scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor: A Systematic Review

2022 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingyang Feng ◽  
Yang Yang ◽  
Weiting Liao ◽  
Qiu Li
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Tyrosine Kinase ◽  
Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Stromal Tumor ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment

Background: The introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy has dramatically improved the clinical effectiveness of patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), and this systematic review was conducted aiming at the cost-effectiveness analysis of TKIs in GIST.Methods: A thorough literature search of online databases was performed, using appropriate terms such as “gastrointestinal stromal tumor or GIST,” “cost-effectiveness,” and “economic evaluation.” Data extraction was conducted independently by two authors, and completeness of reporting and quality of the evaluation were assessed. The systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA statement.Results: Published between 2005 and 2020, 15 articles were incorporated into the systematic review. For advanced GIST, imatinib followed by sunitinib was considered cost-effective, and regorafenib was cost-effective compared with imatinib re-challenge therapy in the third-line treatment. For resectable GIST, 3-year adjuvant imatinib therapy represented a cost-effective treatment option. The precision medicine-assisted imatinib treatment was cost-effective compared with empirical treatment.Conclusion: Although identified studies varied in predicted costs and quality-adjusted life years, there was general agreement in study conclusions. More cost-effectiveness analysis should be conducted regarding more TKIs that have been approved for the treatment of GIST.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO: CRD42021225253.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Submandibular Gland Preservation With Sialendoscopy for the Management of Sialolithiasis

2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982110268
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Acevedo ◽  
Ashley C. Hsu ◽  
Jeffrey C. Yu ◽  
Dale H. Rice ◽  
Daniel I. Kwon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Submandibular Gland ◽  
Average Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Probability Of Success ◽  
Markov Decision Model ◽  
The Cost

Objective To compare the cost-effectiveness of sialendoscopy with gland excision for the management of submandibular gland sialolithiasis. Study Design Cost-effectiveness analysis. Setting Outpatient surgery centers. Methods A Markov decision model compared the cost-effectiveness of sialendoscopy versus gland excision for managing submandibular gland sialolithiasis. Surgical outcome probabilities were found in the primary literature. The quality of life of patients was represented by health utilities, and costs were estimated from a third-party payer’s perspective. The effectiveness of each intervention was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental costs and effectiveness of each intervention were compared, and a willingness-to-pay ratio of $150,000 per QALY was considered cost-effective. One-way, multivariate, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to challenge model conclusions. Results Over 10 years, sialendoscopy yielded 9.00 QALYs at an average cost of $8306, while gland excision produced 8.94 QALYs at an average cost of $6103. The ICER for sialendoscopy was $36,717 per QALY gained, making sialendoscopy cost-effective by our best estimates. The model was sensitive to the probability of success and the cost of sialendoscopy. Sialendoscopy must meet a probability-of-success threshold of 0.61 (61%) and cost ≤$11,996 to remain cost-effective. A Monte Carlo simulation revealed sialendoscopy to be cost-effective 60% of the time. Conclusion Sialendoscopy appears to be a cost-effective management strategy for sialolithiasis of the submandibular gland when certain thresholds are maintained. Further studies elucidating the clinical factors that determine successful sialendoscopy may be aided by these thresholds as well as future comparisons of novel technology.

scholarly journals Systematic review of cost-effectiveness analysis of behavior change communication apps: Assessment of key methods

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 205520762110005
Author(s):  
Cynthia Afedi Hazel ◽  
Sheana Bull ◽  
Elizabeth Greenwell ◽  
Maya Bunik ◽  
Jini Puma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Behavior Change ◽  
Quantitative Measure ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Behavior Change Communication ◽  
Change Communication ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Objective Evidence backing the effectiveness of mobile health technology is growing, and behavior change communication applications (apps) are fast becoming a useful platform for behavioral health programs. However, data to support the cost-effectiveness of these interventions are limited. Suggestions for overcoming the low output of economic data include addressing the methodological challenges for conducting cost-effectiveness analysis of behavior change app programs. This study is a systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of behavior change communication apps and a documentation of the reported challenges for investigating their cost-effectiveness. Materials and methods Four academic databases: Medline (Ovid), CINAHL, EMBASE and Google Scholar, were searched. Eligibility criteria included original articles that use a cost-effectiveness evaluation method, published between 2008 and 2018, and in the English language. Results Out of the 60 potentially eligible studies, 6 used cost-effectiveness analysis method and met the inclusion criteria. Conclusion The evidence to support the cost-effectiveness of behavior change communication apps is insufficient, with all studies reporting significant study challenges for estimating program costs and outcomes. The main challenges included limited or lack of cost data, inappropriate cost measures, difficulty with identifying and quantifying app effectiveness, representing app effects as Quality-adjusted Life Years, and aggregating cost and effects into a single quantitative measure like Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio. These challenges highlight the need for comprehensive economic evaluation methods that balance app data quality issues with practical concerns. This would likely improve the usefulness of cost-effectiveness data for decisions on adoption, implementation, scalability, sustainability, and the benefits of broader healthcare investments.

