Search

Background: Mammography (MG) has demonstrated its effectiveness in diminishing mortality and advanced-stage breast cancer incidences in breast screening initiatives. Notably, research has accentuated the superior diagnostic efficacy and cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). However, the scope of evidence validating the cost-effectiveness of DBT remains limited, prompting a requisite for more comprehensive investigation. The present study aimed to rigorously evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DBT plus MG (DBT-MG) compared to MG alone within the framework of Taiwan's National Health Insurance program. Methods: All parameters for the Markov decision tree model, encompassing event probabilities, costs, and utilities (quality-adjusted life years, QALYs), were sourced from reputable literature, expert opinions, and official records. With 10,000 iterations, a 2-year cycle length, a 30-year time horizon, and a 2% annual discount rate, the analysis determined the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) to compare the cost-effectiveness of the two screening methods. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were also conducted to demonstrate the robustness of findings. Results: The ICER of DBT-MG compared to MG was US$5971.5764/QALYs. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of US$33,004 (Gross Domestic Product of Taiwan in 2021) per QALY, more than 98% of the probabilistic simulations favored adopting DBT-MG versus MG. The one-way sensitivity analysis also shows that the ICER depended heavily on recall rates, biopsy rates, and positive predictive value (PPV2). Conclusion: DBT-MG shows enhanced diagnostic efficacy, potentially diminishing recall costs. While exhibiting a higher biopsy rate, DBT-MG aids in the detection of early-stage breast cancers, reduces recall rates, and exhibits notably superior cost-effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma (RRcHL) associates with poor prognosis and heavy disease burden to patients. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin (BV) in comparison to conventional chemotherapy in patients with RRcHL, from a Chinese healthcare perspective. Methods: The lifetime cost and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated through a partitioned survival model with three health states (progression free, post progression, and death). Two cohorts for each BV arm and chemotherapy arm were built, representing patients with and without transplant after BV or chemotherapy, respectively. Clinical parameters were retrieved from BV trials and the literature. Resource utilization data were mainly collected from local expert surveys and cost parameters were reflecting local unit prices. Utility values were sourced from the literature. A discount rate of 5% was employed according to the Chinese guideline. A series of deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness and uncertainty associated with the model. Results: Results of the base case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for BV versus chemotherapy was $2,867 (¥19,774). The main model driver was the superior progression-free and overall survival benefits of BV. The ICERs were relatively robust in a series of sensitivity analyses, all under a conventional decision threshold (1 time of Chinese per capita GDP). With this conventional threshold, the probability of BV being cost-effective was 100%. Conclusions: Brentuximab vedotin can be considered a cost-effective treatment versus conventional chemotherapy in treating relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma in China. Highlights: In China, BV was approved in 2020 for the treatment of adult patients with CD30-positive RRcHL. However, the economic value of BV compared with conventional therapy remains unknown. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin (BV) in comparison to conventional chemotherapy in patients with RRcHL, from a Chinese healthcare perspective. Brentuximab vedotin can be considered a cost-effective treatment versus conventional chemotherapy in treating relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma in China, with the ICER under a conventional decision threshold (1 time of Chinese per capita GDP). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study measured the health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) and costs and conducted a cost–utility analysis and budget impact analysis of ambulatory knee arthroscopic surgery compared with inpatient knee arthroscopic surgery in Thailand from a societal perspective. Methods: Health outcomes were measured in units of quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) based on the Thai version of the EQ‐5D‐5L Health Questionnaire, and costs were obtained from an electronic database at a tertiary care hospital (Ramathibodi Hospital). A cost–utility analysis was performed to evaluate ambulatory and inpatient surgery using the societal perspective and a 2‐week time horizon. The incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio was applied to examine the costs and QALYs. One‐way sensitivity analysis was used to investigate the robustness of the model. Budget impact analysis was performed considering over 5 years. Results: A total of 161 knee arthroscopic patients were included and divided into two groups: ambulatory surgery (58 patients) and inpatient surgery (103 patients). The total cost of the inpatient surgery was 2235 United States dollars (USD), while the ambulatory surgery cost was 2002 USD. The QALYs of inpatient surgery and ambulatory surgery were 0.79 and 0.81, respectively, resulting in the ambulatory surgery becoming a dominant strategy (cost reduction of 233 USD with an increase of 0.02 QALY) over the inpatient surgery. The ambulatory surgery led to net savings of 4.5 million USD over 5 years. Medical supply costs are one of the most influential factors affecting the change in results. Conclusion: Ambulatory knee arthroscopic surgery emerged as a cost‐saving strategy over inpatient surgery, driven by lower treatment costs and enhanced HRQoL. Budget impact analysis indicated net savings over 5 years, supporting the feasibility of adopting ambulatory knee arthroscopic surgery. Our findings were advocated for its application across diverse hospitals and informed policymakers to improve reimbursement systems in low‐ to middle‐income countries and Thailand. Level of Evidence: Level IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Post-hospitalized acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients in Indonesia National Insurance does not pay for the use of high-intensity statin (HIS) for secondary prevention after ACS hospitalization. Moreover, a cost–utility analysis needs to be conducted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of prescribing HIS and low-to-moderate-intensity statin (LMIS) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). This study aimed to estimate the cost–utility of long-term HIS treatment in post-hospitalized ACS patients in Indonesia compared to current practice. Results: This study compared the economic outcomes of long-term HIS and LMIS in Indonesian post-hospitalized ACS patients. A lifetime Markov model predicted ACS-related events, costs, and QALY from a payer perspective. A systematic review estimated treatment-specific event probabilities, post-event survival, health-related quality of life, and Indonesia medical-care expenses from published sources. This study conducted probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) using 1000 independent Monte Carlo simulations and a series of one-way deterministic sensitivity analyses utilizing a tornado diagram. The economic evaluation model proved that intensive HIS treatment can increase per-patient QALYs and care expenditures compared to LMIS. The use of HIS among post-hospitalized ACS patients had ICER 31.843.492 IDR per QALY gained, below the Indonesia willingness-to-pay (WTP) for terminal disease and life-saving treatment. Conclusion: From the Indonesia payer perspective, using HIS for post-hospitalized ACS patients in Indonesia is cost-effective at 31.843.492 IDR per QALY gained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims/hypothesis: The aim of this study was to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) with alert functionality compared with FreeStyle Libre 1 intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) without alerts in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium. Methods: The IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model was used to estimate cost-effectiveness. Input data for the simulated baseline cohort were sourced from the randomised ALERTT1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov. registration no. NCT03772600). The age of the participants was 42.9 ± 14.1 years (mean ± SD), and the baseline HbA1c was 57.8 ± 9.5 mmol/mol (7.4 ± 0.9%). Participants using rtCGM showed a reduction in HbA1c of 3.6 mmol/mol (0.36 percentage points) based on the 6-month mean between-group difference. In the base case, both rtCGM and isCGM were priced at €3.92/day (excluding value-added tax [VAT]) according to the Belgian reimbursement system. The analysis was performed from a Belgian healthcare payer perspective over a lifetime time horizon. Health outcomes were expressed as quality-adjusted life years. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were used to account for parameter uncertainty. Results: In the base case, rtCGM dominated isCGM, resulting in lower diabetes-related complication costs and better health outcomes. The associated main drivers favouring rtCGM were lower HbA1c, fewer severe hypoglycaemic events and reduced fear of hypoglycaemia. The results were robust under a wide range of one-way sensitivity analyses. In models where the price of rtCGM is €5.11/day (a price increase of 30.4%) or €12.34/day (a price increase of 214.8%), rtCGM was cost-neutral or reached an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €40,000 per quality-adjusted life year, respectively. Conclusions/interpretation: When priced similarly, Dexcom G6 rtCGM with alert functionality has both economic and clinical benefits compared with FreeStyle Libre 1 isCGM without alerts in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium, and appears to be a cost-effective glucose monitoring modality. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03772600 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, autoimmune, and inflammatory disease. The economic burden of MS is substantial, and the high cost of Disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) prices are the main drivers of healthcare expenditures. