scholarly journals Targets in the use of biologics for asthma

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-23
Author(s):  
John Oppenheimer

Asthma is a heterogeneous illness. Despite a vast array of treatment options, a significant proportion of patients with asthma continues to lack control of their illness. We now have a new class of asthma therapy in our armamentarium: biologic agents. Presently, the current pricing for all of the biologic agents exceeds measures of cost-effectiveness. Optimal patient selection, through phenotypic indices, is the only likely way to allow these agents to be cost effective. This review examined the literature regarding biologic agents, which stressed attempts at optimizing choice.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Griffiths ◽  
Christina Saville ◽  
Jane E Ball ◽  
Jeremy Jones ◽  
Thomas Monks

AbstractBackgroundIn the face of pressure to contain costs and make best use of scarce nurses, flexible staff deployment (floating staff between units and temporary hires) guided by a patient classification system may appear an efficient approach to meeting variable demand for care in hospitals.ObjectivesWe modelled the cost-effectiveness of different approaches to planning baseline numbers of nurses to roster on general medical/surgical units while using flexible staff to respond to fluctuating demand.Design and SettingWe developed an agent-based simulation model, where units move between being understaffed, adequately staffed or overstaffed as staff supply and demand, measured by the Safer Nursing Care Tool, varies. Staffing shortfalls are addressed firstly by floating staff from overstaffed units, secondly by hiring temporary staff. We compared a standard staffing plan (baseline rosters set to match average demand) with a ‘resilient’ plan set to match higher demand, and a ‘flexible’ plan, set at a lower level. We varied assumptions about temporary staff availability. We estimated the effect of unresolved low staffing on length of stay and death, calculating cost per life saved.ResultsStaffing plans with higher baseline rosters led to higher costs but improved outcomes. Cost savings from low baseline staff largely arose because shifts were left under staffed. Cost effectiveness for higher baseline staff was improved with high temporary staff availability. With limited temporary staff available, the resilient staffing plan (higher baseline staff) cost £9,506 per life saved compared to the standard plan. The standard plan cost £13,967 per life saved compared to the flexible (low baseline) plan. With unlimited temporary staff, the resilient staffing plan cost £5,524 per life saved compared to the standard plan and the standard plan cost £946 per life saved compared with the flexible plan. Cost-effectiveness of higher baseline staffing was more favourable when negative effects of high temporary staffing were modelled.ConclusionFlexible staffing can be guided by shift-by-shift measurement of patient demand, but proper attention must be given to ensure that the baseline number of staff rostered is sufficient.In the face of staff shortages, low baseline staff rosters with high use of flexible staff on hospital wards is not an efficient or effective use of nurses whereas high baseline rosters may be cost-effective. Flexible staffing plans that minimise the number of nurses routinely rostered are likely to harm patients because temporary staff may not be available at short notice.Study registration: ISRCTN 12307968Tweetable abstractEconomic model of hospital wards shows low baseline staff levels with high use of flexible staff are not cost-effective and don’t solve nursing shortages].What is already known?Because nursing is the largest staff group, accounting for a significant proportion of hospital’s variable costs, ward nurse staffing is frequently the target of cost containment measuresStaffing decisions need to address both the baseline staff establishment to roster, and how best to respond to fluctuating demand as patient census and care needs varyFlexible deployment of staff, including floating staff and using temporary hires, has the potential to minimise expenditure while meeting varying patient need, but high use of temporary staff may be associated with adverse outcomes.What this paper addsOur simulation shows that low baseline staff rosters that rely heavily on flexible staff increase the risk of patient death and provide cost savings largely because wards are often left short staffed under real world availability of temporary staff.A staffing plan set to meet average demand appears to be cost effective compared to a plan with a lower baseline but is still associated with frequent short staffing despite the use of flexible deployments.A staffing plan with a higher baseline, set to meet demand 90% of the time, is more resilient in the face of variation and may be highly cost effective


Stroke ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda Reese ◽  
Scott Young ◽  
Kevin Stands ◽  
William Hicks ◽  
Jenniffer Mejilla ◽  
...  