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 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Statins for Treatment of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Chow ◽  
Elizabeth Horn Prsic ◽  
Hyun Joon Shin
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
United States Healthcare ◽  
Statin Use

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.

scholarly journals ANALISIS EFEKTIVITAS BIAYA PASIEN PNEUMONIA BALITA RAWAT INAP DI RUMAH SAKIT BHAYANGKARA MANADO

PHARMACON ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 968
Author(s):  
Monica D. Lestari ◽  
Gayatri Citraningtyas ◽  
Hosea Jaya Edi
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment ◽  
Retrospective Data Collection ◽  
Keywords Antibiotics ◽  
The Cost

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

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of a physician deployment program to improve access to healthcare in rural and underserved areas in the Philippines

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e033455
Author(s):  
Anton L.V. Avanceña ◽  
Kim Patrick S Tejano ◽  
David W. Hutton
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Rural Municipality ◽  
Healthcare Perspective ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

ObjectivesThe objective of this study is to explore the cost-effectiveness of Doctor to the Barrios (DTTB), a physician deployment program in the Philippines.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis using decision tree models with a lifetime time horizon and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.SettingSocietal and healthcare perspectives.PopulationHypothetical cohort of children under 5 years in two provinces (Aklan and Nueva Ecija) and in a representative rural municipality.ParticipantsNone.InterventionsDTTB’s impact on paediatric pneumonia and diarrhoea outcomes compared with a scenario without DTTB.Main outcome measuresCosts, effectiveness (in terms of lives saved and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).ResultsDTTB is cost-effective in the two provinces that were included in the study from societal and healthcare perspectives. Looking at a representative rural municipality, base case analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggest that DTTB has an ICER of 27 192 per QALY gained from a societal perspective. From a healthcare perspective, the base case ICER of DTTB is Philippine pesos (PHP) 71 839 per QALY gained and PHP 2 064 167 per life saved, and 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations produced similar average estimates. The cost per QALY of DTTB from a healthcare perspective is lower than the WHO recommended willingness-to-pay threshold of 100% of the country’s per-capita gross domestic product.ConclusionsDTTB can be a cost-effective intervention, but its value varies by setting and the conditions of the municipality where it is implemented. By focusing on a narrow set of paediatric outcomes, this study has likely underestimated the health benefits of DTTB. Additional research is needed to understand the full extent of DTTB’s impact on the health of communities in rural and remote areas. Future cost-effectiveness analysis should empirically estimate various parameters and include other health conditions in addition to pneumonia and diarrhoea in children.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of whole area testing of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections in Merthyr Tydfil, 2020: A Modelling and economic analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Drakesmith ◽  
Brendan Collins ◽  
Kelechi Nnoaham ◽  
Angela Jones ◽  
Daniel Rhys Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Cost Ratio ◽  
Case Scenario ◽  
Monetary Benefit ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Net Monetary Benefit