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of DMDs for relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Materials and method: Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase. The search covered articles published between May 2001 and May 2023. Studies that were written in English and Persian and examined the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of DMDs in patients with MS were included in our review. Data extraction was guided by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist, and the quality of economic evaluations was assessed using the Quality of Health Economics Studies Instrument (QHES). All costs were converted to 2020 U.S. dollars using Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). Results: The search yielded 1589 studies, and 49 studies were eligible for inclusion. The studies were mainly based on a European setting. Most studies employed Markov model to assess the cost–effectiveness. The lowest and highest numerical value of outcome measures were -1,623,918 and 2,297,141.53, respectively. Furthermore, the lowest and highest numerical value of the cost of DMDs of RRMS were $180.67, and $1474840.19, respectively. Conclusions: Based on the results of all studies, it can be concluded that for the treatment of patients with MS, care-oriented strategies should be preferred to drug strategies. Also, among the drug strategies with different prescribing methods, oral disease-modifying drugs of RRMS should be preferred to injectable drugs and intravenous infusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The ADAURA trial demonstrated the superiority of osimertinib over a placebo with regard to disease-free survival, showing it to be indicated as an adjuvant therapy for treatment of non–small cell lung cancer with mutated epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). The aim of the present study was to conduct a cost-utility analysis and an analysis of the budgetary impact of adjuvant therapy with osimertinib in patients with non–small cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR who had undergone resection surgery with curative intent. Methods: Analyses were based on the outcomes of the ADAURA clinical trial and were conducted through a Spanish National Health Service perspective. The outcome measures used were quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Results: The average overall cost of adjuvant treatment with osimertinib over a period of 100 months in the overall sample of trial patients (stages IB-IIIA) was 220,961 €, compared with 197,849 € in the placebo group. Effectiveness, estimated according to QALY, was 6.26 years in the osimertinib group and 5.96 years in the placebo group, with the incremental cost-utility ratio being 77,040 €/QALY. With regard to the budgetary impact, it was estimated that, in 2021, approximately 1130 patients would be subsidiaries to receive osimertinib. This pertains to a difference of 17,375,330 € over 100 months to fund this treatment relative to no treatment. Conclusion: Taking into account a Spanish threshold of 24,000 €/QALY, the reduction in the acquisition cost of osimertinib will have to be greater than 10%, to obtain a cost-effective alternative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) expressed substantial improvement in the progression-free survival and overall survival contrasted with trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC), becoming the second-line standard of care, promisingly. We aim to estimate the cost–utility of T-DXd versus T-DM1 in HER2-positive mBC from the Chinese healthcare perspective. Methods: A partitioned survival model was applied to examine the cost–utility of T-DXd versus T-DM1. Clinical patients and outcome data were sourced from the DESTINY-Breast 03 trial. Costs and utilities were sourced in Chinese setting. Total costs, quality-adjusted life months (QALMs), and an incremental cost–utility ratios (ICUR) were calculated for cost–utility analysis. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $3188/QALM. Univariate, scenario, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: T-DXd group gained ∆QALM of 7.09 months and ∆Cost of $304,503 compared with T-DM1 therapy, which caused an ICUR of $42,936/QALM. The results of sensitivity analyses confirmed the base-case findings. Furthermore, T-DXd must reduce the price to enter the Chinese mainland market. At least when the cycle cost of T-DXd is reduced to $2975, T-DXd has an 83.3% chance of becoming a better choice. Conclusions: T-DXd appears to be not cost effective compared with T-DM1 for HER2-positive mBC patients previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Relapses are an important clinical feature of multiple sclerosis (MS) that result in temporary negative changes in quality of life (QoL), measured by health state utilities (HSUs) (disutilities). We aimed to quantify disutilities of relapse in relapsing remitting MS (RRMS), secondary progressive MS (SPMS), and relapse onset MS [ROMS (including both RRMS and SPMS)] and examine these values by disability severity using four multi-attribute utility instruments (MAUIs). Methods: We estimated (crude and adjusted and stratified by disability severity) disutilities (representing the mean difference in HSUs of 'relapse' and 'no relapse' groups as well as 'unsure' and 'no relapse' groups) in RRMS (n = 1056), SPMS (n = 239), and ROMS (n = 1295) cohorts from the Australian MS Longitudinal Study's 2020 QoL survey, using the EQ-5D-5L, AQoL-8D, EQ-5D-5L-Psychosocial, and SF-6D MAUIs. Results: Adjusted mean overall disutilities of relapse in RMSS/SPMS/ROMS were − 0.101/− 0.149/− 0.129 (EQ-5D-5L), − 0.092/− 0.167/− 0.113 (AQoL-8D), − 0.080/− 0.139/− 0.097 (EQ-5D-5L-Psychosocial), and − 0.116/− 0.161/− 0.130 (SF-6D), approximately 1.5 times higher in SPMS than in RRMS, in all MAUI. All estimates were statistically significant and/or clinically meaningful. Adjusted disutilities of RRMS and ROMS demonstrated a U-shaped relationship between relapse disutilities and disability severity. Relapse disutilities were higher in 'severe' disability than 'mild' and 'moderate' in the SPMS cohort. Conclusion: MS-related relapses are associated with substantial utility decrements. As the type and severity of MS influence disutility of relapse, the use of disability severity and MS-type-specific disutility inputs is recommended in future health economic evaluations of MS. Our study supports relapse management and prevention as major mechanisms to improve QoL in people with MS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus chemotherapy (NIVO + Chemo) compared with chemotherapy monotherapy (Chemo) for patients with advanced or metastatic HER2-negative gastric or gastroesophageal junction or esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC) in Japan from the perspective of healthcare payer. Methods: A partitioned survival analysis model was developed to predict costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for NIVO + Chemo and Chemo. The time horizon of the model was set to 38 years. An annual discount rate of 2% for both costs and QALYs was applied. Data on overall survival and progression-free survival were derived from the CheckMate649 trial. Cost parameters were estimated from a Japanese medical claims database. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of NIVO + Chemo compared with Chemo was estimated. A subgroup analysis on the level of PD-L1 CPS expression was conducted. In addition, sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the uncertainty in the parameter settings. Results: The incremental cost and QALY of NIVO + Chemo compared with Chemo were USD99,416 and 0.30 QALY, respectively. The ICER of NIVO + Chemo was estimated to be USD327,161 per QALY gained. The results of the subgroup analysis showed that ICER was USD247,403/QALY and USD302,183/QALY for PD-L1 CPS ≧ 5 and ≧ 1, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed a relatively robust result that the ICER remained higher than the Japanese cancer threshold of USD75,000–150,000/QALY. Conclusions: Applying the Japanese cancer threshold of USD75,000–150,000/QALY, NIVO + Chemo was not cost-effective for patients with advanced or metastatic HER2-negative GC/GEJC/EAC in Japan from the perspective of healthcare payer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to conduct a systematic review of full economic analyses of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in adults' thoracic and abdominopelvic indications. Authors used Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed to conduct a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Fully published economic articles in English were included. Methodology and reporting quality were assessed using standardized tools. Majority of studies (28/33) were on oncology procedures. Radical prostatectomy was the most reported procedure (16/33). Twenty-eight studies used quality-adjusted life years, and five used complication rates as outcomes. Nine used primary and 24 studies used secondary data. All studies used modeling. In 81% of studies (27/33), RAS was cost-effective or potentially cost-effective compared to comparator procedures, including radical prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy. Societal perspective, longer-term time-horizon, and larger volumes favored RAS. Cost-drivers were length of stay and equipment cost. From societal and payer perspectives, robotic-assisted surgery is a cost-effective strategy for thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures. Clinical trial registration This study is a systematic review with no intervention, not a clinical trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Palbociclib and Ribociclib are cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 oral molecular inhibitors that have the potential to improve overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and quality of life in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The objective of this study was to analyze the cost-utility of Palbociclib and Ribociclib in comparison with Letrozole monotherapy as the first-line treatment for hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) MBC patients in Iran. Methods: A Cost-Utility Analysis (CUA) was conducted using a partitioned survival model (PSM) from the perspective of the Iranian healthcare system. The comparative strategies considered were Palbociclib + Letrozole, Ribociclib + Letrozole, and Letrozole monotherapy. The model was structured with a 1-month cycle length and a 15-year time horizon. Clinical safety, efficacy, and survival data in terms of PFS and OS for Palbociclib + Letrozole and Ribociclib + Letrozole were obtained from the latest updates of the PALOMA-1, 2, and MONALEESA-2 studies, respectively. Direct medical costs, including drug costs, visits, hospitalization, CT scans, bone x-rays, monitoring and laboratory testing, as well as medication side effects, were considered. Uncertainty evaluations were performed through deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Excel 2016 and TreeAge 2020 were used for all stages of the evaluation. Results: The base case results indicated that, despite its lower effectiveness, Letrozole monotherapy was the most cost-effective strategy, while Palbociclib + Letrozole and Ribociclib + Letrozole were not cost-effective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for Palbociclib + Letrozole and Ribociclib + Letrozole compared to Letrozole monotherapy were estimated at $137,302 and $120,478 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), respectively, which exceeded the target threshold of $4565. Deterministic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the CUA results were not sensitive to changes in the values of uncertain variables. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis also indicated that Palbociclib + Letrozole and Ribociclib + Letrozole had no chance of being cost-effective based on changes in various parameters and simulations. Conclusions: Palbociclib and Ribociclib showed significant efficacy in combination with Letrozole, as evidenced by improvements in PFS. However, in the first-line treatment of MBC in Iran, these strategies were not cost-effective compared to Letrozole monotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Today, heart failure is one of the leading causes of death and disability in most developed and developing countries. By 2030, more than 23.3 million people are projected to die of cardiovascular diseases each year, and the prevalence of heart failure is expected to increase by 25%. One of the preventive interventions is pharmacological interventions which can be used to reduce the complications of cardiovascular diseases such as heart failure. One of the most important pharmacological interventions in patients with heart failure is the use of antihypertensive drugs such as candesartan, enalapril, and valsartan. This study aimed to compare the cost-utility of candesartan, enalapril, and valsartan in patients with heart failure using the Markov model in Iran in 2020. Methods: In the present study, a four-state Markov model was designed to compare the cost-utility of candesartan, enalapril, and valsartan for a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 heart failure patients older than 24 years. The payers' perspective was used to calculate the costs. The Markov states included outpatients with heart failure, patients with heart failure admitted to general hospital wards, patients with heart failure admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs), and death. The effectiveness measure in this study was the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to determine the robustness of the results. The TreeAge Pro 2011 software was used for data analysis. Results: The results showed that the average expected costs and QALYs were 119645.45 USD and 16.15 for valsartan, 113,019.68 USD and 15.16 for enalapril, and 113,093.37 USD and 15.06 for candesartan, respectively. Candesartan was recognized as the dominated option. Because the calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) value (6,692.69 USD) was less than the threshold value (7,256 USD), valsartan was cost-effective compared to enalapril. The results of the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed that at the threshold of 7,256 USD, valsartan had a 60% chance of being cost-effective compared to enalapril. The results of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. Moreover, the results showed that ICU (1,112 USD) had the highest cost among cost items. Conclusion: According to the results, it is recommended that health policymakers consider the use of valsartan by cardiologists when designing clinical guidelines for the treatment of patients with heart failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of antibiotic-laden bone cement (ALBC) in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from the perspective of a single-payer healthcare system. Methods: A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was performed over a 2-year time horizon comparing primary TKA with either ALBC or regular bone cement (RBC) from the perspective of the single-payer Canadian healthcare system. All costs were in 2020 Canadian dollars. Health utilities were in the form of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Model inputs for cost, utilities and probabilities were derived from the literature as well as regional and national databases. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results: Primary TKA with ALBC was found to be more cost-effective compared to primary TKA with RBC with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of -3,637.79 CAD/QALY. The use of routine ALBC remained cost-effective even with cost increases of up to 50% per bag of ALBC. TKA with ALBC was no longer cost-effective if the rate of PJI following this practice increased 52%, or the rate of PJI following the use of RBC decreased 27%. Conclusions: The routine use of ALBC in TKA is a cost-effective practice in the single-payer Canadian healthcare system. This remains to be the case even with a 50% increase in the cost of ALBC. Policy makers and hospital administrators of single-payer healthcare systems can leverage this model to inform their local funding policies. Future prospective reviews and randomized controlled trials from the perspective of various healthcare models can further shed light on this issue. Level of evidence: III. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prioritizing health technologies requires comparisons of improvements in longevity or quality of life (QoL), or both. For this purpose, value sets are constructed that contain weights assigned to health states based on societal preferences. I show that how this is typically done may distort the results by giving unjustifiably larger impact to individuals who prioritize improvements in QoL over longevity. The problem results from equating the utility differences between being dead and full health across people, ignoring the fact that interpersonal utility comparisons are forbidden (or at least problematic) in economics. I propose another approach: the numerical value of maximal health gain (either in longevity or QoL) is assumed to be equal across individuals, to remove the impact of the range of utilities differing between people. I test this approach using EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L utilities elicited in Poland for two modeling techniques: a simple econometric model and a Bayesian one that accounts for censoring. The proposed approach increases the utilities of the worst health state: from - 0.41 to - 0.25 in EQ-5D-5L and from about - 0.54 to - 0.36 in EQ-5D-3L. In the Bayesian approach, the impact is greater: from - 0.45 to - 0.11 for EQ-5D-5L and from - 0.54 to - 0.22 for EQ-5D-3L. I discuss some normative arguments why the proposed approach may be more justifiable for aggregating individual preferences for health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of newborn screening (NBS) versus no NBS for 5q spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) in England. Methods: A cost-utility analysis using a combination of decision tree and Markov model structures was developed to estimate the lifetime health effects and costs of NBS for SMA, compared with no NBS, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in England. A decision tree was designed to capture NBS outcomes, and Markov modeling was used to project long-term health outcomes and costs for each patient group following diagnosis. Model inputs were based on existing literature, local data, and expert opinion. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the model and the validity of the results. Results: The introduction of NBS for SMA in England is estimated to identify approximately 56 (96% of cases) infants with SMA per year. Base-case results indicate that NBS is dominant (less costly and more effective) than a scenario without NBS, with a yearly cohort of newborns accruing incremental savings of £62,191,531 and an estimated gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 529 years over their lifetime. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of the base-case results. Conclusions: NBS improves health outcomes for patients with SMA and is less costly compared with no screening; therefore, it is a cost-effective use of resources from the perspective of the NHS in England. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Oseltamivir is usually not often prescribed (or reimbursed) for non-high-risk patients consulting for influenza-like-illness (ILI) in primary care in Europe. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding oseltamivir to usual primary care in adults/adolescents (13 years +) and children with ILI during seasonal influenza epidemics, using data collected in an open-label, multi-season, randomised controlled trial of oseltamivir in 15 European countries. Methods: Direct and indirect cost estimates were based on patient reported resource use and official country-specific unit costs. Health-Related Quality of Life was assessed by EQ-5D questionnaires. Costs and quality adjusted life-years (QALY) were bootstrapped (N = 10,000) to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), from both the healthcare payers' and the societal perspectives, with uncertainty expressed through probabilistic sensitivity analysis and expected value for perfect information (EVPI) analysis. Additionally, scenario (self-reported spending), comorbidities subgroup and country-specific analyses were performed. Results: The healthcare payers' expected ICERs of oseltamivir were €22,459 per QALY gained in adults/adolescents and €13,001 in children. From the societal perspective, oseltamivir was cost-saving in adults/adolescents, but the ICER is €8,344 in children. Large uncertainties were observed in subgroups with comorbidities, especially for children. The expected ICERs and extent of decision uncertainty varied between countries (EVPI ranged €1–€35 per patient). Conclusion: Adding oseltamivir to primary usual care in Europe is likely to be cost-effective for treating adults/adolescents and children with ILI from the healthcare payers' perspective (if willingness-to-pay per QALY gained > €22,459) and cost-saving in adults/adolescents from a societal perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health state utilities (HSU) are a health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) input for cost-utility analyses used for resource allocation decisions, including medication reimbursement. New Zealand (NZ) guidelines recommend the EQ-5D instruments; however, the EQ-5D-5L may not sufficiently capture psychosocial health. We evaluated HRQoL among people with multiple sclerosis (MS) in NZ using the EQ-5D-5L and assessed the instrument's discriminatory sensitivity for a NZ MS cohort. Methods: Participants were recruited from the NZ MS Prevalence Study. Participants self-completed a 45-min online survey that included the EQ-5D-5L/EQ-VAS. Disability severity was classified using the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) to categorise participant disability as mild (EDSS: 0–3.5), moderate (EDSS: 4.0–6.0) and severe (EDSS: 6.5–9.5). Anxiety/depression were also measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS). In the absence of an EQ-5D-5L NZ tariff, HSUs were derived using an Australian tariff. We evaluated associations between HSUs and participant characteristics with linear regression models. Results: 254 participants entered the study. Mean age was 55.2 years, 79.5% were female. Mean (SD) EQ-5D-5L HSU was 0.58 (0.33). Mean (SD) HSUs for disability categories were: mild 0.80 ± 0.17, moderate 0.57 ± 0.21 and severe 0.14 ± 0.32. Twelve percent reported HSU = 1.0 (i.e., no problems in any domain). Participants who had never used a disease-modifying therapy reported a lower mean HSU. Multivariable modelling found that the HADS anxiety score was not associated with EQ-5D-5L. Conclusions: HRQoL for people with MS in NZ was lower than comparable countries, including Australia. We suggest a comparison with other generic tools that may have improved sensitivity to mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Deep learning (DL) for screening diabetic retinopathy (DR) has the potential to address limited healthcare resources by enabling expanded access to healthcare. However, there is still limited health economic evaluation, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, on this subject to aid decision-making for DL adoption. Methods: In the context of a middle-income country (MIC), using Thailand as a model, we constructed a decision tree-Markov hybrid model to estimate lifetime costs and outcomes of Thailand's national DR screening program via DL and trained human graders (HG). We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the two strategies. Sensitivity analyses were performed to probe the influence of modeling parameters. Results: From a societal perspective, screening with DL was associated with a reduction in costs of ~ US$ 2.70, similar quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) of + 0.0043, and an incremental net monetary benefit of ~ US$ 24.10 in the base case. In sensitivity analysis, DL remained cost-effective even with a price increase from US$ 1.00 to US$ 4.00 per patient at a Thai willingness-to-pay threshold of ~ US$ 4.997 per QALY gained. When further incorporating recent findings suggesting improved compliance to treatment referral with DL, our analysis models effectiveness benefits of ~ US$ 20 to US$ 50 depending on compliance. Conclusion: DR screening using DL in an MIC using Thailand as a model may result in societal cost-savings and similar health outcomes compared with HG. This study may provide an economic rationale to expand DL-based DR screening in MICs as an alternative solution for limited availability of skilled human resources for primary screening, particularly in MICs with similar prevalence of diabetes and low compliance to referrals for treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Economic evidence for comparing low fraction