The Importance of Cost Inputs and Sensitivity Analyses in a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

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]

Download Full-text

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

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2021.39.6_suppl.419 ◽

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]

Download Full-text

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

10.21203/rs.3.rs-149288/v1 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination in 195 countries: A meta-regression analysis

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0260808 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (12) ◽

pp. e0260808

Author(s):

Katherine L. Rosettie ◽

Jonah N. Joffe ◽

Gianna W. Sparks ◽

Aleksandr Aravkin ◽

Shirley Chen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cervical Cancer ◽

Regression Analysis ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Hpv Vaccination ◽

Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Cancer Burden ◽

Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Meta Regression ◽

Meta Regression Analysis

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a well-known, but resource intensive, method for comparing the costs and health outcomes of health interventions. To build on available evidence, researchers are developing methods to transfer CEA across settings; previous methods do not use all available results nor quantify differences across settings. We conducted a meta-regression analysis of published CEAs of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination to quantify the effects of factors at the country, intervention, and method-level, and predict incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for HPV vaccination in 195 countries. We used 613 ICERs reported in 75 studies from the Tufts University’s Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry and the Global Health CEA Registry, and extracted an additional 1,215 one-way sensitivity analyses. A five-stage, mixed-effects meta-regression framework was used to predict country-specific ICERs. The probability that HPV vaccination is cost-saving in each country was predicted using a logistic regression model. Covariates for both models included methods and intervention characteristics, and each country’s cervical cancer burden and gross domestic product per capita. ICERs are positively related to vaccine cost, and negatively related to cervical cancer burden. The mean predicted ICER for HPV vaccination is 2017 US$4,217 per DALY averted (95% uncertainty interval (UI): US$773–13,448) globally, and below US$800 per DALY averted in 64 countries. Predicted ICERs are lowest in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, with a population-weighted mean ICER across 46 countries of US$706 per DALY averted (95% UI: $130–2,245), and across five countries of US$489 per DALY averted (95% UI: $90–1,557), respectively. Meta-regression analyses can be conducted on CEA, where one-way sensitivity analyses are used to quantify the effects of factors at the intervention and method-level. Building on all published results, our predictions support introducing and expanding HPV vaccination, especially in countries that are eligible for subsidized vaccines from GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, and Pan American Health Organization.

Download Full-text

Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for first-degree relatives of patients with bicuspid aortic valve

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/eurheartj/ehab724.3156 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

I Tessler ◽

M Leshno ◽

A Shmueli ◽

S Shpitzen ◽

R Durst ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Aortic Valve ◽

Bicuspid Aortic Valve ◽

Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Public Institution ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Decision Analytic Model ◽

First Degree Relatives ◽

Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Life Years

Abstract Introduction Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the commonest congenital heart valve defect, found in 1% to 2% of the general population and associated with life-threatening complications. Given the high heritability index of BAV, many experts recommend echocardiography for first-degree relatives (FDRs) of an index patient. However, the cost-effectiveness of such cascade screening for BAV has not been fully evaluated. Materials and methods Using a decision-analytic model, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of echocardiographic screening of FDRs of BAV index cases. Data on BAV probabilities and BAV complications among FDRs were derived from our institution's BAV familial cohort and from the relevant literature on population-based BAV cohorts with long-term follow-up. Health gain was measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Cost inputs were based on list prices and literature data. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to account for uncertainty in the model's variables. Results and disscusion Screening of FDRs was found to be the dominant strategy, being more effective and less costly than no screening, with savings of €208 and gains of 1.6 QALYs. Results were sensitive to the full range of reported BAV rates among FDRs across the literature, with the benefit gradually decreasing from the screening age of 55 years, with trend shifting at the age of 69. Conclusions This economic evaluation model revealed that echocardiographic screening of FDRs of BAV index case is not only clinically important but also highly cost effective and cost-saving. Health gains could be achieved from initiating screening program, along with costs saving. Sensitivity analysis supported the model's robustness, suggesting its generalization. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Public Institution(s). Main funding source(s): Center for Interdisciplinary Data Science Research fellowships grant

