Search

Objectives: The object of this study was to determine, taking into account uncertainty on cost and outcome parameters, the cost-effectiveness of high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) compared with conventional chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer patients.Methods: An analysis was conducted for 300 patients included in a randomized clinical trial designed to evaluate the benefits, in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival, of adding a single course of HDC to a four-cycle conventional-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer patients with axillary lymph node invasion. Costs were estimated from a detailed observation of physical quantities consumed, and the Kaplan–Meier method was used to evaluate mean survival times. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were evaluated successively considering disease-free survival and overall survival outcomes. Handling of uncertainty consisted in construction of confidence intervals for these ratios, using the truncated Fieller method.Results: The cost per disease-free life year gained was evaluated at 13,074€, a value that seems to be acceptable to society. However, handling uncertainty shows that the upper bound of the confidence interval is around 38,000€, which is nearly three times higher. Moreover, as no difference was demonstrated in overall survival between treatments, cost-effectiveness analysis, that is a cost minimization, indicated that the intensive treatment is a dominated strategy involving an extra cost of 7,400€, for no added benefit.Conclusions: Adding a single course of HDC led to a clinical benefit in terms of disease-free survival for an additional cost that seems to be acceptable, considering the point estimate of the ratio. However, handling uncertainty indicates a maximum ratio for which conclusions have to be discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To access the cost-effectiveness of French recommendations for hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening and the extent to which earlier identification of carriers may or not improve the cost-effectiveness of therapeutic strategies. Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis were performed using decision-tree analysis and a Markov model. Four alternative strategies were compared: no screening and no treatment; initiation of HCV treatment after the diagnosis of cirrhosis; and two alternative strategies refer to the current French policies of HCV testing, i.e., two enzyme immunoblot assay (EIA) tests in series, or a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis after the first positive EIA test. Costs were computed from the viewpoint of the health care system. The analysis has been applied to populations particularly at risk of infection, as well as the general population. Results: The “wait and treat cirrhosis” strategy was more cost-effective in the general population and in transfusion recipients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of this strategy compared with baseline strategy was 3,476 of euros and €15,300 in respective cohorts. Considering the HCV screening strategy, the additional cost would be of €4,933 and €240,250 per additional year of life saved, respectively. In the intravenous drug user (IDU) population, the “two EIA” screening strategy was the more cost-effective alternative, with an additional cost of €3,825 per additional year of life saved. Conclusions: HCV screening would be discarded for transfusion recipients but should be encouraged for IDUs and also for the general population, in which the additional cost of screening is an order of magnitude more acceptable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 1994/95, two genes, BRCA1/2, associated with a predisposition to breast or ovarian cancer were identified. Genetic testing of deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations consequently can be proposed to individuals with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer to identify who is at risk. The granting of U.S. patents on BRCA1/2 to a privately owned company has led to the monopoly use of a unique technique (Direct Sequencing of the gene, DS) for BRCA1/2 testing in this country. Alternative strategies using prescreening techniques, however, have been experienced worldwide. Methods: On the basis of data collected at three laboratories of French public hospitals, we carried out a cost-effectiveness study comparing DS to 19 alternative strategies with the number of deleterious BRCA1 mutations detected as the outcome. Results: Results show that the DS strategy presents the highest average cost per mutation detected (9,882.5 °) and that there exist strategies using prescreening techniques that can reach similar effectiveness while reducing total costs. Moreover, other strategies can obtain a four- to sevenfold reduction in the average cost per mutation detected as soon as some rates of false negatives (2% to 13%) are deemed to be acceptable. Conclusions: Results suggest that gene patents with a very broad scope, covering all potential medical applications, may prevent health care systems from identifying and adopting the most efficient genetic testing strategies due to the monopoly granted for the exploitation of the gene. Policy implications for regulatory authorities, in the current context of the extension of BRCA1/2 patents in other countries, are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The usual implementation of contingent valuation (CV), in the context of priorities setting for allocation of public funds in health care, is to develop as many surveys as there are programmes, i.e. to perform separate evaluations (SE). In the EuroWill project, three health programmes (for heart disease, breast cancer and a service of helicopter ambulance) were however simultaneously evaluated, i.e. a joint evaluation (JE) was performed. The paper examines the issue of the econometric techniques that should be used to estimate WTP values obtained in the context of JE by comparing the application of independent OLS regressions for each programme versus simultaneous estimations using seemingly unrelated regressions (SUR) on data of the French EuroWill survey. It shows that separate estimations may lead to misspecifications because they cannot take into account that JE exogenously provides a reference structure to the respondent which affects the estimates of WTP for each programme. Therefore, the potential advantage of JE versus SE as an elicitation technique in CV studies applied to health care (to better control the referents used by respondents for evaluating different programmes) only holds if simultaneous rather than independent techniques are used in the estimation of WTPs. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper challenges traditional views which oppose health economics and medical ethics by arguing that economic assessment is a necessary complement to medical ethics and can help to improve public participation and democratic processes in choices about resource allocation for health care technologies. In support of this argument, four points are emphasized: (1) Most current biomedical ethical debates implicitly deal with economic issues of resource allocation. (2) Clinical decisions, which usually respect the Hippocratic code of ethics, are nevertheless influenced by economic incentives and constraints. (3) Economic assessment is concerned with both efficiency and equity and potential trade-offs between the two, which means that ethical judgements are always embedded in welfare economics. (4) The real debate is not between economics on the one side and medical ethics on the other. Rather it is between different ethical conceptions of social justice and the contrasting approaches they entail to reconciling individual interests and preferences with collective goods and welfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]