Background: Our aim was to determine if stentriever treatment results in cost effectiveness over Merci thrombectomy and to identify a cost-effective imaging threshold for intra-arterial treatment selection. Methods: With institutional approval, we retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing intra-arterial stroke therapy from March 2011 to March 2013 at our center. We collected the following data: stroke score, occlusion site, baseline Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS), device used, reperfusion, hemorrhage, 90-day modified Rankin Score (mRS), and procedure cost. Using published criteria, a quality-adjusted life year (QUALY) value of 0.74 and 0.4 was ascribed to a mRS outcome 2 respectively. Using the procedural mean cost, we calculated an incremental cost efficiency ratio (ICER) for stentriever versus Merci embolectomy and for interventions done for a baseline ASPECTS above and below the following thresholds: > 6, > 7, > 8, and > 9. Using established criteria, we identified a cost effective patient selection if the ICER was positive and less than $50,000/QUALY. Results: Our cohort included 122 patients, 45 treated with Merci in the first year and 78 with stentrievers in year two. Reperfusion occurred in 79% (87% in the stentriever and 64% with Merci groups, p=0.002). The good outcome rate for the entire cohort was 40% (43% good outcomes in the stentriever and 33% in the Merci groups, p=0.21) respectively. Stentriever interventions were not cost effective compared to Merci embolectomy (ICER > $500,000/QUALY). Using baseline ASPECTS > 6 and > 7 as a selection criteria for intervention, the good outcome rate was 42% and 44% respectively but with a negative ICER due to higher costs in treating those with lower scores. For those with an ASPECTS > 8 and > 9, the good outcome rate was 44% and 54% with an ICER of $40,000/QUALY and $24,000/QUALY respectively. Conclusions: At our institution, despite better outcome and reperfusion rates, stentriever interventions are yet to show a cost benefit. Optimizing patient selection by using the ASPECTS scoring system has led to improved clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness. Further prospective study may validate this technique for greater value to the individual patient and the health system at large.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 205031211879458
Author(s):  
Jan Titulaer ◽  
Habibollah Arefian ◽  
Michael Hartmann ◽  
Mustafa Z Younis ◽  
Orlando Guntinas-Lichius

Allergic rhinitis is serious public health problems and one of the most common chronic diseases worldwide. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of clinically relevant treatment options for allergic rhinitis using evidence-based literature. In addition, we aimed to develop recommendations for allergic rhinitis treatment based on health economic facts. We searched MEDLINE via PubMed from 2009 to 2014 to identify all therapeutic options described in the current literature and selected randomized controlled trials that used a symptom score, had at least one placebo control group and used adult patients. We analyzed the side effects and the number of cases in which treatment was discontinued for each treatment option. Local antihistamines were the most cost-effective local therapy and are recommended due to the low number of complications. Regarding systemic therapies, although the use of oral steroids is indeed significantly cost-effective, this treatment was found to be associated with strong side effects. Sublingual immunotherapy was identified as the most cost-effective immunotherapy and exhibits a good side-effect profile. Overall, local therapy with antihistamines was found to be the most cost-effective option of all therapies. This study showed that there are only minor differences between sublingual and subcutaneous immunotherapy. Based on our results, we recommend the use of an international, uniform nasal symptom score to facilitate the comparison of clinical trials on allergic rhinitis in the future.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Chow ◽  
Elizabeth Horn Prsic ◽  
Hyun Joon Shin