with ultra-hypo fractionated (UHF) radiation therapy in the treatment of intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer (PC) is lacking, especially in Europe. This study presents an economic evaluation performed alongside an ongoing clinical trial. Aim: To investigate up to 6 years' follow-up whether conventional fractionation (CF, 78.0 Gy in 39 fractions, 5 days per week for 8 weeks) is more cost-effective than UHF (42.7 Gy in 7 fractions, 3 days per week for 2.5 weeks inclusive of 2 weekends) radiotherapy in treatment for patients with intermediate-to-high-risk PC. Method: HYPO-RT-PC trial is an open-label, randomized, multicenter (10 in Sweden; 2 in Denmark) phase-3 trial. Patients from Sweden (CF 434; UHF 445) were included in this study. The trial database was linked to the National Patient Registry (NPR). Costs for inpatient/non-primary outpatient care for each episode were retrieved. For calculating Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was mapped to the EQ-5D-3L index. Multivariable regression analyses were used to compare the difference in costs and QALYs, adjusting for age and baseline costs, and health status. The confidence interval for the difference in costs, QALYs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated by the bootstrap percentile method. Results: No significant differences were found in ICER between the two arms after 6 years of follow-up. Conclusion: The current study did not support that the ultra-hypo-fractionated treatment was more cost-effective than the conventional fraction treatment up to the sixth year of the trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In the randomized PARTNER 3 trial, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the SAPIEN 3 device significantly reduced a composite of all-cause death, stroke, and rehospitalization, compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and low risk of surgical mortality. Furthermore, TAVI has been shown to be cost-effective in low-risk patients, compared with SAVR, in a number of countries. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of TAVI with SAPIEN 3 versus SAVR in Germany. Methods: A previously published two-stage Markov-based model that captured clinical outcomes from the PARTNER 3 trial was adapted for the German context using the German Statutory Health Insurance perspective. The model had a lifetime horizon. The cost–utility analysis estimated changes in direct healthcare costs as well as survival and health-related quality of life using TAVI with SAPIEN 3 compared with SAVR. Results: TAVI with SAPIEN 3 increased quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) by + 0.72 at an increased cost of €8664 per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness/QALY ratio was €12,037, which fell below that of other cardiovascular interventions in use in Germany. The cost-effectiveness of TAVI over SAVR remained robust across multiple challenging scenarios and was driven by lower longer-term management costs compared with SAVR. Conclusions: TAVI with SAPIEN 3 appears to be a clinically meaningful, cost-effective treatment option over SAVR for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and low risk for surgical mortality in Germany. Clinical Trial Registration Number: www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02675114. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The increasing incidence of prostate cancer (PC) in China leads to a significant disease burden. Although three novel androgen inhibitors (darolutamide, apalutamide, and enzalutamide) have been approved for patients with high-risk non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), the economic evaluation of these novel treatments in China remains unknown. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the cost–utility of darolutamide combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), comparing with apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT, in patients with high-risk nmCRPC from a healthcare system perspective in China. Methods: A partitioned survival model was developed to capture time spent by patients in three health states: nmCRPC, metastatic CRPC (mCRPC), and death. Clinical outcomes from the ARAMIS, PROSPER, and SPARTAN studies were obtained. In the absence of head-to-head studies, indirect treatment comparisons were conducted to capture the comparative effectiveness between darolutamide + ADT, apalutamide + ADT, and enzalutamide + ADT. The prices of apalutamide and enzalutamide were assumed to be the same as the initial launch price of darolutamide, since post-negotiation prices after national reimbursement drug list (NRDL) inclusion remain confidential. Other health resources costs, baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and utility were collected through literature or clinical expert interviews. Selected sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results: For a 20-year time horizon, darolutamide + ADT was associated with lower cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) than apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT (202,897 Chinese yuan (CNY)/QALY vs. 228,998 CNY/QALY and 221,409 CNY/QALY, respectively) (exchange rate, 1 USD = 6.7871 CNY). Darolutamide + ADT had better health outcomes and lower total costs compared to both apalutamide + ADT (+ 0.22 QALYs and − 72,818 CNY) and enzalutamide + ADT (+ 0.09 QALYs and − 67,451 CNY). Across the modelled sensitivity analyses (including hazard ratios and drug costs), darolutamide + ADT remained dominant or cost-effective. Conclusions: This economic evaluation suggested that, in comparison with apalutamide + ADT and enzalutamide + ADT, darolutamide + ADT was a dominant or cost-effective treatment option for patients with high-risk nmCRPC in China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory, neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system which results in disability over time and reduced quality of life. To increase the sensitivity of the EQ-5D-5L for psychosocial health, four bolt-on items from the AQoL-8D were used to create the nine-item EQ-5D-5L-Psychosocial. We aimed to externally validate the EQ-5D-5L-Psychosocial in a large cohort of people with MS (pwMS) and explore the discriminatory power of the new instrument with EQ-5D-5L/AQoL-8D. Methods: A large representative sample from the Australian MS Longitudinal Study completed the AQoL-8D and EQ-5D-5L (including EQ VAS) and both instruments health state utilities (HSUs) were scored using Australian tariffs. Sociodemographic/clinical data were also collected. External validity of EQ-5D-5L-Psychosocial scoring algorithm was assessed with mean absolute errors (MAE) and Spearman's correlation coefficient. Discriminatory sensitivity was assessed with an examination of ceiling/floor effects, and disability severity classifications. Results: Among 1683 participants (mean age: 58.6 years; 80% female), over half (55%) had moderate or severe disability. MAE (0.063) and the distribution of the prediction error were similar to the original development study. Mean (± standard deviation) HSUs were EQ-5D-5L: 0.58 ± 0.32, EQ-5D-5L-Psychosocial 0.62 ± 0.29, and AQoL-8D: 0.63 ± 0.20. N = 157 (10%) scored perfect health (i.e. HSU = 1.0) on the EQ-5D-5L, but reported a mean HSU of 0.90 on the alternative instruments. The Sleep bolt-on dimension was particularly important for pwMS. Conclusions: The EQ-5D-5L-Psychosocial is more sensitive than the EQ-5D-5L in pwMS whose HSUs approach those reflecting full health. When respondent burden is taken into account, the EQ-5D-5L-Psychosocial is preferential to the AQoL-8D. We suggest a larger confirmatory study comparing all prevalent multi-attribute utility instruments for pwMS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health utility is a key input used to perform cost-utility analysis (CUA), which is increasingly used to inform resource allocation decisions.To identify the sources and elicitation methods of health utilities used in CUAs in oncology.We used the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry to identify oncology CUAs published in Medline between 1976 and 2021. Eligible CUAs had to include an oncology population (based on ICD-10 codes), report health utilities, and be published in English. The references of cited health utilities were traced to identify the original health utility study and the method of utility elicitation. Characteristic of included CUAs were summarized and the methods to derive health utilities were compared.A total of 1512 CUAs in oncology were identified. The majority of CUAs (n = 1428, 94.4%) were model-based. Malignant neoplasm of breast and female genital organs was the most common population considered (n = 424, 28.0%). Among these CUAs, 8714 health utilities were identified. Upon review, the sources of 2096 (24.1%) health utilities could not be traced. Of the remaining 6618 health utilities, 1718 (26.0%) were obtained from original health utility study embedded in CUA in which expert opinion (n = 547, 31.8%) or EQ-5D (n = 479, 27.9%) was most frequently used. The 4900 health utilities (74.0%) that were cited from external studies were most often derived using the standard gamble (n = 1258, 25.7%) or EQ-5D (n = 1190, 24.3%).Published health utilities are widely used in oncology CUAs, especially for model-based analyses. However, the identification, selection, and use of health utilities is suboptimal.Objective: Health utility is a key input used to perform cost-utility analysis (CUA), which is increasingly used to inform resource allocation decisions.To identify the sources and elicitation methods of health utilities used in CUAs in oncology.We used the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry to identify oncology CUAs published in Medline between 1976 and 2021. Eligible CUAs had to include an oncology population (based on ICD-10 codes), report health utilities, and be published in English. The references of cited health utilities were traced to identify the original health utility study and the method of utility elicitation. Characteristic of included CUAs were summarized and the methods to derive health utilities were compared.A total of 1512 CUAs in oncology were identified. The majority of CUAs (n = 1428, 94.4%) were model-based. Malignant neoplasm of breast and female genital organs was the most common population considered (n = 424, 28.0%). Among these CUAs, 8714 health utilities were identified. Upon review, the sources of 2096 (24.1%) health utilities could not be traced. Of the remaining 6618 health utilities, 1718 (26.0%) were obtained from original health utility study embedded in CUA in which expert opinion (n = 547, 31.8%) or EQ-5D (n = 479, 27.9%) was most frequently used. The 4900 health utilities (74.0%) that were cited from external studies were most often derived using the standard gamble (n = 1258, 25.7%) or EQ-5D (n = 1190, 24.3%).Published health utilities are widely used in oncology CUAs, especially for model-based analyses. However, the identification, selection, and use of health utilities is suboptimal.Methods: Health utility is a key input used to perform cost-utility analysis (CUA), which is increasingly used to inform resource allocation decisions.To identify the sources and elicitation methods of health utilities used in CUAs in oncology.We used the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry to identify oncology CUAs published in Medline between 1976 and 2021. Eligible CUAs had to include an oncology population (based on ICD-10 codes), report health utilities, and be published in English. The references of cited health utilities were traced to identify the original health utility study and the method of utility elicitation. Characteristic of included CUAs were summarized and the methods to derive health utilities were compared.A total of 1512 CUAs in oncology were identified. The majority of CUAs (n = 1428, 94.4%) were model-based. Malignant