The Cost-Effectiveness of a Novel SIAscopic Diagnostic Aid for the Management of Pigmented Skin Lesions in Primary Care: A Decision-Analytic Model

ObjectivesPigmented skin lesions are commonly presented in primary care. Appropriate diagnosis and management is challenging because the vast majority are benign. The MoleMate system is a handheld SIAscopy scanner integrated with a primary care diagnostic algorithm aimed at improving the management of pigmented skin lesions in primary care.MethodsThis decision-model–based economic evaluation draws on the results of a randomized controlled trial of the MoleMate system versus best practice (ISRCTN79932379) to estimate the expected long-term cost and health gain of diagnosis with the MoleMate system versus best practice in an English primary care setting. The model combines trial results with data from the wider literature to inform long-term prognosis, health state utilities, and cost.ResultsResults are reported as mean and incremental cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and value of information analysis. Over a lifetime horizon, the MoleMate system is expected to cost an extra £18 over best practice alone, and yield an extra 0.01 QALYs per patient examined. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is £1,896 per QALY gained, with a 66.1% probability of being below £30,000 per QALY gained. The expected value of perfect information is £43.1 million.ConclusionsGiven typical thresholds in the United Kingdom (£20,000–£30,000 per QALY), the MoleMate system may be cost-effective compared with best practice diagnosis alone in a primary care setting. However, there is considerable decision uncertainty, driven particularly by the sensitivity and specificity of MoleMate versus best practice, and the risk of disease progression in undiagnosed melanoma; future research should focus on reducing uncertainty in these parameters.     

Cost-Effectiveness of a Program to Eliminate Disparities in Pneumococcal Vaccination Rates in Elderly Minority Populations: An Exploratory Analysis

ObjectiveInvasive pneumococcal disease is a major cause of preventable morbidity and mortality in the United States, particularly among the elderly (>65 years). There are large racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination rates in this population. Here, we estimate the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical national vaccination intervention program designed to eliminate racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination in the elderly.MethodsIn an exploratory analysis, a Markov decision-analysis model was developed, taking a societal perspective and assuming a 1-year cycle length, 10-year vaccination program duration, and lifetime time horizon. In the base-case analysis, it was conservatively assumed that vaccination program promotion costs were $10 per targeted minority elder per year, regardless of prior vaccination status and resulted in the elderly African American and Hispanic pneumococcal vaccination rate matching the elderly Caucasian vaccination rate (65%) in year 10 of the program.ResultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness of the vaccination program relative to no program was $45,161 per quality-adjusted life-year gained in the base-case analysis. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the likelihood of the vaccination program being cost-effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained was 64% and 100%, respectively.ConclusionsIn a conservative analysis biased against the vaccination program, a national vaccination intervention program to ameliorate racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination would be cost-effective.     

High-Dose Hemodialysis versus Conventional In-Center Hemodialysis: A Cost-Utility Analysis from a UK Payer Perspective

ObjectiveTo investigate the cost-effectiveness of high-dose hemodialysis (HD) versus conventional in-center HD (ICHD), over a lifetime time horizon from the UK payer’s perspective.MethodsWe used a Markov modeling approach to compare high-dose HD (in-center or at home) with conventional ICHD using current and hypothetical home HD reimbursement tariffs in England. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as a cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).ResultsOver a lifetime, high-dose HD in-center (5 sessions/wk) is associated with higher per-patient costs and QALYs (increases of £108,713 and 0.862, respectively) versus conventional ICHD. The corresponding ICER (£126,106/QALY) indicates that high-dose HD in-center is not cost-effective versus conventional ICHD at a UK willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 to £30,000. High-dose HD at home is associated with lower total costs (£522 less per patient) and a per-patient QALY increase of 1.273 compared with ICHD under the current Payment-by Results reimbursement tariff (£456/wk). At an increased home HD tariff (£575/wk), the ICER for high-dose HD at home versus conventional ICHD is £17,404/QALY. High-dose HD at home had a 62% to 84% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 to £30,000/QALY.ConclusionsAlthough high-dose HD has the potential to offer improved clinical and quality-of-life outcomes over conventional ICHD, under the current UK Payment-by Results reimbursement scheme, it would be considered cost-effective from a UK payer perspective only if conducted at home.     

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in People With Mental Disorders: A Dynamic Decision Analytical Model

ObjectivesPeople with mental disorders are more likely to smoke than the general population. The objective of this study is to develop a decision analytical model that estimates long-term cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in this population.MethodsA series of Markov models were constructed to estimate average lifetime smoking-attributable inpatient cost and expected quality-adjusted life-years. The model parameters were estimated using a variety of data sources. The model incorporated uncertainty through probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulations. It also generated tables presenting incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the proposed interventions with varying incremental costs and incremental quit rates. We used data from 2 published trials to demonstrate the model’s ability to make projections beyond the observational time frame.ResultsThe average smoker’s smoking-attributable inpatient cost was 3 times higher and health utility was 5% lower than ex-smokers. The intervention in the trial with a statistically insignificant difference in quit rate (19% vs 25%; P=.2) showed a 45% to 49% chance of being cost-effective compared with the control at willingness-to-pay thresholds of £20 000 to £30 000/quality-adjusted life-years. The second trial had a significant outcome (quit rate 35.9% vs 15.6%; P<.001), and the corresponding probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 65%.ConclusionsThis model provides a consistent platform for clinical trials to estimate the potential lifetime cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for people with mental disorders and could help commissioners direct resources to the most cost-effective programs. However, direct comparisons of results between trials must be interpreted with caution owing to their different designs and settings.     