Download Full-text

Reconstruction After Salvage Total Laryngectomy: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

Otolaryngology ◽

10.1177/0194599820936264 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Cost-effectiveness Analysis in R Using a Multi-state Modeling Survival Analysis Framework: A Tutorial

Medical Decision Making ◽

10.1177/0272989x16651869 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 37 (4) ◽

pp. 340-352 ◽

Cited By ~ 19

Author(s):

Claire Williams ◽

James D. Lewsey ◽

Andrew H. Briggs ◽

Daniel F. Mackay

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Markov Property ◽

R Package ◽

Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Survival Models ◽

Decision Analytic Model ◽

Modeling Approach ◽

Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Markov Decision

This tutorial provides a step-by-step guide to performing cost-effectiveness analysis using a multi-state modeling approach. Alongside the tutorial, we provide easy-to-use functions in the statistics package R. We argue that this multi-state modeling approach using a package such as R has advantages over approaches where models are built in a spreadsheet package. In particular, using a syntax-based approach means there is a written record of what was done and the calculations are transparent. Reproducing the analysis is straightforward as the syntax just needs to be run again. The approach can be thought of as an alternative way to build a Markov decision-analytic model, which also has the option to use a state-arrival extended approach. In the state-arrival extended multi-state model, a covariate that represents patients’ history is included, allowing the Markov property to be tested. We illustrate the building of multi-state survival models, making predictions from the models and assessing fits. We then proceed to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis, including deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Finally, we show how to create 2 common methods of visualizing the results—namely, cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. The analysis is implemented entirely within R. It is based on adaptions to functions in the existing R package mstate to accommodate parametric multi-state modeling that facilitates extrapolation of survival curves.

Download Full-text

Cost-effectiveness analysis of cabazitaxel for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer after docetaxel and androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitor resistance

BMC Cancer ◽

10.1186/s12885-020-07754-9 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Peng-Fei Zhang ◽

Dan Xie ◽

Qiu Li

Keyword(s):

Prostate Cancer ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽

Castration Resistant ◽

Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Previously Treated ◽

Markov Decision Model ◽

The Cost

Abstract Background The aim of our study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with docetaxel who had progression within 12 months while receiving an alternative inhibitor (abiraterone or enzalutamide) from a US payer’s perspective. Methods To conduct the cost-effectiveness analysis, a Markov decision model was established. Three health states (progression-free survival (PFS), progressive disease (PD) and death) were included, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was regarded as the primary endpoint. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at $100,000.00/quality-adjusted life year (QALY), and discounted rates were set at 3% annually. Efficacy data were derived from the CARD trial and Weibull distribution curves were modeled to fit the survival curves. The robustness of the analysis was tested with a series of one-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results Overall, the incremental effectiveness and cost of cabazitaxel versus androgen-signaling-targeted inhibitors (ASTIs) were 0.16 QALYs and $49,487.03, respectively, which yielded an ICER of $309,293.94/QALY. Our model was mostly sensitive to the duration of PFS in the cabazitaxel group, cost of cabazitaxel and utility of the PFS state. At a WTP threshold of $100,000.00/QALY, cabazitaxel was the dominant strategy in 0% of the simulations. Conclusions Cabazitaxel is unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment option compared with ASTIs in patients with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel who had progression within 12 months while receiving ASTIs.