Introduction: A recent systematic review and meta-analysis by our group reported on thirteen published cohorts investigating 110,078 patients. Patients administered statins after their COVID-19 diagnosis and hospitalization were found to have a lower risk of mortality. Given this reported superiority, a logical next question would be whether statins are cost-effective treatment options for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In this paper, we report on a cost-effectiveness analysis of statin-containing treatment regimens for hospitalized COVID-19 patients, from a United States healthcare perspective. Methods: A Markov model was used, to compare statin use and no statin use among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The cycle length was one week, with a time horizon of 4 weeks. A Monte Carlo microsimulation, with 20,000 samples were used. All analyses were conducted using TreeAge Pro Healthcare Version 2021 R1.1. Results: Treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients with statins was both cheaper and more effective than treatment without statins; statin-containing therapy dominates over non-statin therapy. Conclusion: Statin for treatment of COVID-19 should be further investigated in RCTs, especially considering its cost-effective nature. Optimistically and pending the results of future RCTs, statins may also be used broadly for treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.


PHARMACON ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 968
Author(s):  
Monica D. Lestari ◽  
Gayatri Citraningtyas ◽  
Hosea Jaya Edi

ABSTRACTPneumonia is an infectious disease in the lower respiratory tract that affects the lung tissue. Ceftriaxone and Gentamicin antibiotics are the most numerous and good for use in the treatment of pneumonia, but of the two antibiotics is not yet known the options for more cost effective treatment, so it needs to be done the cost effectiveness analysis in order to facilitate the selection of more cost-effective treatment options especially in toddler. This study aims to determine which therapies are more cost-effective than the use of antibiotics Ceftriaxone and Gentamicin in pneumonia patients in the January-December 2018 period in the Bhayangkara Manado Hospital using descriptive research methods with retrospective data collection. The sample in this study were 22 patients, 12 patients using ceftriaxone antibiotics and 10 patients using gentamicin antibiotics. The results showed that pneumonia treatment in infants using Ceftriaxone antibiotics was more cost-effective with ACER ceftriaxone value of Rp. 503,872 / day and ICER value of Rp. 145,588 / day. Keywords : Antibiotics, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis), Pharmacoeconomy, Toddler Pneumonia. ABSTRAKPneumonia merupakan penyakit infeksi pada saluran pernapasan bagian bawah yang mengenai jaringan paru. Antibiotik Seftriakson dan Gentamisim yang paling banyak dan baik untuk digunakan dalam pengobatan pneumonia, namun dari kedua antibiotik tersebut belum diketahui pilihan terapi yang lebih cost-effective, sehingga perlu dilakukan analisis efektivitas biaya agar dapat mempermudah dalam pemilihan alternatif pengobatan yang lebih cost-effective khususnya pada balita. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menentukan terapi yang lebih cost-effective dari penggunaan antibiotik Seftriakson dan Gentamisin pada pasien pneumonia rawat inap periode Januari-Desember 2018 di Rumah Sakit Bhayangkara Manado dengan menggunakan metode penelitian deskriptif dengan pengambilan data secara retrospektif. Sampel pada penelitian ini sebanyak 22 pasien yaitu 12 pasien menggunakan antibiotik Seftriakson dan 10 pasien menggunakan antibiotik Gentamisin. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan pengobatan pneumonia pada balita menggunakan antibiotik Seftriakson lebih cost-effective dengan nilai ACER seftriakson sebesar Rp. 503,872/hari dan nilai ICER sebesar Rp. 145.588/hari. Kata Kunci : Pneumonia Balita, Antibiotik, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis), Farmakoekonomi


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 100-100
Author(s):  
Missale Tiruneh ◽  
Stephanie Ross ◽  
Kristina Ellis ◽  
Maureen E. Trudeau ◽  
Catherine Moltzan ◽  
...  

