. Models were simulated in one-year cycles for a 20-year time horizon, with transitions through distinct health states relevant to the kidney recipient. Willingness to pay was considered as AUD 28000. ResultsBase case analysis indicated that allocating the worst 20% of Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) donor kidneys to the worst 20% of estimated post-transplant survival (EPTS) recipients (option 2) and allocating the oldest 25% of donor kidneys to the oldest 25% of recipients are both cost saving and more effective compared to the current Australian allocation practice. Option 2, returned the lowest costs, greatest health benefits and largest gain to net monetary benefits (NMB). Allocating the best 20% of KDRI donor kidneys to the best 20% of EPTS recipients had the lowest expected incremental NMB. ConclusionOf the four longevity-based kidney allocation practices considered, transplanting the lowest quality kidneys to the worst kidney recipients (option 2), was estimated to return the best value for money for the Australian health system.

scholarly journals Deceased donor kidney allocation : an economic evaluation of contemporary longevity matching practices

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameera Senanayake ◽  
Nicholas Graves ◽  
Helen Healy ◽  
Keshwar Baboolal ◽  
Adrian Barnett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Index ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Donor Kidney ◽  
Health States ◽  
Kidney Allocation ◽  
Australian Health ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Matching survival of a donor kidney with that of the recipient (longevity matching), is use in some kidney allocation systems to maximize graft-life years. It is not part of the allocation algorithm for Australia. Given the growing evidence of survival benefit due to longevity matching based allocation algorithms, development of a similar kidney allocation system for Australia is currently underway. The aim of this research is to estimate the impact that changes to costs and health outcomes arising from ‘longevity matching’ on the Australian healthcare system. Methods: A decision analytic model to estimate cost-effectiveness was developed using a Markov process. Four plausible competing allocation options were compared to the current kidney allocation practice. Models were simulated in one-year cycles for a 20-year time horizon, with transitions through distinct health states relevant to the kidney recipient. Willingness to pay was considered as AUD 28000. Results: Base case analysis indicated that allocating the worst 20% of Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) donor kidneys to the worst 20% of estimated post-transplant survival (EPTS) recipients (option 2) and allocating the oldest 25% of donor kidneys to the oldest 25% of recipients are both cost saving and more effective compared to the current Australian allocation practice. Option 2, returned the lowest costs, greatest health benefits and largest gain to net monetary benefits (NMB). Allocating the best 20% of KDRI donor kidneys to the best 20% of EPTS recipients had the lowest expected incremental NMB. Conclusion: Of the four longevity-based kidney allocation practices considered, transplanting the lowest quality kidneys to the worst kidney recipients (option 2), was estimated to return the best value for money for the Australian health system.

scholarly journals Deceased donor kidney allocation: an economic evaluation of contemporary longevity matching practices

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameera Senanayake ◽  
Nicholas Graves ◽  
Helen Healy ◽  
Keshwar Baboolal ◽  
Adrian Barnett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Index ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Donor Kidney ◽  
Health States ◽  
Kidney Allocation ◽  
Australian Health ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Matching survival of a donor kidney with that of the recipient (longevity matching), is used in some kidney allocation systems to maximize graft-life years. It is not part of the allocation algorithm for Australia. Given the growing evidence of survival benefit due to longevity matching based allocation algorithms, development of a similar kidney allocation system for Australia is currently underway. The aim of this research is to estimate the impact that changes to costs and health outcomes arising from ‘longevity matching’ on the Australian healthcare system. Methods A decision analytic model to estimate cost-effectiveness was developed using a Markov process. Four plausible competing allocation options were compared to the current kidney allocation practice. Models were simulated in one-year cycles for a 20-year time horizon, with transitions through distinct health states relevant to the kidney recipient. Willingness to pay was considered as AUD 28000. Results Base case analysis indicated that allocating the worst 20% of Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) donor kidneys to the worst 20% of estimated post-transplant survival (EPTS) recipients (option 2) and allocating the oldest 25% of donor kidneys to the oldest 25% of recipients are both cost saving and more effective compared to the current Australian allocation practice. Option 2, returned the lowest costs, greatest health benefits and largest gain to net monetary benefits (NMB). Allocating the best 20% of KDRI donor kidneys to the best 20% of EPTS recipients had the lowest expected incremental NMB. Conclusion Of the four longevity-based kidney allocation practices considered, transplanting the lowest quality kidneys to the worst kidney recipients (option 2), was estimated to return the best value for money for the Australian health system.

