Budgetary impact of using BPaL for treating extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis

IntroductionBedaquiline, pretomanid and linezolid (BPaL) is a new all oral, 6-month regimen comprised of bedaquiline, the new drug pretomanid and linezolid, endorsed by the WHO for use under operational research conditions in patients with extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB). We quantified per-patient treatment costs and the 5-year budgetary impact of introducing BPaL in Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan and Nigeria.MethodsPer-patient treatment cost of BPaL regimen was compared head-to-head with the conventional XDR-TB treatment regimen for respective countries based on cost estimates primarily assessed using microcosting method and expected frequency of each TB service. The 5-year budget impact of gradual introduction of BPaL against the status quo was assessed using a Markov model that represented patient’s treatment management and outcome pathways.ResultsThe cost per patient completing treatment with BPaL was US$7142 in Indonesia, US$4782 in Kyrgyzstan and US$7152 in Nigeria – 57%, 78% and 68% lower than the conventional regimens in the respective countries. A gradual adoption of the BPaL regimen over 5 years would result in an 5-year average national TB service budget reduction of 17% (US$128 780) in XDR-TB treatment-related expenditure in Indonesia, 15% (US$700 247) in Kyrgyzstan and 32% (US$1 543 047) in Nigeria.ConclusionOur study demonstrates that the BPaL regimen can be highly cost-saving compared with the conventional regimens to treat patients with XDR-TB in high drug-resistant TB burden settings. This supports the rapid adoption of the BPaL regimen to address the significant programmatic and clinical challenges in managing patients with XDR-TB in high DR-TB burden countries.

PP231 Safety, Effectiveness And Economic Analysis Of Exercise Intervention For Prevention Of Cognitive And Functional Deterioration In Hospitalized Patients

IntroductionCognitive and functional deterioration is common in hospital setting and occurs in 40 percent of admitted older patients. One of its main causes is physical inactivity. The objective of our health technology assessment was to assess the safety and clinical effectiveness of a structured multicomponent intervention of physical exercise (Vivifrail) for the prevention of the cognitive and functional deterioration in hospitalized patients aged 70 years or older and to estimate costs and the budgetary impact for the Spanish National Health Service.MethodsA systematic review of available scientific literature (including experimental and observational designs) on the safety and effectiveness of Vivifrail was performed. A costing study and budgetary impact analysis of the incorporation of Vivifrail as a therapeutic alternative to standard care with a time horizon of 5 years was performed.ResultsOne randomized controlled trial (RCT) (n = 370) showed positive effects of Vivifrail compared to usual care in functional capacity (mean difference (MD) = 2.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.78 to 2.62), cognitive state (MD = 1.80, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.36), and quality of life (MD = 13.20, 95% CI 12.70 to 13.70). Regarding other variables, the Vivifrail increased the grip strength of the dominant hand (MD = 2.30; 95% CI = 1.79 to 2.81), verbal fluency (MD = 2.15; 95% CI = 1.56 to 2.74), performance of double tasks (MD = 0.10; 95% CI = 0.07 to 0.13), executive function (MD = −31.07; 95% CI = −49.23 to −12.91) and emotional state (MD = −2.00; 95% CI = −2.50 to −1.50).The total cost of implementing Vivifrail in a 1,000-bed general hospital would be EUR18,000 per year (adjusted to 2020 currency), with approximately 150 patients older than 75 years benefited. This represents a cost of EUR120 per patient.ConclusionsThe Vivifrail could improve functional and cognitive capacity, although available evidence on the Vivifrail is very scarce. More well designed and executed RCT and cost-effectiveness study confirming or refuting the promising findings are needed for a new assessment.

