scholarly journals The Value and Sustainability of Ocrelizumab in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: A Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Angelo Cortesi ◽  
Damiano Paolicelli ◽  
Marco Capobianco ◽  
Paolo Cozzolino ◽  
Lorenzo Giovanni Mantovani
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Economic Impact ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Base Case Analysis ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost

INTRODUCTION: The availability of ocrelizumab for the relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS) in the Italian markets raised some questions about its economic impact and value compared to the alternative treatment options available.AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of ocrelizumab compared to the most used second line disease modifying therapies (DMTs) in Italy.METHODS: The study was divided in two phases: Phase 1 – based on the development of a decision analytical Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of ocrelizumab compared to natalizumab and fingolimod, and Phase 2 – based on the development of a budget impact model to assess the economic impact of ocrelizumab in Italy. Both models used the National Health System perspective; a lifetime horizon was applied in the cost-effectiveness analysis and a 3-year time horizon in the budget impact. The cost-effectiveness analysis results were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as € per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained, the budget impact analysis results were reported as difference in the overall budget (€) between a scenario with and without ocrelizumab.RESULTS: The two analyses reported ocrelizumab as a cost-effective option compared to natalizumab and fingolimod with a positive impact on the overall NHS budget. In the base-case analysis, the ICER was € 2,023 for ocrelizumab compared to fingolimod; while ocrelizumab resulted cost-saving compared to natalizumab. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the base-case analysis results. Further, the use of ocrelizumab was associated to a budget decrease of € 21 million (-2.6%) in a 3-year time horizon.CONCLUSION: The results of our cost-effectiveness and budget impact models reported ocrelizumab as an effective and efficient treatment in patients with relapsing forms of MS who failed a first line DMTs from the Italian NHS perspective.

Comparison of Cost-Effectiveness of Anticoagulation with Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban and Apixaban in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Across Countries

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 1164-1164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Krejczy ◽  
Job Harenberg ◽  
Svetlana Marx ◽  
Konrad Obermann ◽  
Martin Wehling
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Markov Model ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Base Case ◽  
German Population ◽  
Base Case Analysis ◽  
Chads2 Score ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Markov Decision Model ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Abstract 1164 The three new oral anticoagulants (NOAC) dabigatran 110mg bid and 150mg bid, investigated in the RE-LY trial, rivaroxaban 20mg od of the ROCKET trial, and apixaban 5mg bid of the ARISTOTLE trial showed equivalent or superior efficacy and safety compared to warfarin in these patients. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis for these NOACs in Germany and compared the quality of life (QALY), incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICER), and total costs across those countries form where these data are published. The base case population was a hypothetical cohort of patients 65 years or older with AF who were at increased risk for stroke (CHADS2-score >1) and had no contraindications to anticoagulation. The time horizon was based on the life expectancy of the German population. The QALYs, health insurance costs, and ICER for the NOACs compared with warfarin were calculated for each study. The sensitivity analysis was performed for different base case prices. The Markov decision model was adopted using the TreeAge Pro 2011 program. The data of the outcomes of ischemic stroke and cerebral embolism, major and intracerebral haemorrhage, myocardial infarction, and mortality were taken from the 3 studies comparing the NOAC with INR-adjusted warfarin. Prices for clinical events and for outpatient care were taken from the institute for payment regulations in German hospitals (InEK). The base-case analysis of a 65 years old person with a >2 CHADS2 score using the data from the RE-LY study resulted in 11.41 QALYs for warfarin, 11.53 QALYs for dabigatran 110mg bid, 11.66 QALYs for dabigatran 150 mg bid. ICERs per QALY were 49640€ for dabigatran 110 mg bid and 49590€ for dabigatran 150 mg bid versus warfarin. The same base-case analysis using the data from the ROCKET AF study resulted in 10.79 QALYs for warfarin versus 11.05 QALYs for rivaroxaban. ICERs per QALY were 48980€ for rivaroxaban versus warfarin. The base-case analysis using the data from the ARISTOTLE study resulted and 11.04 QALYs for warfarin versus 11.38 QALYs for apixaban. ICERs per QALY were 49720€ for apixaban versus warfarin. According the Markov Model the daily value based daily prices were 1.25€ for dabigatran 110 mg bid, 2.50€ for dabigatran 150 mg bid, 2.60€ for rivaroxaban, and 3.10€ for apixaban in Germany. The model was highly sensitive to the daily costs for the NOACs but relatively insensitive to other model inputs. Calculating the range of NOAC prices from 0.2 to 10 Euro versus the ICERs dabigatran 110 mg bid produced the highest increase of ICERs over this range of daily costs (Tukey-Kramer test, p<0.05) Comparing these data across countries using the published data shows that the willingness to pay per QALY as well as differences in treatment costs between substantially influences the daily prices of the NOACs. The data demonstrate the necessity to analyse the cost-effectiveness separately for every study due to differences in the INR-adjusted warfarin treated control group. The better the outcome during treatment with warfarin the lower is the benefit of the NOAC. The tendency of the cost-effectiveness calculated by the Markov model is comparable across countries. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals The Cost-Effectiveness of 13-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Seven Chinese Cities