Evaluation of a Stratified National Breast Screening Program in the United Kingdom: An Early Model-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Objectives

To identify the incremental costs and consequences of stratified national breast screening programs (stratified NBSPs) and drivers of relative cost-effectiveness.

Cost-Effectiveness of Venetoclax Plus Obinutuzumab Versus Chlorambucil Plus Obinutuzumab for the First-Line Treatment of Adult Patients With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: An Extended Societal View

ObjectivesEfficacy of venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (VenO) compared with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (ClbO) for treatment-naïve adult patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with coexisting medical conditions was investigated in CLL14 (NCT02242942). Our aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of VenO versus ClbO for these patients from a Dutch societal perspective.MethodsA 3-state partitioned survival model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of VenO. The outcome of the analysis was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Uncertainty was explored through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, scenario analyses, and value of information analysis (VOI).ResultsThe base case resulted in a discounted ICER −49 928 EUR/QALY gained (with incremental negative costs and positive effects). None of the ICERs resulted from deterministic sensitivity and scenario analyses exceeded the chosen willingness-to-pay threshold of 20 000 EUR/QALY, and > 99% of the iterations in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis were cost-effective. VOI analyses showed a maximum expected value of eliminating all model parameter uncertainty of 183 591 EUR.ConclusionsOur study demonstrated VenO being dominant over ClbO in treatment-naïve adult patients with CLL assuming a Dutch societal perspective. We concluded that our results are robust as tested through sensitivity and scenario analyses. Additionally, the VOI analyses confirmed that our current evidence base is strong enough to generate reliable results for our study. Nevertheless, further research based on real-world data or longer follow-up period could further contribute to the robustness of the current study’s conclusions.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of coronary arteries bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) through drug stent in iran: a comparative study

Emerging evidence suggests that structured and progressive exercise underpinned by a cognitive behavioural approach can improve functional outcomes in patients with neurogenic claudication (NC). However, evidence surrounding its economic benefits is lacking. To estimate the economic costs, health-related quality of life outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a physical and psychological group intervention (BOOST programme) versus best practice advice (BPA) in older adults with NC. An economic evaluation was conducted based on data from a pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial. The base-case economic evaluation took the form of an intention-to-treat analysis conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services (PSS) perspective and separately from a societal perspective. Costs (£ 2018–2019 prices) were collected prospectively over a 12 month follow-up period. A bivariate regression of costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with multiple imputation of missing data, was conducted to estimate the incremental cost per QALY gained and the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) of the BOOST programme in comparison to BPA. Sensitivity and pre-specified subgroup analyses explored uncertainty and heterogeneity in cost-effectiveness estimates. Participants (N?=?435) were randomised to the BOOST programme (n?=?292) or BPA (n?=?143). Mean (standard error [SE]) NHS and PSS costs over 12 months were £1,974 (£118) in the BOOST arm versus £1,827 (£169) in the BPA arm (p?=?0.474). Mean (SE) QALY estimates were 0.620 (0.009) versus 0.599 (0.006), respectively (p?=?0.093). The probability that the BOOST programme is cost-effective ranged between 67 and 83% (NHS and PSS perspective) and 79–89% (societal perspective) at cost-effectiveness thresholds between £15,000 and £30,000 per QALY gained. INMBs ranged between £145 and £464 at similar cost-effectiveness thresholds. The cost-effectiveness results remained robust to sensitivity analyses. The BOOST programme resulted in modest QALY gains over the 12 month follow-up period. Future studies with longer intervention and follow-up periods are needed to address uncertainty around the health-related quality of life impacts and cost-effectiveness of such programmes. Trial registration This study has been registered in the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry, reference number ISRCTN12698674. Registered on 10 November 2015.     