100 Background: In Canada, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health’s pERC makes reimbursement recommendations for cancer drugs based on pCODR reviews of best available evidence, which in some circumstances, is from Phase II NRTs. To date, the majority of pERC recommendations based on NRT evidence have been for blood cancers. Objective: To examine aspects of NRT evidence that may influence pERC reimbursement recommendations for blood cancers. Methods: Final pERC Recommendations on blood cancer reviews supported by NRTs were included (July 2011 to June 2018). Factors that influenced Final Recommendations, such as clinical benefit, alignment with patient values and cost-effectiveness, were extracted. Results: As of June 2018, 10 conditional and 6 negative decisions were made in 13 Final Recommendations. Among conditional reimbursement recommendations, substantial need for treatment options and poor prognosis with available therapies were commonly noted. Assessment of the feasibility of randomized controlled trials (RCT) varied. The magnitude of benefit was impressive or a substantial benefit was seen in subgroups with greater need. Some recommendations noted benefit above historical outcomes or consistent evidence with other indications or trials. Most recommendations reported an improvement in quality of life (QoL) and a manageable toxicity profile. Limitations included short trial follow-up. Factors affecting cost-effectiveness and alignment with patient values varied. Among negative recommendations, there was less certainty about burden of illness and need. Uncertainty about magnitude of clinical benefit was attributed to lack of direct or indirect comparison to available options, lack of long term data or comparison to historical evidence, limited QoL data, and variability in toxicity. All cases were not cost-effective and partially aligned with patient values. Conclusions: pERC may accept evidence from NRTs to make reimbursement recommendations for blood cancers when there is a high burden of illness, unmet need, reasonable demonstration of efficacy and manageable toxicities. Feasibility of RCT was not a consistent factor.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. e0245288
Author(s):  
Alastair Heffernan ◽  
Yanling Ma ◽  
Shevanthi Nayagam ◽  
Polin Chan ◽  
Zhongdan Chen ◽  
...  

Background The paradigm shift in hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment options in the last five years has raised the prospect of eliminating the disease as a global health threat. This will require a step-change in the number being treated with the new direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). Given constrained budgets and competing priorities, policy makers need information on how to scale-up access to HCV treatment. To inform such decisions, we examined the cost effectiveness of screening and treatment interventions in Yunnan, China. Methods and findings We simulated the HCV epidemic using a previously published model of HCV transmission and disease progression, calibrated to Yunnan data, and implemented a range of treatment and screening interventions from 2019. We incorporated treatment, diagnosis, and medical costs (expressed in 2019 US Dollars, USD) to estimate the lifetime benefits and costs of interventions. Using this model, we asked: is introducing DAAs cost effective from a healthcare sector perspective; what is the optimal combination of screening interventions; and what is the societal return on investment of intervention? The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of switching to DAAs with a median cost of 7,400 USD (50,000 Chinese Yuan) per course is 500 USD/disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted; at a threshold of 50% of Yunnan gross domestic product (2,600 USD), switching to DAAs is cost effective 94% of the time. At this threshold, the optimal, cost-effective intervention comprises screening people who inject drugs, those in HIV care, men who have sex with men, and ensuring access to DAAs for all those newly diagnosed with HCV. For each USD invested in this intervention, there is an additional 0·80 USD (95% credible interval: 0·17–1·91) returned through reduced costs of disease or increased productivity. Returns on investment are lower (and potentially negative) if a sufficiently long-term horizon, encompassing the full stream of future benefits, is not adopted. The study had two key limitations: costing data were not always specific to Yunnan province but were taken from China-level studies; and modelled interventions may require more operational research to ensure they can be effectively and efficiently rolled-out to the entire province. Conclusions Introducing DAAs is cost effective, the optimal package of screening measures is focussed on higher risk groups, and there are likely to be positive returns from investing in such HCV interventions. Our analysis shows that targeted investment in HCV interventions will have net benefits to society; these benefits will only increase as DAA costs fall.