neoplasm of breast and female genital organs was the most common population considered (n = 424, 28.0%). Among these CUAs, 8714 health utilities were identified. Upon review, the sources of 2096 (24.1%) health utilities could not be traced. Of the remaining 6618 health utilities, 1718 (26.0%) were obtained from original health utility study embedded in CUA in which expert opinion (n = 547, 31.8%) or EQ-5D (n = 479, 27.9%) was most frequently used. The 4900 health utilities (74.0%) that were cited from external studies were most often derived using the standard gamble (n = 1258, 25.7%) or EQ-5D (n = 1190, 24.3%).Published health utilities are widely used in oncology CUAs, especially for model-based analyses. However, the identification, selection, and use of health utilities is suboptimal.Results: Health utility is a key input used to perform cost-utility analysis (CUA), which is increasingly used to inform resource allocation decisions.To identify the sources and elicitation methods of health utilities used in CUAs in oncology.We used the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry to identify oncology CUAs published in Medline between 1976 and 2021. Eligible CUAs had to include an oncology population (based on ICD-10 codes), report health utilities, and be published in English. The references of cited health utilities were traced to identify the original health utility study and the method of utility elicitation. Characteristic of included CUAs were summarized and the methods to derive health utilities were compared.A total of 1512 CUAs in oncology were identified. The majority of CUAs (n = 1428, 94.4%) were model-based. Malignant neoplasm of breast and female genital organs was the most common population considered (n = 424, 28.0%). Among these CUAs, 8714 health utilities were identified. Upon review, the sources of 2096 (24.1%) health utilities could not be traced. Of the remaining 6618 health utilities, 1718 (26.0%) were obtained from original health utility study embedded in CUA in which expert opinion (n = 547, 31.8%) or EQ-5D (n = 479, 27.9%) was most frequently used. The 4900 health utilities (74.0%) that were cited from external studies were most often derived using the standard gamble (n = 1258, 25.7%) or EQ-5D (n = 1190, 24.3%).Published health utilities are widely used in oncology CUAs, especially for model-based analyses. However, the identification, selection, and use of health utilities is suboptimal.Conclusion: Health utility is a key input used to perform cost-utility analysis (CUA), which is increasingly used to inform resource allocation decisions.To identify the sources and elicitation methods of health utilities used in CUAs in oncology.We used the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry to identify oncology CUAs published in Medline between 1976 and 2021. Eligible CUAs had to include an oncology population (based on ICD-10 codes), report health utilities, and be published in English. The references of cited health utilities were traced to identify the original health utility study and the method of utility elicitation. Characteristic of included CUAs were summarized and the methods to derive health utilities were compared.A total of 1512 CUAs in oncology were identified. The majority of CUAs (n = 1428, 94.4%) were model-based. Malignant neoplasm of breast and female genital organs was the most common population considered (n = 424, 28.0%). Among these CUAs, 8714 health utilities were identified. Upon review, the sources of 2096 (24.1%) health utilities could not be traced. Of the remaining 6618 health utilities, 1718 (26.0%) were obtained from original health utility study embedded in CUA in which expert opinion (n = 547, 31.8%) or EQ-5D (n = 479, 27.9%) was most frequently used. The 4900 health utilities (74.0%) that were cited from external studies were most often derived using the standard gamble (n = 1258, 25.7%) or EQ-5D (n = 1190, 24.3%).Published health utilities are widely used in oncology CUAs, especially for model-based analyses. However, the identification, selection, and use of health utilities is suboptimal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In light of the lack of an agreed international standard for how to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs), including cost–utility analyses (CUAs) from a societal perspective, there is uncertainty regarding to what extent the inclusion of productivity losses/gains in economic evaluations can affect cost-effectiveness results and subsequently decisions on whether to recommend new health technologies. To investigate this, we conducted a systematic review of CEAs and CUAs of drug-based therapies for a set of chronic immune-mediated disorders to understand how cost elements and calculation methods related to productivity losses/gains are used, examine the impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of including productivity costs, and explore factors that affect the inclusion of productivity loss. Methods: Databases (MEDLINE® In-process, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library) were searched from January 2010 to October 2020 by two independent reviewers for all CEAs and CUAs in adults with any of the following conditions: ankylosing spondylitis, chronic idiopathic urticaria, Crohn's disease, fibromyalgia, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus and ulcerative colitis. Relevant study data were extracted and evidence was synthesized for both qualitative and quantitative analysis. Productivity cost elements including absenteeism, presenteeism, unemployment/early retirement, premature mortality and informal care were extracted, along with the method used to determine them. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the inclusion of productivity loss. Results: Our searches identified 5016 records, culminating in 198 unique studies from 234 publications following screening. Most of the studies investigated rheumatoid arthritis (37.0%) or psoriasis (32.0%). The majority were CUAs, with some including both a CEA and a CUA (73.0%). Most studies used a payer perspective only (28.5%) or a societal perspective only (21.0%). Of the 49 studies incorporating productivity losses/gains, 42 reported the type of cost element used; all of these used patient absenteeism, either alone or in addition with other elements. Only 16 studies reported the method used to value productivity changes, of which eight used a human capital approach, four used a friction cost approach and four used both approaches. Twenty-eight of the 49 studies (57.1%) reported inclusion of productivity losses/gains as contributing to more favourable cost-effectiveness outcomes and ICERs, while 12 (24.5%) reported no substantial impact. On the basis of a multivariate analysis, rheumatoid arthritis as the target disease had a statistically significant association with the inclusion of productivity loss compared with psoriasis and inflammatory bowel disease. Conclusions: The results of our review suggest that incorporating productivity cost elements may positively affect cost-effectiveness outcomes in evaluations of therapeutics for immune-mediated disorders. Our work highlights the continued need for clarity when reporting how CEAs and CUAs in this disease area are conducted, in order to better inform healthcare decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endovascular coiling (EC) has been identified in systematic reviews and meta-analyses to produce more favourable clinical outcomes in comparison to neurosurgical clipping (NC) when surgically treating a subarachnoid haemorrhage from a ruptured aneurysm. Cost-effectiveness analyses between both interventions have been done, but no cost-utility analysis has yet been published. This systematic review aims to perform an economic analysis of the relative utility outcomes and costs from both treatments in the UK. A cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS), over a 1-year analytic horizon. Outcomes were obtained from the randomised International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) and measured in terms of the patient's modified Rankin scale (mRS) grade, a 6-point disability scale that aims to quantify a patient's functional outcome following a stroke. The mRS score was weighted against the Euro-QoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D), with each state assigned a weighted utility value which was then converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A sensitivity analysis using different utility dimensions was performed to identify any variation in incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) if different input variables were used. Costs were measured in pounds sterling (£) and discounted by 3.5% to 2020/2021 prices. The cost-utility analysis showed an ICER of − £144,004 incurred for every QALY gained when EC was utilised over NC. At NICE's upper willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £30,000, EC offered a monetary net benefit (MNB) of £7934.63 and health net benefit (HNB) of 0.264 higher than NC. At NICE's lower WTP threshold of £20,000, EC offered an MNB of £7478.63 and HNB of 0.374 higher than NC. EC was found to be more 'cost-effective' than NC, with an ICER in the bottom right quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane—indicating that it offers greater benefits at lower costs. This is supported by the ICER being below the NICE's threshold of £20,000–£30,000 per QALY, and both MNB and HNB having positive values (> 0). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The dose-limiting factor of ramucirumab plus docetaxel (RAM + DTX) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is febrile neutropenia (FN), which has a high incidence in Asians. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim (Peg-G) in patients with NSCLC receiving RAM + DTX in Japan. Methods: We simulated model patients treated with RAM + DTX in Japan and developed a decision-analytical model for patients receiving Peg-G prophylaxis or no primary prophylaxis. The expected cost, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of each treatment were calculated from the perspective of a Japanese healthcare payer. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at 45,867 United States dollars (USD) (5 million Japanese yen) per QALY gained. The probabilities, utility values, and other costs were obtained from published sources. Deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) and probabilistic analysis were conducted to evaluate the effect of each parameter and robustness of the base-case results. Results: The expected cost and QALYs were 20,275 USD and 0.701 for Peg-G prophylaxis and 17,493 USD and 0.672 for no primary prophylaxis, respectively. The ICER was calculated to be 97,519 USD per QALY gained. The results were most sensitive to FN risk with Peg-G. When FN risk with no primary prophylaxis exceeded 51% or the cost of Peg-G was less than 649 USD per injection, the ICER was below the WTP threshold. The probabilistic analysis revealed a 9.1% probability that the ICER was below the WTP threshold. Conclusion: Peg-G is not cost-effective in patients with NSCLC receiving RAM + DTX in Japan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) accounts for 176 cases per 100,000 inhabitants (female/male ratio = 2:1) in Italy. For most of the patients (67%), the disease course is relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS).Objective: To compare the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of teriflunomide in RRMS naïve patients vs. RRMS patients previously treated (experienced) with other disease-modifying therapies in Italy.Methods: A four health states Markov model-supported cost-utility analysis (CUA) covering a 7-year timespan through annual cycles was developed, following the healthcare sector and the societal viewpoints. Part of the parameters that populated the Markov model was obtained from a questionnaire administered to four primary Italian MS centres. Costs of healthcare and non-healthcare resources, expressed in euro (€) 2019, and QALYs were discounted at 3% real social discount rate. One-way, scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses tested the uncertainty of the baseline findings.Results: Baseline CUA shows that teriflunomide in RRMS naïve patients is strongly dominant vs. experienced patients (healthcare sector perspective: - €1042.68 and + 0.480 QALYs; societal perspective: - €6782.81 and + 0.480 QALYs). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the baseline results.Conclusion: Teriflunomide in RRMS naïve vs. experienced patients is cost-effective and possibly strongly dominant from both the healthcare sector and the society viewpoints in Italy. Our findings need further confirmation from real-world studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of evolocumab when added to standard of care lipid-lowering treatment (LLT) for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) who cannot adequately control their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) despite optimized LLT in Canada. Methods: An incremental cost-utility analysis was conducted using a Markov cohort state transition model adapted to the Canadian setting. Analyses were conducted from a public health and societal perspective using a lifetime time horizon for Canada. Scenario analyses were conducted on the basis of recommendations from the 2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) dyslipidemia guidelines. Results: In ASCVD patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) and baseline LDL-C ≥ 1.8 mmol/L, adding evolocumab to optimized statin therapy with or without ezetimibe is associated with an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of $66,453 CAD. Furthermore, for every 100 patients treated with evolocumab for lifetime, adding evolocumab to optimized LLT will prevent approximately 52 cardiovascular (CV) events, of which seven would be fatal. The results are generally robust using univariate and simultaneous variation in model input parameters. Scenario analyses for patient populations as per the CCS guidelines suggest that evolocumab added to optimized LLT may be considered cost-effective, given an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) threshold of CAD$100,000 per QALY gained. Limitations associated with this analysis should be interpreted in the context of data and modeling assumptions used. Conclusion: Overall, this analysis supports reimbursement of evolocumab by payers in patients with ASCVD who cannot reach LDL-C thresholds despite optimized LLT to reduce unnecessary fatal and non-fatal CV events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Men who receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa) are a vulnerable falls population due to the side effects of treatment. The purpose of this paper is to determine the cost-effectiveness of exercise in preventing falls and fractures for this high-risk population in Australia.Methods: A decision analytic model was constructed to evaluate the cost utility of an exercise intervention compared to usual care from a health system perspective. The intervention comprised two 1-h sessions of supervised exercise per week over 1 year for men with non-metastatic PCa receiving curative radiation therapy and ADT. A Markov model simulated the transition between five health states: (1) at risk of falling; (2) at recurrent risk of falling; (3) fracture (minor or major); (4) non-fracture injury (minor or major); and (5) death. Model inputs including transition probabilities and utility scores were obtained from published meta-analyses, and costs were drawn from Australian data sources (e.g. Medical Benefits Schedule). The model time horizon was 3 years, and costs and effects were discounted at 5% annual rate. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were aggregated and compared between the intervention and control to calculate incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB). Uncertainty in the results was explored using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA).Results: At a willingness-to-pay of AU$50,000 per QALY, the exercise intervention dominated, as it was less costly and more effective than usual care. The iNMB was $3010 per patient. The PSA showed a 58% probability the intervention was cost-effective.Conclusion: This is the first modelled economic evaluation of exercise for men with PCa. Our results suggest supervised exercise is cost-effective in reducing the risks of falls and fractures in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this paper is to map the number of concerns on the dimensions in Head and Neck Patient Concerns Inventory (PCI) on to the health utility (HU) index scores on Euroqol-Five Dimensions-Five levels {EQ-5D-5L). Methods: This is a cross-sectional survey conducted in patients who have completed their treatment. Four candidate models were considered, three based on ordinary least squares regression (OLS) and one two-parts model. Results: A reduced OLS model based on 'Physical and functional', 'Treatment-related', and 'Psychological, emotional and spiritual well-being' domains was found best on the estimation sample. This was validated externally on a separate sample. Conclusions: This is the first study that mapped a non-QOL tool to generate HU scores on EQ-5D-5L. The proposed mapping algorithm can estimate the cost–utility in economic evaluation studies when HU scores are not directly available. The algorithm will be best suited for studies in low-middle income countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) creates a significant economic burden on patients and society. The DAPA-CKD trial reports the benefit of dapagliflozin in CKD patients; however, its cost-effectiveness is unknown in Thailand. This study evaluated the cost–utility of dapagliflozin in addition to standard of care (SoC) compared with SoC alone in CKD patients. Methods: A Markov model was employed to estimate lifetime costs, life-years, and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with the modeled population aligned to the baseline characteristics of a DAPA-CKD trial, from a societal perspective. Effectiveness inputs were obtained from the DAPA-CKD trial. Costs and most utility data were gathered from published studies conducted in Thailand. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3% per annum. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Over a lifetime horizon, add-on dapagliflozin was estimated to increase life-years by 0.34 and QALY by 0.30 in comparison with SoC alone (7.13 vs. 6.78 years, 5.10 vs. 4.80 QALYs). Total cost was lower under dapagliflozin treatment than SoC treatment (648,413 THB vs. 689,284 THB or 20,947.64 USD vs. 22,268.01 USD). Cost saving occurred as a result of the lower costs of dialysis and KT. The findings were robust to the changes of inputs. Conclusions: On the basis of the DAPA-CKD trial, the add-on dapagliflozin results in cost saving compared favorably with SoC alone in Thailand. The benefit of dapagliflozin in delayed CKD progression is that it reduces the requirement for dialysis and KT, which can offset the costs of dapagliflozin and early CKD treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Uncertainty in model-based cost-utility analyses is commonly assessed in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Model parameters are implemented as distributions and values are sampled from these distributions in a Monte Carlo simulation. Bootstrapping is an alternative method that requires fewer assumptions and incorporates correlations between model parameters. Methods: A Markov model-based cost–utility analysis comparing oromucosal spray containing delta-9-tetrahidrocannabinol + cannabidiol (Sativex®, nabiximols) plus standard care versus standard spasticity care alone in the management of multiple sclerosis spasticity was performed over a 5-year time horizon from the Belgian healthcare payer perspective. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis was implemented using a bootstrap approach to ensure that the correlations present in the source clinical trial data were incorporated in the uncertainty estimates. Results: Adding Sativex® spray to standard care was found to dominate standard spasticity care alone, with cost savings of €6,068 and a quality-adjusted life year gain of 0.145 per patient over the 5-year analysis. The probability of dominance increased from 29% in the first year to 94% in the fifth year, with the probability of QALY gains in excess of 99% for all years considered. Conclusions: Adding Sativex® spray to spasticity care was found to dominate standard spasticity care alone in the Belgian healthcare setting. This study showed the use of bootstrapping techniques in a Markov model probabilistic sensitivity analysis instead of Monte Carlo simulations. Bootstrapping avoided the need to make distributional assumptions and allowed the incorporation of correlating structures present in the original clinical trial data in the uncertainty assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are entering the hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment landscape in Hong Kong, prompting the need for cost–effectiveness evaluations of these interventions to enable optimal use of healthcare resources. Aims: This study aimed to compare the cost–effectiveness of DAAs to standard-of-care pegylated interferon plus ribavirin (RBV) in treatment-naïve patients without significant liver fibrosis and to compare different DAAs in patients who are treatment-experienced and/or have advanced liver disease. Methods: A Markov model was constructed to evaluate cost–effectiveness over a lifetime time horizon from the payer perspective. The target population was treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced HCV genotype 1 patients, stratified by degree of liver fibrosis. The model consists of 16 health states encompassing METAVIR fibrosis score (F0–F4), treatment success or failure, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplant, and liver-related death. The proportions of patients achieving sustained virologic response were obtained from clinical trials. Other inputs were obtained from published and local data. The primary outcome was incremental cost–utility ratio for each DAA versus pegylated interferon + ribavirin and among different DAAs. Results: In treatment-naïve F0–2 HCV patients, all DAAs were cost-effective in genotype 1a and daclatasvir + asunaprevir, elbasvir/grazoprevir, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir, and glecaprevir/pibrentasvir were cost-effective compared to pegylated interferon + ribavirin in genotype 1b. In genotypes 1a and 1b, treatment-experienced patients, and F3–4 patients, elbasvir/grazoprevir was the least costly DAA and economically dominant over most other DAAs. Conclusions: DAAs can be a cost-effective option for the treatment of genotype 1 HCV patients in Hong Kong, and elbasvir/grazoprevir is cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several multi-attribute utility instruments (MAUIs) are available from which utilities can be derived for use in cost-utility analysis (CUA). This study provides a review of recommendations from national health technology assessment (HTA) agencies regarding the choice of MAUIs. Methods: A list was compiled of HTA agencies that provide or refer to published official pharmacoeconomic (PE) guidelines for pricing, reimbursement or market access. The guidelines were reviewed for recommendations on the indirect calculation of utilities and categorized as: a preference for a specific MAUI; providing no MAUI preference, but providing examples of suitable MAUIs and/or recommending the use of national value sets; and recommending CUA, but not providing examples of MAUIs. Results: Thirty-four PE guidelines were included for review. MAUIs named for use in CUA: EQ-5D (n = 29 guidelines), the