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 1368
Author(s):  
Yan Li ◽  
Huaqing Wang ◽  
Wesley Furnback ◽  
Bruce C. M. Wang ◽  
Shuiqing Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Indirect Effects ◽  
Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Base Case Analysis ◽  
The Cost

Objective: This study estimates the cost-effectiveness of vaccination with the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) among infants in Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Chengdu, Karamay, Qingdao, and Suzhou. Methods: A previously published cost-effectiveness model comparing vaccination with PCV13 to no vaccination was localized to the included Chinese cities. A systematic literature review was undertaken to identify age-specific incidence rates for pneumococcal bacteremia, pneumococcal meningitis, pneumonia, and otitis media (AOM). Age-specific direct medical costs of treating the included pneumococcal diseases were taken from the Chinese Health Insurance Association database. The base case analysis evaluated vaccine efficacy using direct effect and indirect effects (DE+ IDE). A subsequent scenario analysis evaluated the model outcomes if only DE was considered. A vaccination rate of 70% was used. The model reported outcomes over a one-year period after it was assumed the vaccine effects had reached a steady state (5–7 years after vaccine introduction) to include the direct and indirect effects of vaccination. Health outcomes were discounted at 5% during the steady-state period. Results: Vaccination with PCV13 was cost-effective in the base case analysis for all included cities with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) ranging from 1145 CNY(Shenzhen) to 15,422 CNY (Qingdao) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. PCV13 was the dominant strategy in Shanghai with lower incremental costs and higher incremental QALYs. PCV13 remained cost-effective in the DE-only analysis with all ICERs falling below a cost-effectiveness threshold of three times GDP per capita in each city. Conclusions: Vaccination with PCV13 was a cost-effective strategy in the analyzed cities for both the DE-only and DE + IDE analyses. PCV13 became very cost-effective when a vaccination rate was reached where IDE is observed.

scholarly journals Pharmacoeconomic aspects of the therapy for moderate and severe psoriatic arthritis

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-123
Author(s):  
A. V. Rudakova ◽  
D. G. Tolkacheva ◽  
V. D. Sokolova
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Time Horizon ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Budget Impact ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Cost