scholarly journals Deceased donor kidney allocation: an economic evaluation of contemporary longevity matching practices

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameera Senanayake ◽  
Nicholas Graves ◽  
Helen Healy ◽  
Keshwar Baboolal ◽  
Adrian Barnett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Index ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Donor Kidney ◽  
Health States ◽  
Kidney Allocation ◽  
Australian Health ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Matching survival of a donor kidney with that of the recipient (longevity matching), is use in some kidney allocation systems to maximize graft-life years. It is not part of the allocation algorithm for Australia. Given the growing evidence of survival benefit due to longevity matching based allocation algorithms, development of a similar kidney allocation system for Australia is currently underway. The aim of this research is to estimate the impact that changes to costs and health outcomes arising from ‘longevity matching’ on the Australian healthcare system. Methods A decision analytic model to estimate cost-effectiveness was developed using a Markov process. Four plausible competing allocation options were compared to the current kidney allocation practice. Models were simulated in one-year cycles for a 20-year time horizon, with transitions through distinct health states relevant to the kidney recipient. Willingness to pay was considered as AUD 28000. Results Base case analysis indicated that allocating the worst 20% of Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) donor kidneys to the worst 20% of estimated post-transplant survival (EPTS) recipients (option 2) and allocating the oldest 25% of donor kidneys to the oldest 25% of recipients are both cost saving and more effective compared to the current Australian allocation practice. Option 2, returned the lowest costs, greatest health benefits and largest gain to net monetary benefits (NMB). Allocating the best 20% of KDRI donor kidneys to the best 20% of EPTS recipients had the lowest expected incremental NMB. Conclusion Of the four longevity-based kidney allocation practices considered, transplanting the lowest quality kidneys to the worst kidney recipients (option 2), was estimated to return the best value for money for the Australian health system.

scholarly journals Deceased donor kidney allocation: an economic evaluation of contemporary longevity matching practices

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameera Senanayake ◽  
Nicholas Graves ◽  
Helen Healy ◽  
Keshwar Baboolal ◽  
Adrian Barnett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Index ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Donor Kidney ◽  
Health States ◽  
Kidney Allocation ◽  
Australian Health ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Matching survival of a donor kidney with that of the recipient (longevity matching), is used in some kidney allocation systems to maximize graft-life years. It is not part of the allocation algorithm for Australia. Given the growing evidence of survival benefit due to longevity matching based allocation algorithms, development of a similar kidney allocation system for Australia is currently underway. The aim of this research is to estimate the impact that changes to costs and health outcomes arising from ‘longevity matching’ on the Australian healthcare system. Methods A decision analytic model to estimate cost-effectiveness was developed using a Markov process. Four plausible competing allocation options were compared to the current kidney allocation practice. Models were simulated in one-year cycles for a 20-year time horizon, with transitions through distinct health states relevant to the kidney recipient. Willingness to pay was considered as AUD 28000. Results Base case analysis indicated that allocating the worst 20% of Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) donor kidneys to the worst 20% of estimated post-transplant survival (EPTS) recipients (option 2) and allocating the oldest 25% of donor kidneys to the oldest 25% of recipients are both cost saving and more effective compared to the current Australian allocation practice. Option 2, returned the lowest costs, greatest health benefits and largest gain to net monetary benefits (NMB). Allocating the best 20% of KDRI donor kidneys to the best 20% of EPTS recipients had the lowest expected incremental NMB. Conclusion Of the four longevity-based kidney allocation practices considered, transplanting the lowest quality kidneys to the worst kidney recipients (option 2), was estimated to return the best value for money for the Australian health system.