SF-6D (n = 11), HUI (n = 10), QWB (n = 3), AQoL (n = 2), CHU9D (n = 1). EQ-5D was a preferred MAUI in 15 guidelines. Alongside the EQ-5D, the HUI was a preferred MAUI in one guideline, with DALY disability weights mentioned in another. Fourteen guidelines expressed no preference for a specific MAUI, but provided examples: EQ-5D (n = 14), SF-6D (n = 11), HUI (n = 9), QWB (n = 3), AQoL (n = 2), CHU9D (n = 1). Of those that did not specify a particular MAUI, 12 preferred calculating utilities using national preference weights. Conclusions: The EQ-5D, HUI, and SF-6D were the three MAUIs most frequently mentioned in guidelines. The most commonly cited MAUI (in 85% of PE guidelines) was EQ-5D, either as a preferred MAUI or as an example of a suitable MAUI for use in CUA in HTA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: With recent innovative developments in microsurgery, novel, safe, and effective surgical options for erectile dysfunction (ED) are quickly emerging which may replace mainstay medical treatments. In an age where health care is increasingly focused on financial accountability and clinical outcomes, cost-utility analysis between nonsurgical treatment (pharmaceutical agents, mechanical devices, and shockwave therapy) and emerging surgical options will prove relevant and impactful to all physicians that treat patients with ED. The purpose of this study was to use the cost-utility analysis to compare the costs, outcomes, and overall quality of life conveyed to the patient by either nonsurgical or surgical treatments for ED. These results will help patients and physicians form more informed decisions when it comes to the treatment of men suffering from ED. Methods: The cost-utility analysis makes use of costs, probabilities, and utilities of health outcomes (referred to as health states) that are used to evaluate opposing interventions. Amazon Mechanical Turk© was used to derive utility scores for health states associated with surgical and nonsurgical interventions. In addition, a systematic review was performed to identify common complications of treatment and associated probabilities. All direct costs were derived from national Medicare facility reimbursement data and national hospital billing charges for fiscal year 2017, and indirect costs were accounted for by our utility estimates. Results: Baseline analysis revealed an incremental cost-utility ratio of $(1428.00) in favor of surgical intervention. The cost of lifetime medical therapy was $15,488.28 greater than that of surgery even when adjusted for inflation. Furthermore, surgery provided patients with a quality-adjusted life-year gain of 10.77 years greater than medical treatment. Conclusions: Long-term costs and utility data should be taken into consideration when determining the best treatment options for a patient with ED. Surgical interventions for erectile dysfunctions represent a significant cost savings to society compared with nonsurgical treatment. Phosphodiesterase type-5 (PDE5) inhibitors offered the greatest cost with the least clinical benefit in the eyes of the patient. Level of evidence: Not ratable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Scientific advances in the last decade have highlighted the use of immunotherapy, especially immune checkpoint inhibitors, to be an effective strategy in cancer therapy. However, these immunotherapeutic agents are expensive, and their use must take into account economic criteria. Thus, the objective of the present study was to systematically identify and review published EE related to the use of ipilimumab, nivolumab or pembrolizumab in melanoma, lung cancer, head and neck cancer or renal cell carcinoma, and to assess their quality. Methods: The systematic literature research was conducted on Medline via PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify economic evaluations published before July 2018. The quality of each selected economic evaluation was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Drummond checklist. Results: Our systematic review was based on 32 economic evaluations using different methodological approaches, different perspectives and different time horizons. Three-quarters of the economic evaluations are full (n = 24) with a Drummond score ≥ 7, synonymous of "high quality". Among them, 66% reported a strategy that was cost-effective. The most assessed immunotherapeutic agent was nivolumab. In patients with renal cell carcinoma or head and neck cancer, it was less likely to be cost-effective than in patients with melanoma or lung cancer. Conclusions: Whether or not these findings will be confirmed remains to be seen when market approval to cover more indications is extended and new effective immunotherapeutic agents become available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aimed to develop and evaluate different families of applicable models available for utility mapping between World Health Organization Quality of Life for HIV-abbreviated version (WHOQOL-HIV Bref) and EQ-5D-3L and to propose an optimised algorithm to estimate health utilities of people living with HIV.Methods: Estimation dataset was collected between July 2014 and September 2016 in a cross-sectional study including 1526 people living with HIV/Aids (PLWH) under care at the Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas-FIOCRUZ, in Brazil. Data of WHOQOL-HIV Bref and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires were collected. Fisher's exact tests were used for testing WHOQOL-HIV Bref response frequencies among groups of responses to each of the five EQ-5D-3L domains. Multiple correspondence analyses (MCA) were used to inspect the relationships between both instrument responses. Different families of applicable models available for utility mapping between WHOQOL-HIV Bref and EQ-5D-3L were adjusted for the prediction of disutility.Results: Candidate models' performances using mean absolute error (MAE), mean squared error (MSE), and root mean squared error (RMSE) were similarly good, which was evidenced by the overlapping of its 95% confidence intervals of the mean tenfold cross-validation or estimated generalisation errors. However, the Hurdle Logistic-Log-Normal model was better on average according to generalisation errors both in the prediction of Brazilian utility values (MAE = 0.1037, MSE = 0.0178, and RMSE = 0.1332) and for those of the UK (MAE = 0.1476, MSE = 0.0443, and RMSE = 0.2099).Conclusions: Mapping EQ-5D-3L responses or deriving health utilities directly from WHOQOL-HIV Bref responses can be a valid alternative for settings with no preference-based health utility data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Examine the health and economic impact of extending screening intervals in people with Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and Type 1 diabetes (T1DM) without diabetes-related retinopathy (DR).Setting: Diabetic Eye Screening Wales (DESW).Study Design: Retrospective observational study with cost-utility analysis (CUA) and Decremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (DCER) study.Intervention: Biennial screening versus usual care (annual screening).Inputs: Anonymised data from DESW were linked to primary care data for people with two prior screening events with no DR. Transition probabilities for progression to DR were estimated based on a subset of 26,812 and 1232 people with T2DM and T1DM, respectively. DCER above £20,000 per QALY was considered cost-effective.Results: The base case analysis DCER results of £71,243 and £23,446 per QALY for T2DM and T1DM respectively at a 3.5% discount rate and £56,822 and £14,221 respectively when discounted at 1.5%. Diabetes management represented by the mean HbA1c was 7.5% for those with T2DM and 8.7% for T1DM.Sensitivity Analysis: Extending screening to biennial based on HbA1c, being the strongest predictor of progression of DR, at three levels of HbA1c 6.5%, 8.0% and 9.5% lost one QALY saving the NHS £106,075; £58,653 and £31,626 respectively for T2DM and £94,696, £37,646 and £11,089 respectively for T1DM. In addition, extending screening to biennial based on the duration of diabetes > 6 years for T2DM per QALY lost, saving the NHS £54,106 and for 6-12 and > 12 years for T1DM saving £83,856, £23,446 and £13,340 respectively.Conclusions: Base case and sensitivity analyses indicate biennial screening to be cost-effective for T2DM irrespective of HbA1c and duration of diabetes. However, the uncertainty around the DCER indicates that annual screening should be maintained for those with T1DM especially when the HbA1c exceeds 80 mmol/mol (9.5%) and duration of diabetes is greater than 12 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outcomes in economic evaluations, such as health utilities and costs, are products of multiple variables, often requiring complete item responses to questionnaires. Therefore, missing data are very common in cost-effectiveness analyses. Multiple imputations (MI) are predominately recommended and could be made either for individual items or at the aggregate level. We, therefore, aimed to assess the precision of both MI approaches (the item imputation vs. aggregate imputation) on the cost-effectiveness results. The original data set came from a cluster-randomized, controlled trial and was used to describe the missing data pattern and compare the differences in the cost-effectiveness results between the two imputation approaches. A simulation study with different missing data scenarios generated based on a complete data set was used to assess the precision of both imputation approaches. For health utility and cost, patients more often had a partial (9% vs. 23%, respectively) rather than complete missing (4% vs. 0%). The imputation approaches differed in the cost-effectiveness results (the item imputation: − 61,079€/QALY vs. the aggregate imputation: 15,399€/QALY). Within the simulation study mean relative bias (< 5% vs. < 10%) and range of bias (< 38% vs. < 83%) to the true incremental cost and incremental QALYs were lower for the item imputation compared to the aggregate imputation. Even when 40% of data were missing, relative bias to true cost-effectiveness curves was less than 16% using the item imputation, but up to 39% for the aggregate imputation. Thus, the imputation strategies could have a significant impact on the cost-effectiveness conclusions when more than 20% of data are missing. The item imputation approach has better precision than the imputation at the aggregate level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Of Review: Chronic thoracic pain, even though not as prevalent as low back and neck pain, appears in approximately 30% of the general population. The severity of thoracic pain and degree of disability seems to be similar to other painful conditions. Despite this severity, interventions in managing chronic thoracic pain are less frequent, and there is a paucity of literature regarding epidural injections and facet joint interventions.Recent Findings: As with lumbar and cervical spine, a multitude of interventions are offered in managing chronic thoracic pain, including interventional techniques with epidural injections and facet joint interventions. A single randomized controlled trial (RCT) has been published with a 2-year follow-up of clinical effectiveness of the results. However, there have not been any cost-utility analysis studies pertaining to either epidural injections or facet joint interventions in thoracic pain. Based on the results of the RCT, a cost-utility analysis of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections was undertaken. Evaluation of the cost-utility analysis of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids in managing thoracic disc herniation, thoracic spinal stenosis, and thoracic discogenic or axial pain was assessed in 110 patients with a 2-year follow-up. Direct payment data from 2018 was utilized for procedural costs and indirect costs. Costs, including drug costs, were determined by multiplication of direct procedural payment data by a factor of 1.67 or addition of 40% of cost to accommodate for indirect payments and arrive at overall costs. Cost-utility analysis showed direct procedural cost of USD $1943.19, whereas total estimated costs year per QALY were USD $3245.12. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patent expiration for erectile dysfunction (ED) treatments like sildenafil means loss of exclusivity (LOE), and other manufacturers may bring generics to the market. This has resulted in price reductions, which influences the cost-effectiveness. In Norway, this development has led to a discussion on whether reimbursement should be granted. Cost-effectiveness analysis in this treatment area is scarce and more research is demanded.Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of three separate phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors in ED therapy in a Norwegian setting.Methods: The cost-effectiveness was analyzed using two patient populations: (1) 55-year-old patients diagnosed with ED and with no specific underlying illness, and (2) 55-year-old patients diagnosed with ED and with diabetes as an underlying illness. Using a state-transition Markov model with a 10-year time horizon, a "no-treatment" option was compared with three treatment strategies: (1) treatment using 50/100 mg sildenafil; (2) treatment using 10/20 mg tadalafil; (3) treatment using 10 mg vardenafil. A societal perspective was applied.Results: All PDE5 inhibitor treatment strategies were cost-effective compared to a "no-treatment" option, with cost per additional quality-adjusted life-year of less than €15,000. With a willingness-to-pay threshold greater than €13,500, sildenafil was estimated as the dominant treatment strategy. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated robust results. However, as the expected value of information was considerable, the cost-effectiveness of conducting further research to reduce uncertainty should be considered. Treating a diabetic population was less cost-effective for all PDE5 inhibitors and was associated with greater uncertainty with regard to choosing the optimal strategy.Conclusions: Sildenafil treatment of erectile dysfunction was a cost-effective alternative compared to tadalafil and vardenafil, as well as compared to a "no-treatment" option. Treating a diabetic population is less cost-effective for all PDE5 inhibitors and was associated with greater uncertainty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery (BS) compared to non-surgical treatment (NST) in Korean people with morbid obesity according to comorbidities and body mass index (BMI) severity. Methods: The target cohort was people with morbid obesity, defined as BMI of ≥ 35 kg/m2, or obese people with BMI of 30–34.9 kg/m2 having obesity-related comorbidities. A decision-tree model for 1-year obesity treatment and Markov model for the rest of life were used. In the decision-tree model, the comorbidity remission rate and BMI change after 1-year treatment were decided based on a prospective clinical trial. In the Markov model, the transition probabilities were calculated considering the BMI level and age. The starting age of 20 years, a cycle length of 1 year, a time horizon of 80 years, and a 5% discount rate were applied for the base case from the healthcare system perspective. Results: In the base case, BS improved quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and was the cost-effective option in total cohort (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of BS vs. NST was 674 USD/QALY). It was shown to be cost-effective in all subgroup analyses based on BMI level. In particular, BS was a dominant alternative for the subgroup with basal BMI of 35.0–37.4 kg/m2. Various sensitivity analyses showed the robustness of results indicating the cost-effectiveness of BS. Conclusion: BS at BMI of > 30 kg/m2 was more effective than NST for a reduction in BMI and remission of obesity-related comorbidities and was cost-effective in Korea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) can be treated using a vonoprazan-first strategy (first-line treatment with vonoprazan), or esomeprazole-first/rabeprazole-first strategies (first-line treatment with proton-pump inhibitors [PPIs], esomeprazole/rabeprazole, followed by a switch to vonoprazan). This cost-utility analysis used long-term simulation modeling to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a vonoprazan-first strategy compared with the esomeprazole-first and rabeprazole-first strategies.Methods: A Markov simulation model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of vonoprazan-first, esomeprazole-first, and rabeprazole-first strategies, comprising healing and maintenance therapies, over 5 years (4-week cycles). Healing therapy began with the administration of a normal dose of drug per real-world practice. If patients were not healed endoscopically, either a longer duration of healing therapy was provided (vonoprazan), the dose was increased (rabeprazole), or patients were switched to vonoprazan (immediately for esomeprazole, and after dose-escalation for rabeprazole, respectively). Healed patients received maintenance (lower/same dose as healing therapy). Recurrence resulted in re-challenge with healing therapy. Transition probabilities were derived from the results of indirect comparisons (network meta-analysis) and costs calculated from the Japanese payer perspective. Outcomes were defined as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with utilities based on published values.Results: Expected costs of the vonoprazan-, esomeprazole-, and rabeprazole-first strategies were ¥36,194, ¥76,719, and ¥41,105, respectively, over 5 years. QALY gains for vonoprazan-first strategy versus the esomeprazole- and rabeprazole-first strategies were 0.014 and 0.003, respectively. Both estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were dominant and robust to two sensitivity analyses.Conclusions: Vonoprazan-first strategy increased QALYs and appeared to be cost-effective for GERD patients compared with the esomeprazole- or rabeprazole-first strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Rotavirus gastroenteritis is the leading cause of severe diarrhoea among young children < 5 years old. Previous cost-effectiveness analyses on rotavirus (RV) vaccination in Thailand have generated conflicting results. The aim of this current study is to evaluate the economic impact of introducing RV vaccination in Thailand, using updated Thai epidemiological and cost data. Methods: Both cost-utility analysis (CUA) and budget impact analysis (BIA) of human rotavirus vaccine (HRV) under a universal mass vaccination (UMV) programme were conducted. A published static, deterministic, cross-sectional population model was adapted to assess costs and health outcomes associated with RV vaccination among Thai children < 5 years old during 1 year for CUA and over a 5-year period (2019–2023) for BIA. Data identified through literature review were incorporated into the model after consultation with local experts. Base case CUA was conducted from a societal perspective with quality-adjusted life year (QALY) discounted at 3% annually. Scenario analyses as well as one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the base case CUA results. Costs were updated to 2017. Results: At 99% coverage, HRV vaccination would substantially reduce RV-related disease burden. With an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Thai baht (THB) 49,923/QALY gained, HRV vaccination versus no vaccination was cost-effective when assessed against a local threshold of THB 160,000/QALY gained. Scenario and sensitivity analyses confirmed the cost-effectiveness with all resultant ICERs falling below the willingness-to-pay threshold. HRV use in the UMV programme was estimated to result in a net expenditure of about THB 255–281 million to the Thai government in the 5th year of the programme, depending on vaccine uptake. Conclusion: HRV vaccination is estimated to be cost-effective in Thailand. The budget impact following inclusion of HRV into the UMV programme is expected to be partially offset by substantial reductions in RV-related disease costs. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA GSK Study Identifier: HO-17-18213 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Diabetologe is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: The generic and preference-based instrument EQ-5D is available in a five-response levels version (EQ-5D-5L). A value set for the EQ-5D-5L based on a representative sample of the German population has recently been developed. The aim of this study was to estimate normative values of the EQ-5D-5L index for Germany, and to examine associations between the EQ-5D-5L and selected sociodemographic factors.Methods: The analysis was based on a representative sample (n = 4998) of the German general adult population in 2014. Participants had to rate their health-related quality of life on the EQ-5D-5L descriptive system as well as on a visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS). Normative values of the EQ-5D-5L index were estimated for selected sociodemographic characteristics. For the examination of associations between EQ-5D-5L index scores and selected sociodemographic factors, multivariate regression analyses were used.Results: The mean EQ-5D-5L index score of the total sample was 0.88 (SD 0.18), corresponding to an overall mean EQ-VAS score of 71.59 (SD 21.36). Female gender and increasing age were associated with a lower EQ-5D-5L index score (p < 0.001). Higher education, full-time employment and private health insurance were associated with a higher EQ-5D-5L index score (p < 0.001).Conclusion: This was the first study to estimate normative values of the EQ-5D-5L index for Germany based on a representative sample. The German normative values of the EQ-5D-5L are comparable to those reported for other countries. However, the mean EQ-5D-5L index score of the total sample was worse than those of the samples of studies from other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Germline mutations in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 genes (gBRCA1/2m) are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (BC) and ovarian cancer (OC). The aim of this study was to estimate the efficiency of providing germline BRCA1/2 testing to high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer (HGEOC) patients without family history of OC or BC and the subsequent testing and management of their relatives with gBRCA1/2m in Spain. Methods/patients: Incident HGEOC patients without family history of OC or BC who were gBRCA1/2m carriers and their relatives were simulated in a 50-year time horizon. The study compared two scenarios: BRCA1/2 testing vs no testing, using the perspective of the Spanish National Health Service. Cancer risk among gBRCA1/2m carriers was estimated based on their age and whether they had undergone risk-reducing surgeries. Direct healthcare costs and utilities of patients who developed EOC and BC were also included. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) with 5 thousand simulations was developed considering ± 25% of the base-case value. Results: The BRCA1/2-testing scenario amounted to €13,437,897.43 while the no-testing scenario amounted to €12,053,291.17. It was estimated that the screening test improved the quality of life among the patients' relatives by 43.8 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The incremental cost–utility ratio (ICUR) was €31,621.33/QALY in the base case. The PSA showed that 89.12% of the simulations were below the €50,000/QALY threshold. Conclusion: Providing this screening test to HGEOC patients and their relatives is cost-effective and it allows one to identify a target population with high risk of cancer to provide effective prevention strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]