Objective: to perform cost-effectiveness analysis of the treatment for adult patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with a Russian interleukin- 17А inhibitor netakimab in comparison with other biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs) and to evaluate the influence of the inclusion of netakimab in the therapy for PsA on the budget of the Russian healthcare system.Material and methods. The evaluation of cost-effectiveness was performed from the position of the Russian healthcare system for patients with moderate and severe PsA. The evaluation was performed based on the results of the network meta-analysis of the randomized clinical studies. The criterion of clinical effectiveness included the changes in the condition of the joints by the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70) and changes in skin symptoms by the index of the prevalence and severity of psoriasis (PASI 75 and PASI 90) with a recalculation into quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The time horizon of the cost-effectiveness analysis was 2 years. The calculation was based on the registered prices and VAT. If there was an original drug and a biosimilar registered on the pharmaceutical market, the calculation was based on the median of the registered prices. The budget impact analysis of the influence of netakimab inclusion in the therapy for patients with PsA was performed considering the structure of the prescription of bDMARDs and tsDMARDs that was determined in the pharmaco-epidemiological study conducted in the Russian Federation in 2020. The analysis was performed for patients that received medication by the scheme of reimbursement. The time horizon of the study was 3 years old.Results. In the base-case analysis, the cost-effectiveness ratio for netakimab was 1.210 mln rub/QALY (by 66.2–88.5% lower than in cases when comparison drugs were used). The budget impact analysis showed that the inclusion of netakimab in the therapy for PsA could reduce the costs by 376.60 mln rub (21.1%). Considering budget saving, the number of additional patients that can be treated will increase by 26.7% within 3 years.Conclusion. Netakimab is characterized by higher cost-effectiveness in comparison with other bDMARDs (adalimumab, golimumab, guselkumab, ixekizumab, infliximab, secukinumab, ustekinumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept) and tsDMARDs (apremilast, tofacitinib) prescribed in the Russian Federation for patients with PsA. The inclusion of netakimab in the therapy for PsA will reduce the financial burden on the healthcare system.

scholarly journals First-Line ICI Monotherapies for Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer Patients With PD-L1 of at Least 50%: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiao Liu ◽  
Zhen Zhou ◽  
Xia Luo ◽  
Lidan Yi ◽  
Liubao Peng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Scenario Analysis ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Base Case Analysis ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Nsclc Patients ◽  
The Cost

Objective: Three immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), pembrolizumab, atezolizumab and cemiplimab, have been successively approved as first-line treatments for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with programmed cell death ligand 1(PD-L1) expression of at least 50%. This study was designed to compare the cost-effectiveness of these three novel therapies in this patient population.Material and Methods: Using Markov model and network meta-analysis, we conducted separate cost-effectiveness analyses for cemiplimab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab among advanced NSCLC patients with PD-L1 of at least 50% from the United States health care sector perspective. Health states included progression-free survival, progressive disease, end-stage disease, and death. Clinical efficacy and safety data were derived from phase III clinical trials and health state utilities and costs data were collected from published resources. Two scenario analyses were conducted to assess the impact of varying subsequent anticancer therapies on the cost-effectiveness of these 3 ICIs and cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy versus these 3 first-line ICI monotherapies.Results: In base case analysis, cemiplimab compared with pembrolizumab was associated with a gain of 0.44 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and an increased cost of $23,084, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $52,998/QALY; cemiplimab compared with atezolizumab was associated with a gain of 0.13 QALYs and a decreased cost of $104,642, resulting in its dominance of atezolizumab. The first scenario analysis yielded similar results as our base case analysis. The second scenario analysis founded the ICERs for pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy were $393,359/QALY, $190,994/QALY and $33,230/QALY, respectively, compared with cemiplimab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab.Conclusion: For advanced NSCLC patients with PD-L1 of at least 50%, cemiplimab was a cost-effective option compared with pembrolizumab and a dominant alternative against atezolizumab. Our scenario analysis results supported the cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as a second-line therapy and suggested an extended QALY but overwhelming cost linking to pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of home versus hospital management of children at onset of type 1 diabetes: the DECIDE randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e043523
Author(s):  
Zoe McCarroll ◽  
Julia Townson ◽  
Timothy Pickles ◽  
John W Gregory ◽  
Rebecca Playle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Base Case Analysis ◽  
Home Management ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectiveThe aim of this economic evaluation was to assess whether home management could represent a cost-effective strategy in the patient pathway of type 1 diabetes (T1D). This is based on the Delivering Early Care In Diabetes Evaluation trial (ISRCTN78114042), which compared home versus hospital management from diagnosis in childhood diabetes and found no statistically significant difference in glycaemic control at 24 months.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial.SettingEight paediatric diabetes centres in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.Participants203 clinically well children aged under 17 years, with newly diagnosed T1D and their carers.Outcome measuresThe base-case analysis adopted n National Health Service (NHS) perspective. A scenario analysis assessed costs from a broader societal perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost per mmol/mol reduction in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), was based on the mean difference in costs between the home and hospital groups, divided by mean differences in effectiveness (HbA1c). Uncertainty was considered in terms of the probability of cost-effectiveness.ResultsAt 24 months postintervention, the base-case analysis showed a difference in costs between home and hospital, in favour of home management (mean difference −£2,217; 95% CI −£2825 to −£1,609; p<0.001). Home care dominated, with an ICER of £7434 (saved) per mmol/mol reduction of HbA1c. The results of the scenario analysis also favoured home management. The greatest driver of cost differences was hospitalisation during the initiation period.ConclusionsHome management from diagnosis of children with T1D who are medically stable represents a less costly approach for the NHS in the UK, without impacting clinical effectiveness.Trial registration numberISRCTN78114042.