Author(s):  
Sarkis Manoukian ◽  
Sally Stewart ◽  
Stephanie J. Dancer ◽  
Helen Mason ◽  
Nicholas Graves ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Antimicrobial resistance has been recognised as a global threat with carbapenemase- producing-Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) as a prime example. CPE has similarities to COVID-19 where asymptomatic patients may be colonised representing a source for onward transmission. There are limited treatment options for CPE infection leading to poor outcomes and increased costs. Admission screening can prevent cross-transmission by pre-emptively isolating colonised patients. Objective We assess the relative cost-effectiveness of screening programmes compared with no- screening. Methods A microsimulation parameterised with NHS Scotland date was used to model scenarios of the prevalence of CPE colonised patients on admission. Screening strategies were (a) two-step screening involving a clinical risk assessment (CRA) checklist followed by microbiological testing of high-risk patients; and (b) universal screening. Strategies were considered with either culture or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. All costs were reported in 2019 UK pounds with a healthcare system perspective. Results In the low prevalence scenario, no screening had the highest probability of cost-effectiveness. Among screening strategies, the two CRA screening options were the most likely to be cost-effective. Screening was more likely to be cost-effective than no screening in the prevalence of 1 CPE colonised in 500 admitted patients or more. There was substantial uncertainty with the probabilities rarely exceeding 40% and similar results between strategies. Screening reduced non-isolated bed-days and CPE colonisation. The cost of screening was low in relation to total costs. Conclusion The specificity of the CRA checklist was the parameter with the highest impact on the cost-effectiveness. Further primary data collection is needed to build models with less uncertainty in the parameters.


2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (8) ◽  
pp. 683-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo Vos ◽  
Justine Corry ◽  
Michelle M. Haby ◽  
Rob Carter ◽  
Gavin Andrews

Objective: Antidepressant drugs and cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) are effective treatment options for depression and are recommended by clinical practice guidelines. As part of the Assessing Cost-effectiveness – Mental Health project we evaluate the available evidence on costs and benefits of CBT and drugs in the episodic and maintenance treatment of major depression. Method: The cost-effectiveness is modelled from a health-care perspective as the cost per disability-adjusted life year. Interventions are targeted at people with major depression who currently seek care but receive non-evidence based treatment. Uncertainty in model inputs is tested using Monte Carlo simulation methods. Results: All interventions for major depression examined have a favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio under Australian health service conditions. Bibliotherapy, group CBT, individual CBT by a psychologist on a public salary and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are very cost-effective treatment options falling below $A10 000 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) even when taking the upper limit of the uncertainty interval into account. Maintenance treatment with selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is the most expensive option (ranging from $A17 000 to $A20 000 per DALY) but still well below $A50 000, which is considered the affordable threshold. Conclusions: A range of cost-effective interventions for episodes of major depression exists and is currently underutilized. Maintenance treatment strategies are required to significantly reduce the burden of depression, but the cost of long-term drug treatment for the large number of depressed people is high if SSRIs are the drug of choice. Key policy issues with regard to expanded provision of CBT concern the availability of suitably trained providers and the funding mechanisms for therapy in primary care.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lachaine Jean ◽  
Miron Audrey ◽  
Catherine Beauchemin ◽  
on behalf of the iGenoMed Consortium

Objective. The objective of this literature review was to evaluate the existing evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of treatment options in IBD. Methods. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify economic evaluations of IBD therapy. The literature search was performed using electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE. Searches were limited to full economic evaluations published in English or French between 2004 and 2016. Results. A total of 5,403 potentially relevant studies were identified. After screening titles and abstracts, 48 studies were included, according to the eligibility criteria. A total of 56% and 42% of the studies were assessing treatments of UC or CD, respectively. Treatment options under evaluation included biological agents, mesalamine, immunosuppressants, and surgery. The majority of studies evaluated the cost-effectiveness of biological treatments. Biological therapies were dominant in 23% of the analyses and were cost-effective according to a $CAD50,000/QALY and $CAD100,000/QALY threshold in 41% and 62% of the analyses, respectively. Conclusion. This literature review provided a comprehensive overview of the economic evaluations for the different treatment options for IBD over the past 12 years and represents a helpful reference for future economic evaluations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document