Search

When healthcare interventions prolong life, people consume medical and non-medical goods during the years of life they gain. It has been argued that the costs for medical consumption should be included in cost-effectiveness analyses from both a healthcare and societal perspective, and the costs for non-medical consumption should additionally be included when a societal perspective is applied. Standardized estimates of these so-called future costs are available in only a few countries and the impact of inclusion of these costs is likely to differ between countries. In this paper we present and compare future costs for five European countries and estimate the impact of including these costs on the cost-effectiveness of life-prolonging interventions. As countries differ in the availability of data, we illustrate how both individual- and aggregate-level data sources can be used to construct standardized estimates of future costs. Results show a large variation in costs between countries. The medical costs for the Netherlands, Germany, and the United Kingdom are large compared to Spain and Greece. Non-medical costs are higher in Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom than in Greece. The impact of including future costs on the ICER similarly varied between countries, ranging from €1000 to €35,000 per QALY gained. The variation between countries in impact on the ICER is largest when considering medical costs and indicate differences in both structure and level of healthcare financing in these countries. Case study analyses were performed in which we highlight the large impact of including future costs on ICER relative to willingness-to-pay thresholds., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is becoming an increasingly important approach to treatment of different malignant and non-malignant disorders. There is thus growing demand for diagnostic assays permitting the surveillance of donor/recipient chimerism posttransplant. Current techniques are heterogeneous, rendering uniform evaluation and comparison of diagnostic results between centers difficult. Leading laboratories from 10 European countries have therefore performed a collaborative study supported by a European grant, the EuroChimerism Concerted Action, with the aim to develop a standardized diagnostic methodology for the detection and monitoring of chimerism in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Following extensive analysis of a large set of microsatellite/short tandem repeat (STR) loci, the EuroChimerism (EUC) panel comprising 13 STR markers was established with the aim to optimally meet the specific requirements of quantitative chimerism analysis. Based on highly stringent selection criteria, the EUC panel provides multiple informative markers in any transplant setting. The standardized STR-PCR tests permit detection of donor- or recipient-derived cells at a sensitivity ranging between 0.8 and 1.6%. Moreover, the EUC assay facilitates accurate and reproducible quantification of donor and recipient hematopoietic cells. Wide use of the European-harmonized protocol for chimerism analysis presented will provide a basis for optimal diagnostic support and timely treatment decisions.

Background: Macrolides are a group of commonly prescribed antibiotics. There is some doubt surrounding the use of the newer macrolides in pregnancy., Objective: The present study aimed to compare outcomes of pregnancies exposed to the new macrolides clarithromycin, azithromycin and roxithromycin with non-teratogenic preparations., Methods: In this prospective, multinational, multicentre, controlled, observational study, information was obtained either from pregnant women or their healthcare professionals who contacted their local teratogen information services in Italy, Israel, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands and Germany seeking information after exposure to macrolides. The comparison group included women or their healthcare professional who contacted these centres with questions regarding known non-teratogenic preparations. Information on obstetric and other background parameters was collected at enrollment; after delivery, subjects or their healthcare professionals were contacted to ascertain pregnancy outcome parameters and other exposures through the remainder of the pregnancy., Results: A total of 608 women exposed to macrolides during pregnancy were enrolled; 511 of the exposures occurred during the first trimester. The comparison group comprised 773 women exposed to non-teratogenic preparations during the first trimester of pregnancy. No significant difference in the rate of major congenital malformations was found between the study group and the comparison group (3.4% vs 2.4%; p = 0.36; odds ratio (OR) 1.42; 95% CI 0.70, 2.88) or in the rate of cardiovascular malformations (1.6% vs 0.9%; p = 0.265; OR 1.91; 95% CI 0.63, 5.62). No significant differences were found between subgroups of macrolides in the rates of major congenital malformations or cardiac malformations, although for azithromycin this was of borderline significance., Conclusions: This study, in agreement with earlier smaller studies, suggests that the new macrolides do not pose a significantly increased risk of major congenital malformations or cardiac malformations.