Download Full-text

Is it worth it? Cost-effectiveness analysis of a commercial physical activity app

BMC Public Health ◽

10.1186/s12889-021-11988-y ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Renante Rondina ◽

Michael Hong ◽

Sisira Sarma ◽

Marc Mitchell

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Older Adults ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Public Healthcare ◽

Parameter Estimates ◽

Reference Scenario ◽

Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Subgroup Analyses

Abstract Background Government interest in investing in commercial physical activity apps has increased with little evidence of their cost-effectiveness. This is the first study to our knowledge to examine the cost-effectiveness of a commercial physical activity app (Carrot Rewards) despite there being over 100,000 in the major app stores. Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the app compared to a no-intervention reference scenario using a five-year time horizon. Primary data was collected between 2016 and 2017. Data synthesis, model creation, and statistical analyses were conducted between 2019 and 2020. An age-, sex-, and geography-dependent Markov model was developed assuming a public healthcare payer perspective. A closed cohort (n = 38,452) representing the population reached by Carrot Rewards in two Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Newfoundland & Labrador) at the time of a 12-month prospective study was used. Costs and effects were both discounted at 1.5% and expressed in 2015 Canadian dollars. Subgroup analyses were conducted to compare ICERs between provinces, sexes, age groups, and engagement levels. Results Carrot Rewards had an ICER of $11,113 CAD per quality adjusted life year (QALY), well below a $50,000 CAD per QALY willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. Subgroup analyses revealed that the app had lower ICERs for British Columbians, females, highly engaged users, and adults aged 35-64 yrs., and was dominant for older adults (65 + yrs). Deterministic sensitivity analyses revealed that the ICER was most influenced by the relative risk of diabetes. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed varying parameter estimates predominantly resulted in ICERs below the WTP threshold. Conclusions The Carrot Rewards app was cost-effective, and dominant for older adults. These results provide, for the first time, rigorous health economic evidence for a commercial physical activity app as part of public health programming.

Download Full-text

Comparing Prednisone and Methotrexate to Off-label Biologic Infliximab for Management of Ocular Uveitis: A Cost-minimization Analysis

Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research ◽

10.36469/9895 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 131-146

Author(s):

William V. Padula ◽

Miguel Cordero-Coma ◽

Taygan Yilmaz ◽

William V. Padula ◽

Michéal J. Gallagher ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sensitivity Analysis ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

The United States ◽

Posterior Uveitis ◽

Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Off Label ◽

Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Life Years ◽

Successful Recovery

Background: Approximately 3.75% of cases of blindness in the United States are caused by uveitis. Incurred clinical costs and lost productivity related to vision loss in these cases totals $3.58 billion annually. Objective: To evaluate whether infliximab, a modern off-label biologic, is cost-effective for treating posterior uveitis and panuveitis compared to current standards of care, methotrexate and prednisone. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov model to simulate a patient cohort with posterior uveitis or panuveitis. The model followed patients’ therapy from the onset of posterior uveitis or panuveitis using the U.S. societal perspective. The lifetime model simulated health states that could lead to successful reversal of uveitis with standard or intensified treatment with prednisone, methotrexate, or infliximab. Probabilities, health utilities, and costs were included in the model based on findings from the literature. We conducted univariate sensitivity analyses and a Bayesian multivariate probablistic sensitivity analysis to estimate uncertainty in results. Outcomes were measured in terms of costs ($US, 2010) and effects (qualityadjusted life years; QALYs) discounted at 3% per year were estimated for each simulated treatment. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for pairwise results was interpretted assuming a predetermined willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Results: Average lifetime costs and QALYs for each drug were ($306.95; 15.80 QALYs) for prednisone, methotrexate ($36,232.24; 16.21 QALYs), and inflixmab ($74,762.63; 15.04 QALYs). Methotrexate was on average compared to prednisone, with an ICER of $86,901.16/QALY. Prednisone and methotrexate dominated infliximab. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the model was most sensitive to the utility for successful recovery from uveitis. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis returned results similar to the base case. Conclusion: This cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that despite advances in the use of biologics for treating sight-threatening posterior uveitis and panuveitis, infliximab had lower effectiveness and higher costs compared to both prednisone and methotrexate. As compared to prednisone, methotrexate was associated with increased costs and QALYs and was found to be a good value. Clinical trials of infliximab in the uveitis population are needed to reduce the uncertain estimates of inflixmab treatment success and the drug’s cost-effectiveness.

Download Full-text