The budgetary impact of alemtuzumab in multiple sclerosis in Quito, Ecuador. Payer’s perspective

Introduction: Multiple sclerosis is a neurological condition that causes disabilities and is most common in young adults. It imposes high financial costs affecting the quality of life of patients, families, and society. It is critical to measure the budgetary impact of new technologies to treat this disease. Objective: The aim of the article is to estimate the budgetary impact of introducing alemtuzumab as an escalation therapy in patients diagnosed with Recurrent Remitting Multiple Sclerosis and treated in Quito, Ecuador. Materials and methods: A cohort of 85 patients receiving treatment with disease-modifying therapies was used, within a 5-year timeframe, between 2021 and 2025. The baseline scenario, including the percentages of administration of the different drugs, is compared with the alternative scenario, including alemtuzumab. The cost assessment included only direct medical resources. To obtain local resources for management of the disease, a neurologist and clinical expert who treats most of the patients in Quito was consulted. Results: Considering a cohort of 85 patients with active Recurrent Remitting Multiple Sclerosis, the average global budget impact in 5 years would be USD 10,603,230.00 in the base case and USD 9,995,817.00 in the alemtuzumab scenario. Conclusion: The inclusion of alemtuzumab as escalation therapy represents budgetary savings over the next 5 years (2021-2025).

Economic assessment of incorporating the Hexavalent vaccine as part of the National Immunization Program of Peru

Background This study aimed to estimate the economic impact of replacing the current Peruvian primary immunization scheme for infants under 1 year old with an alternative scheme with similar efficacy, based on a hexavalent vaccine. Methods A cost-minimization analysis compared the costs associated with vaccine administration, adverse reactions medical treatment, logistical activities, and indirect social costs associated with time spent by parents in both schemes. A budgetary impact analysis assessed the financial impact of the alternative scheme on healthcare budget. Results Incorporating the hexavalent vaccine would result in a 15.5% net increase in healthcare budget expenditure ($48,281,706 vs $55,744,653). Vaccination costs would increase by 54.1%, whereas logistical and adverse reaction costs would be reduced by 59.8% and 33.1%, respectively. When including indirect social costs in the analysis, the budgetary impact was reduced to 8.7%. Furthermore, the alternative scheme would enable the liberation of 17.5% of national vaccines storage capacity. Conclusions Despite of the significant reduction of logistical and adverse reaction costs, including the hexavalent vaccine into the National Immunization Program of Peru in place of the current vaccination scheme for infants under 1 year of age would increase the public financial budget of the government as it would represent larger vaccine acquisition costs. Incorporating the indirect costs would reduce the budgetary impact demonstrating the social value of the alternative scheme. This merits consideration by government bodies, and future studies investigating such benefits would be informative.

Analysis of the budgetary impact of alogliptin in type 2 diabetes and unachieved target glycemia with metformin

within the preferential medication supply according to the List of Vital and Essential Drugs. Patients and Methods: the analytical model of decision-making was created using the MS Excel software to analyze the budgetary impact and "missed opportunities" when using alogliptin compared to other DPP-4 inhibitors for T2D. This model included only direct medical costs for one patient (medical costs of medical treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors). The target population included adults with T2D who received DPP-4 inhibitors from the List of Vital and Essential Drugs to enhance ineffective therapy with metformin based on the monitoring of the IQVIA drug purchase in 2021. Results: complete switch to alogliptin in the target population (249,700 patients with T2D) eased the strain on a budget of the health care system by 18%, or 839.7 million of RUB, over a 1-year therapy. Considering the previously calculated penetration rate, the average budget savings of the health care system over a 5-year therapy will be 11% or 448.6 of RUB. In addition, the analysis of "missed opportunities" has demonstrated that prescribing alogliptin in adults with T2D (considering replacement schedule) allows for additional treatment of 13,693 patients within the first year and 146,311 patients within five years in a fixed budget. Conclusion: in T2D, alogliptin is more effective compared to other DPP-4 inhibitors in terms of economics due to lower cost and similar efficacy. KEYWORDS: diabetes, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, alogliptin, analysis of budgetary impact, pharmacoeconomics. FOR CITATION: Nedogoda S.V., Salasyuk A.S., Barykina I.N. et al. Analysis of the budgetary impact of alogliptin in type 2 diabetes and unachieved target glycemia with metformin. Russian Medical Inquiry. 2021;5(9):559–567 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.32364/2587-6821-2021-5-9-559-567.