scholarly journals 80. Pharmacoeconomic Analysis Comparing the Empiric Utilization of Cefepime Versus Piperacillin/tazobactam

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S57-S58
Author(s):  
Kelsey Olmack ◽  
Curtis D Collins
Keyword(s):  
Pharmacoeconomic Analysis ◽  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Empiric Treatment ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background In the hospital setting, cefepime (CFP) and piperacillin/tazobactam (PTZ) are among the most commonly utilized antipseudomonal agents in the empiric treatment of nosocomial and healthcare-associated infections. Institutional preference of CFP or PTZ as the preferred antipseudomonal antibiotic varies. Recent literature suggests each may be associated with increased rates of harmful adverse effects including Clostridiodes difficile infection (CDI) and acute kidney injury (AKI). The objective of this study is to perform a pharmacoeconomic analysis comparing CFP versus PTZ for empiric antibiotic treatment in patients where Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a concern. Methods We performed a cost-utility analysis comparing CFP and PTZ for empiric utilization in the hospital setting by creating a decision analytic model from the hospital perspective. Model variables were populated utilizing published clinical and economic data including incidence of AKI and CDI, their associated costs and mortality, and the cost of antibiotic therapy. Secondary and univariate sensitivity analyses tested the impact of model uncertainties and the robustness of our model. A willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $0 was utilized. Results Results of our base-case model predicted that the use of CFP dominated PTZ as empiric utilization was less expensive ($7690 vs. $9331) and associated with a higher quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) (0.9193 vs. 0.9191) compared to the use of PTZ. Several variables had the potential to impact base case results. PTZ became cost-effective at our WTP threshold if CFP nephrotoxicity rates increased to 17.3%, the PTZ nephrotoxicity decreased to 28.5%, or if the cost of nephrotoxicity was less than $17,457. No other model variables, including incidence of CDI, impacted base case results. Sensitivity Analysis on Cefepime Clostridioides difficile Infection Incidence and Piperacillin/tazobactam Nephrotoxicity Conclusion Results of our model showed that CFP dominated PTZ for the empiric treatment of nosocomial infections. The model was sensitive to variation in CFP and PTZ nephrotoxicity rates. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals Computational Eurotransplant kidney allocation simulations demonstrate the feasibility and benefit of T-cell epitope matching

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. e1009248
Author(s):  
Matthias Niemann ◽  
Nils Lachmann ◽  
Kirsten Geneugelijk ◽  
Eric Spierings
Keyword(s):  
T Cell ◽  
Cell Epitope ◽  
Haplotype Frequency ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Waiting List ◽  
T Cell Epitopes ◽  
Kidney Allocation ◽  
Virtual Population ◽  
Considerable Impact ◽  
The Impact

The EuroTransplant Kidney Allocation System (ETKAS) aims at allocating organs to patients on the waiting list fairly whilst optimizing HLA match grades. ETKAS currently considers the number of HLA-A, -B, -DR mismatches. Evidently, epitope matching is biologically and clinically more relevant. We here executed ETKAS-based computer simulations to evaluate the impact of epitope matching on allocation and compared the strategies. A virtual population of 400,000 individuals was generated using the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP) haplotype frequency dataset of 2011. Using this population, a waiting list of 10,400 patients was constructed and maintained during simulation, matching the 2015 Eurotransplant Annual Report characteristics. Unacceptable antigens were assigned randomly relative to their frequency using HLAMatchmaker. Over 22,600 kidneys were allocated in 10 years in triplicate using Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulations on 32-CPU-core cloud-computing instances. T-cell epitopes were calculated using the www.pirche.com portal. Waiting list effects were evaluated against ETKAS for five epitope matching scenarios. Baseline simulations of ETKAS slightly overestimated reported average HLA match grades. The best balanced scenario maintained prioritisation of HLA A-B-DR fully matched donors while replacing the HLA match grade by PIRCHE-II score and exchanging the HLA mismatch probability (MMP) by epitope MMP. This setup showed no considerable impact on kidney exchange rates and waiting time. PIRCHE-II scores improved, whereas the average HLA match grade diminishes slightly, yet leading to an improved estimated graft survival. We conclude that epitope-based matching in deceased donor kidney allocation is feasible while maintaining equal balances on the waiting list.

