An economic analysis of the cost of survival of micro preemies: A systematic review

ObjectiveThis study aimed to systematically review the current literature on the economic costs of micro preemie as well as evidence on the cost-effectiveness of interventions to improve outcomes for micro preemie babies with a birth weight of ≤500 g.MethodWe searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, ECONLIT, Business Source Premier and Cochrane Library for studies reporting costs of micro preemie from January 2000. Costs were inflated to 2019 United States dollars (US$). All full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and a quality assessment of included articles was conducted using the Drummond and the Larg and Moss checklists.ResultsThe search identified three studies that met the inclusion criteria; two cost-of-illness studies and one cost-effectiveness study. Across studies, the mean healthcare spending per micro preemie survivor (in 2019 US$) ranged from US$61,310 (birth admission) to US$263,958 (inpatient and outpatient for the first six months of life). One modelling study reported exclusive human milk diet for micro preemies at birth was more cost-effective compared to the standard approach with cow milk diet from the third-party payer and societal perspectives.ConclusionDespite significant advances in perinatal care and expanded access to life-saving equipment to improve survival outcomes of micro preemie, there remains a paucity of research on economic costs associated with these babies. No study has utilised quality-adjusted life-years as an outcome measure. Given the chronic conditions and long-term neurologic disability associated with micro preemie survivors, an estimate of the lifetime cost to the individual, healthcare providers and society would provide a benchmark of the potential cost-savings that could accrue from cost-effective interventions to improve the survival rate of micro preemies.     

Ethnoracial Disparity in Hospital Survival following Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation for Acute Variceal Bleeding in the United States

PurposeTo investigate the magnitude of racial/ethnic differences in hospital mortality after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation for acute variceal bleeding and whether hospital care processes contribute to them.MethodsPatients aged ≥18 years undergoing TIPS creation for acute variceal bleeding in the United States (n = 10,331) were identified from 10 years (2007–2016) available in the National Inpatient Sample. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between patient race and inpatient mortality, controlling for disease severity, treatment utilization, and hospital characteristics.ResultsA total of 6,350 (62%) patients were White, 1,780 (17%) were Hispanic, and 482 (5%) were Black. A greater proportion of Black patients were admitted to urban teaching hospitals (Black, n = 409 (85%); Hispanic, n = 1,310 (74%); and White, n = 4,802 (76%); P < .001) and liver transplant centers (Black, n = 215 (45%); Hispanic, n = 401 (23%); and White, n = 2,267 (36%); P < .001). Being Black was strongly associated with mortality (Black, 32% vs non-Black, 15%; odds ratio, 3.0 [95% confidence interval, 1.6–5.8]; P = .001), as assessed using the risk-adjusted regression model. This racial disparity disappeared in a sensitivity analysis including only patients with a maximum Child-Pugh score of 13 (odds ratio 1.2 [95% confidence interval, 0.4–3.6]; P = .68), performed to compensate for the absence of Model for End-stage Liver Disease scores. Ethnoracial differences in access to teaching hospitals, liver transplant centers, first-line endoscopy, and transfusion did not significantly contribute (P > .05) to risk-adjusted mortality.ConclusionsBlack patients have a 2-fold higher inpatient mortality than non-Black patients following TIPS creation for acute variceal bleeding, possibly related to greater disease severity before the procedure.     

Cost evolution of biological drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients in a tertiary hospital: Influential factors on price

ObjectiveTo assess the evolution of cost per patient/year and the cost per patient/year/drug in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving biological treatments. To analyze and quantify the factors influencing this evolution, such as the optimization of the biological drugs, the use of biosimilars, and official discounts and discounts obtained after negotiated procedures. In addition, to assess specific clinical parameters of disease activity in these patients.MethodsRetrospective, observational study conducted in a Spanish tertiary hospital. Adult patients diagnosed with RA under treatment from 2009 to 2017 were included.Results320, 270 and 389 patients were included in 2009, 2013 and 2017, respectively. The patient/year cost decreased from 10,789€ in 2009, 7491€ in 2013 to 7116€ in 2017. In 2017, due to the established competition, discounts of 14% and 29.5% were achieved on etanercept and its biosimilar; 11.5%, 17.8%, 17.9%, 17.3% on adalimumab, certolizumab, golimumab and tocilizumab IV respectively, and 24.6% and 43.1% on infliximab and its biosimilar. The percentage of patients optimized in 2017 was 35.2%. The annual saving in 2017 was 1,288,535€ (830,000€ due to dose optimization and/or administration regimens, 249,666€ corresponding to 7.5% of the official discount and 208,868€ after negotiated procedures).ConclusionThe annual cost per patient in RA decreased considerably due to different factors, such as discounts on the purchase of drugs due to official discounts and negotiated procedures, together with the optimization of therapies, the latter being the factor that contributed most to this decrease.     