scholarly journals Pharmacoeconomic analysis of using typical and atypical antipsychotics in schizophrenia

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-24
Author(s):  
I. A. Vilyum ◽  
B. V. Andreev ◽  
M. A. Proskurin ◽  
Yu. E. Balykina
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Atypical Antipsychotics ◽  
Impact Analysis ◽  
Pharmacoeconomic Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Resource Saving ◽  
Antipsychotic Therapy ◽  
Healthcare Budget ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost

The aim: to provide a comprehensive pharmacoeconomic evaluation of the maintenance therapy with antipsychotics in outpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia.Materials and methods. The analysis was conducted by two mutually complementary steps: an epidemiological study on outpatients with schizophrenia, and a subsequent pharmacoeconomic modeling. Two medical technologies were evaluated and compared: treatment with classical antipsychotics (kA) and treatment with atypical antipsychotics (AA). For the clinical and economic analysis of these treatments, we used a number of indices derived from our retrospective study of patients’ medical records. The cost-effectiveness analysis, incremental analysis, and «budget impact» analysis were performed taking into account the direct and indirect costs of the treatments.Results. We determined the costs of managing outpatients with schizophrenia from the perspective of the healthcare budget and the social burdens; we also looked into the relevance and effectiveness of the current costs at various time intervals – 6, 12 and 24 months. As shown, the treatment strategies involving AA were more budget-consumptive than the kA treatments. even if the treatments were switched to the reproduced AA (up to 100% replacement), the costs would remain to be higher than those for the kA. The «cost-effectiveness» analysis related to «the proportion of stable patients» for the horizons of 6 and 12 months indicated that the reproduced AA would be more economically effective than the kA. However, when the observation period was increased to 24 months, this economic advantage of AA diminished, and the kA drugs had a lower CeR instead. For the «number of hospitalization-free days per year», the use of AA was more cost-effective only versus the 100% use of reproduced AA at the simulated horizon of 12 months. When the use of 100% reference AA or the combined use of reference + reproduced AA was simulated, the treatment with kA remained more economically effective, regardless of the simulated period.Conclusion. The pharmacoeconomic simulation of the antipsychotic therapy in outpatients with schizophrenia suggests the ways to optimize the treatment. Among them, (a) using AA for the treatment of at least 15.6% of patients (those who are employed); keeping the ≥60% use of kA to ensure the optimal resource-saving effect of the treatment; (b) using reproduced AA at the level of ≥70% (instead of the reference AA similar in efficacy and safety) to keep the treatment economically feasible. 

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists for Venous Thromboembolism in China

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ke-Xin Sun ◽  
Bin Cui ◽  
Shan-Shan Cao ◽  
Qi-Xiang Huang ◽  
Ru-Yi Xia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Markov Model ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost

Background: The drug therapy of venous thromboembolism (VTE) presents a significant economic burden to the health-care system in low- and middle-income countries. To understand which anticoagulation therapy is most cost-effective for clinical decision-making , the cost-effectiveness of apixaban (API) versus rivaroxaban (RIV), dabigatran (DAB), and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), followed by vitamin K antagonist (VKA), in the treatment of VTE in China was assessed.Methods: To access the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), a long-term cost-effectiveness analysis was constructed using a Markov model with 5 health states. The Markov model was developed using patient data collected from the Xijing Hospital from January 1, 2016 to January 1, 2021. The time horizon was set at 30 years, and a 6-month cycle length was used in the model. Costs and ICERs were reported in 2020 U.S. dollars. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were used to test the uncertainties. A Chinese health-care system perspective was used.Results: In the base case, the data of 231 VTE patients were calculated in the base case analysis retrospectively. The RIV group resulted in a mean VTE attributable to 95% effective treatment. API, DAB, and VKA have a negative ICER (−187017.543, −284,674.922, and −9,283.339, respectively) and were absolutely dominated. The Markov model results confirmed this observation. The ICER of the API and RIV was negative (−216176.977), which belongs to the absolute inferiority scheme, and the ICER value of the DAB and VKA versus RIV was positive (110,577.872 and 836,846.343). Since the ICER of DAB and VKA exceeds the threshold, RIV therapy was likely to be the best choice for the treatment of VTE within the acceptable threshold range. The results of the sensitivity analysis revealed that the model output varied mostly with the cost in the DAB on-treatment therapy. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis of 1,000 patients for 30 years, RIV has 100% probability of being cost-effective compared with other regimens when the WTP is $10973 per QALY. When WTP exceeded $148,000, DAB was more cost-effective than RIV.Conclusions: Compared with LMWH + VKA and API, the results proved that RIV may be the most cost-effective treatment for VTE patients in China. Our findings could be helpful for physicians in clinical decision-making to select the appropriate treatment option for VTE.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Dimethyl Fumarate in the Treatment of Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: An Italian Societal Perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Giovanni Mantovani ◽  
Gianluca Furneri ◽  
Rossella Bitonti ◽  
Paolo Cortesi ◽  
Elisa Puma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Societal Perspective ◽  
Dimethyl Fumarate ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Base Case ◽  
First Line ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND: Delayed-release dimethyl fumarate (also known as gastro-resistant dimethyl fumarate, hereafter dimethyl fumarate) is an oral disease-modifying therapy used for the treatment of Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS), an autoimmune chronic inflammatory condition of the central nervous system.OBJECTIVE: The objective of this economic analysis was to compare cost-effectiveness of dimethyl fumarate with the alternatives used as first-line treatment of RRMS in Italy.METHODS: The analysis was conducted from the Italian societal perspective. Health outcomes and costs were evaluated over a 50-year time horizon (equivalent to a lifetime horizon). Both health outcomes and costs were discounted at 3.5%. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted by adapting a Markov model, already used in previous similar economic analyses conducted in RRMS, to the Italian context. The Markov model estimated the clinical and economic consequences of treating RRMS patients with the following therapeutic options: dimethyl fumarate; interferon (IFN) beta-1a subcutaneous (SC) at two different doses, 22 mcg and 44 mcg; IFN beta-1b SC; glatiramer acetate (GA) SC 20 mg; oral teriflunomide. Clinical efficacy data were retrieved from an elaboration of an already published mixed treatment comparison (MTC). Both direct and indirect costs (disability, treatment acquisition, administration, monitoring, relapses, adverse events) were included in the analysis. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were carried out and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves generated.RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, dimethyl fumarate was more efficacious than alternatives, in terms of both survival (19.634 vs. 19.440-19.600 life years for alternatives), and quality-of-life-adjusted survival (6.526 vs. 5.143- 6.189 QALYs for alternatives). The total lifetime cost per patient treated with dimethyl fumarate (€ 954,286) was lower than that of the other DMTs included in the analysis. Therefore, dimethyl fumarate was dominant compared with all analyzed alternatives. Dimethyl fumarate was also the therapeutic option with the highest benefit on disease burden. In fact, costs of disability management were lower than those of all the other first-line drugs included in the analysis. The results of one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the reliability of base-case results.CONCLUSIONS: The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis confirm that dimethyl fumarate is an optimal first-line treatment for RRMS in Italy, compared with the other first-line alternatives included in the economic analysis, when evaluated from the societal perspective.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document