scholarly journals Milk Powder Fortified with Potassium and Phytosterols to Decrease the Risk of Cardiovascular Events among the Adult Population in Malaysia: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Nutrients ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1235
Author(s):  
Anita E. Gandola ◽  
Livia Dainelli ◽  
Diane Zimmermann ◽  
Maznah Dahlui ◽  
Patrick Detzel
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Milk Powder ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Discounted Cost ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Impact

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the consumption of a milk powder product fortified with potassium (+1050.28 mg/day) and phytosterols (+1200 mg/day) to lower systolic blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, respectively, and, therefore, the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke among the 35–75-year-old population in Malaysia. A Markov model was created against a do-nothing option, from a governmental perspective, and with a time horizon of 40 years. Different data sources, encompassing clinical studies, practice guidelines, grey literature, and statistical yearbooks, were used. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of uncertainty on the base case estimates. With an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio equal to international dollars (int$) 22,518.03 per quality-adjusted life-years gained, the intervention can be classified as very cost-effective. If adopted nationwide, it would help prevent at least 13,400 MIs, 30,500 strokes, and more than 10,600 and 17,100 MI- and stroke-related deaths. The discounted cost savings generated for the health care system by those who consume the fortified milk powder would amount to int$8.1 per person, corresponding to 0.7% of the total yearly health expenditure per capita. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. Together with other preventive interventions, the consumption of milk powder fortified with potassium and phytosterols represents a cost-effective strategy to attenuate the rapid increase in cardiovascular burden in Malaysia.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the microprocessor-controlled knee C-Leg in transfemoral amputees with and without diabetes mellitus

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Kuhlmann ◽  
Henning Krüger ◽  
Susanne Seidinger ◽  
Andreas Hahn
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Input Parameter ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Transfemoral Amputees ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The safe use of a prosthesis in activities of daily living is key for transfemoral amputees. However, the number of falls varies significantly between different prosthetic device types. This study aims to compare medical and economic consequences of falls in transfemoral amputees who use the microprocessor-controlled knee joint C-Leg with patients who use non-microprocessor-controlled (mechanical) knee joints (NMPK). The main objectives of the analysis are to investigate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of C-Legs in transfemoral amputees with diabetes mellitus (DM) and without DM in Germany. Methods A decision-analytic model was developed that took into account the effects of prosthesis type on the risk of falling and fall-related medical events. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses were performed separately for transfemoral amputees with and without DM. The study took the perspective of the statutory health insurance (SHI). Input parameters were derived from the published literature. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to investigate the impact of changes in individual input parameter values on model outcomes and to explore parameter uncertainty. Results C-Legs reduced the rate of fall-related hospitalizations from 134 to 20 per 1000 person years (PY) in amputees without DM and from 146 to 23 per 1000 PY in amputees with DM. In addition, the C-Leg prevented 15 or 14 fall-related death per 1000 PY. Over a time horizon of 25 years, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 16,123 Euro per quality-adjusted life years gained (QALY) for amputees without DM and 20,332 Euro per QALY gained for amputees with DM. For the period of 2020–2024, the model predicted an increase in SHI expenditures of 98 Mio Euro (53 Mio Euro in prosthesis users without DM and 45 Mio Euro in prosthesis users with DM) when all new prosthesis users received C-Legs instead of NMPKs and 50% of NMPK user whose prosthesis wore out switched to C-Legs. Results of the PSA showed moderate uncertainty and a probability of 97–99% that C-Legs are cost-effective at an ICER threshold of 40,000 Euro (≈ German GDP per capita in 2018) per QALY gained. Conclusion Results of the study suggest that the C-Leg provides substantial additional health benefits compared with NMPKs and is likely to be cost-effective in transfemoral amputees with DM as well as in amputees without DM at an ICER threshold of 40,000 Euro per QALY gained.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document