Objectives: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of an asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 whole area testing pilot. Design: Epidemiological modelling and cost effectiveness analysis. Setting: The community of Merthyr Tydfil County Borough between20 Nov and 21 Dec 2020. Participants: A total of 33,822 people tested as part of the pilot in Merthyr Tydfil County Borough, 712 of whom tested positive by lateral flow test and reported being asymptomatic. Main outcome measures: Estimated number of cases, hospitalisations, ICU admissions and deaths prevented, and associated costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and monitory cost to the healthcare system. Results: An initial conservative estimate of 360 (95% CI: 311 - 418) cases were prevented by the mass testing, representing a would-be reduction of 11% of all cases diagnosed in Merthyr Tydfil residents during the same period. Modelling healthcare burden estimates that 24 (16 - 36) hospitalizations, 5 (3 - 6) ICU admissions and 15 (11 - 20) deaths were prevented, representing 6.37%, 11.1% and 8.19%, respectively of the actual counts during the same period. A less conservative, best-case scenario predicts a much higher number of cases prevented of 2328 (1761 - 3107), representing 80% reduction in would-be cases. Cost effectiveness analysis indicates 108 (80 - 143) QALYs gained, an incremental cost ratio of &#163 2,143 (&#163 860-&#163 4,175) per QALY gained and net monetary benefit of &#163 6.2m (&#163 4.5m-&#163 8.4m). In the less conservative scenario, the net monetary benefit increases to &#163 15.9m (&#163 12.3m-&#163 20.5m). Conclusions: A significant number of cases, hospitalisations and deaths were prevented by the mass testing pilot. Considering QALYs lost and healthcare costs avoided, the pilot was cost-effective. These findings suggest mass testing with LFDs in areas of high prevalence (>2%) is likely to provide significant public health benefit. It is not yet clear whether similar benefits will be obtained in low prevalence settings.

scholarly journals A cost-effectiveness analysis of front-line treatment strategies in early stage follicular lymphoma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua W.D. Tobin ◽  
Anna Crothers ◽  
Ti Eric Ma ◽  
Peter Mollee ◽  
Maher K. Gandhi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Combined Modality Therapy ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Minimal Improvement

AbstractRecent data suggests the use of radiotherapy alone (RT) in Early-Stage Follicular Lymphoma is declining. Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatments has not been performed. We constructed a partitioning model (15-year horizon) to compare RT, combined-modality therapy (CMT) and immunochemotherapy with rituximab maintenance (ICT+RM) from a PET-staged cohort from the Australian Lymphoma Alliance. Lifetime direct health care costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. AUD $75,000 was defined as the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP). The direct healthcare costs were: RT $12,791, CMT $29,391 and ICT+RM $42,644. Compared with RT, CMT demonstrated minimal improvement in QALYs (+0.01) and an ICER well above the WTP threshold ($1,535,488). Compared with RT, ICT+RM demonstrated an improvement in QALYs (+0.41) with an ICER of $73,319. Modelling a 25% cost reduction with a rituximab biosimilar led to further ICER reductions with ICT+RM ($52,476). ICT+RM is cost-effective in early stage FL from the Australian taxpayer perspective.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of caplacizumab in the new standard of care for immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura in Italy

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 43-52
Author(s):  
Giovanni Di Minno ◽  
Roberto Ravasio
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
The Cost

Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of caplacizumab in combination with plasmapheresis (PEX) and immunosuppression compared to PEX and immunosuppression in the treatment of acute episodes of iTTP. Methods: A Markov model was used to conduct the CEA from the perspective of the hospital, over a lifetime horizon. Clinical data derived from HERCULES trial and a systematic literature review. Economic input included direct costs only. Utility and disutility values were obtained from literature. Data on healthcare resources and costs were retrieved from HERCULES trial, literature, TTP guidelines and Italian tariffs. A sensitivity analysis was conducted. The cost-effectiveness probability was tested for several options of discount levels considering a suggested willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of € 60,000 in Italy. Results: The use of caplacizumab in combination with PEX and immunosuppression is associated with a positive difference in survival of 3.27 life years (24.53 vs 21.26) and in quality of life of 3.06 QALY (22.01 vs 18.96) when compared to PEX and immunosuppression. Caplacizumab leads to an ICER per life years of € 41,653 and an ICER per QALY of € 44,572. For the suggested WTP threshold, the probability of caplacizumab being cost-effective is 82.4% (no discount), 92.8% (15% discount), 95.3% (20% discount), 96.9% (25% discount) and 98.2% (30% discount). Conclusions: Caplacizumab in addition to PEX and immunosuppression is cost-effective, allowing the hospital to achieve greater efficiency in managing the burden of a life-threatening disease such as iTTP.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document