左奥硝唑治疗厌氧菌感染的系统评价

摘 要 目的：系统评价左奥硝唑治疗厌氧菌感染的临床疗效及安全性，为临床合理用药提供参考。方法：计算机检索PubMed、Medline（viaOvidSP）、Cochrane Library、CNKI、WanFang Data、VIP数据库，搜集有关左奥硝唑治疗厌氧菌感染的随机对照试验（RCTs），检索时限均为建库至2018年10月1日，由两名研究人员独立交叉筛选文献，并进行质量评估和数据提取，采用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果：纳入16个RCTs，共计1 557例研究对象，其中左奥硝唑治疗厌氧菌感染的试验组779例，奥硝唑治疗厌氧菌感染的对照组778例。Meta分析结果显示：试验组的临床治愈率明显优于对照组，差异有统计学意义[OR=2.28，95%CI（1.60，3.25），P<0.000 01]；但腹部感染两组临床治愈率差异无统计学意义[OR=1.73，95%CI（0.76，3.96），P<0.19]。两组在细菌清除上效果相当，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。试验组在消化系统不良反应、过敏反应以及白细胞减少等方面的发生率略低于对照组，但差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；但在神经系统不良反应方面，试验组与对照组相比发生率较低，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。在假设其他治疗方案一致的情况下，试验组的成本及成本 效果比显著高于对照组，在一定程度上增加了患者的医疗负担。结论：基于目前的临床研究，左奥硝唑治疗厌氧菌感染可提高临床治愈率，减少神经系统不良反应的发生，但鉴于临床发生的药品不良反应均为轻中度，无需针对治疗处理，停药后即可缓解或消失，且奥硝唑的成本 效果比远低于左奥硝唑，因此，临床医生综合评估患者病情后仍可考虑选用奥硝唑治疗厌氧菌感染。而对于合并消化系统、神经系统、免疫系统、恶性肿瘤等基础疾病，以及药品不良反应不耐受的患者，则可优选左奥硝唑。     

Cost–Utility Analysis of Pembrolizumab Versus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With Different PD-L1 Expression Levels

To evaluate the cost–utility of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy as the first-line setting for metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the US health care system perspective, a Markov model was developed to compare the lifetime cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for untreated metastatic NSCLC, based on the clinical data derived from phase III randomized controlled trial (KEYNOTE- 042; ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02220894). Weibull distribution was fitted to simulate the parametric survival functions. Drug costs were collected from official websites, and utility values were obtained from published literature. Total costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed as primary output indicators. The impact of different PD-L1 expression levels on ICER was also evaluated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the model uncertainty. Compared with chemotherapy, patients treated with pembrolizumab provided an additional 1.13, 1.01, and 0.59 QALYs in patients with PD-L1 expression levels of ≥50%, ≥20%, and ≥1%, with corresponding incremental cost of $53,784, $47,479, and $39,827, respectively. The resultant ICERs of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy were $47,596, $47,184, and $68,061/QALY, in three expression levels of PD-L1, respectively, all of which did not exceed the WTP threshold of 180,000/QALY. Probability sensitivity analysis outcome supported that pembrolizumab exhibited evident advantage over chemotherapy to be cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analysis found that ICERs were most sensitive to utility value of pembrolizumab in progression survival state. All the adjustment of parameters did not qualitatively change the result. For treatment-naive, metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1+, pembrolizumab was estimated to be cost-effective compared with chemotherapy for all PD-L1 expression levels at a WTP threshold of $180,000/QALY in the context of the US health care system.