Cost-Effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Prostate Cancer Screening: A Microsimulation Study

ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with combinations of targeted biopsy (TBx) and systematic biopsy (SBx) for early prostate cancer detection in Sweden.MethodsA cost-utility analysis was conducted from a lifetime societal perspective using a microsimulation model. Five strategies included no screening and quadrennial screening for men aged 55 to 69 years using SBx alone, TBx on positive MRI (MRI + TBx), combined TBx/SBx on positive MRI (MRI + TBx/SBx), and SBx on negative MRI with TBx/SBx on positive MRI (MRI − SBx, MRI + TBx/SBx). Test characteristics were based on a recent Cochrane review. We predicted the number of biopsies, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.ResultsThe screening strategies were classified in Sweden as high costs per QALY gained compared with no screening. Using MRI + TBx and MRI + TBx/SBx reduced the number of biopsy episodes across a lifetime by approximately 40% compared with SBx alone. Both strategies showed strong dominance over SBx alone and MRI − SBx, MRI + TBx. Compared with MRI + TBx, the MRI + TBx/SBx strategy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of more than €200 000 per QALY gained, which was classified in Sweden as a very high cost. These predictions were robust in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Limitations included generalizability of the model assumptions and uncertainty regarding the health-state values and study heterogeneity from the Cochrane review.ConclusionsMRI + TBx and MRI + TBx/SBx showed strong dominance over alternative screening strategies. MRI + TBx resulted in similar or marginally lower gains in QALYs and lower costs than MRI + TBx/SBx. MRI + TBx was considered the optimal choice among the screening strategies.     

Cost-Utility Analysis of Direct-Acting Antivirals for Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis C Genotype 1 and 6 in Vietnam

ObjectiveVery few cost-utility analyses have either evaluated direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) on hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 6 patients or undertaken societal perspective. Recently, DAAs have been introduced into the Vietnamese health insurance drug list for chronic hepatitis C (CHC) treatment without empirical cost-effectiveness evidence. This study was conducted to generate these data on DAAs among CHC patients with genotypes 1 and 6 in Vietnam.MethodsA hybrid decision-tree and Markov model was employed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of available DAAs, including (1) sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, (2) sofosbuvir/velpatasvir, and (3) sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir, with pegylated-interferon plus ribavirin (PR). Primary data collection was conducted in Vietnam to identify costs and utility values. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated from societal and payer perspectives. Uncertainty and scenario analyses and value of information analyses were performed.ResultsAll DAAs were cost-saving as compared with PR in CHC patients with genotypes 1 and 6 in Vietnam, and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir was the most cost-saving regimen, from both societal and payer perspectives. From the societal perspective, DAAs were associated with the increment of quality-adjusted life-years by 1.33 to 1.35 and decrement of costs by $6519 to $7246. Uncertainty and scenario analyses confirmed the robustness of base-case results, whereas the value of information analyses suggested the need for further research on relative treatment efficacies among DAA regimens.ConclusionsAllocating resources for DAA treatment for HCV genotype 1 and 6 is surely a rewarding public health investment in Vietnam. It is recommended that the government rapidly scale up treatment and enable financial accessibility for HCV patients.     

Cost-Effectiveness of Truncated Therapy for Hepatitis C Based on Rapid Virologic Response

BackgroundShortened courses of treatment with pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin for patients with hepatitis C virus infection who experience rapid virologic response can be effective in appropriately selected patients. The cost-effectiveness of truncated therapy is not known.ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of response-guided therapy versus standard-duration therapy on the basis of best available evidence.MethodsWe developed a decision model for chronic hepatitis C virus infection representing two treatment strategies: 1) standard-duration therapy with pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin for 48 weeks in patients with genotype 1 or 4 and for 24 weeks in patients with genotype 2 or 3 and 2) truncated therapy (i.e., 50% decrease in treatment duration) in patients with rapid virologic response. Patients for whom truncated therapy failed began standard-duration therapy guided by genotype. We used a Markov model to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, mean lifetime costs were $46,623 ± $2,483 with standard-duration therapy and $42,354 ± $2,489 with truncated therapy. Mean lifetime quality-adjusted life-years were similar between the groups (17.1 ± 0.7 with standard therapy; 17.2 ± 0.7 with truncated therapy). Across model simulations, the probability of truncated therapy being economically dominant (i.e., both cost saving and more effective) was 78.6%. The results were consistent when we stratified the data by genotype. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the results were sensitive only to changes in treatment efficacy.ConclusionTruncated therapy based on rapid virologic response is likely to be cost saving for treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection. Cost-effectiveness varied with small changes in relative treatment efficacy.     

An Empiric Estimate of the Value of Life: Updating the Renal Dialysis Cost-Effectiveness Standard

ObjectivesProposals to make decisions about coverage of new technology by comparing the technology's incremental cost-effectiveness with the traditional benchmark of dialysis imply that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dialysis is seen a proxy for the value of a statistical year of life. The frequently used ratio for dialysis has, however, not been updated to reflect more recently available data on dialysis.MethodsWe developed a computer simulation model for the end-stage renal disease population and compared cost, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life expectancy of current dialysis practice relative to three less costly alternatives and to no dialysis. We estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for these alternatives relative to the next least costly alternative and no dialysis and analyzed the population distribution of the ratios. Model parameters and costs were estimated using data from the Medicare population and a large integrated health-care delivery system between 1996 and 2003. The sensitivity of results to model assumptions was tested using 38 scenarios of one-way sensitivity analysis, where parameters informing the cost, utility, mortality and morbidity, etc. components of the model were by perturbed +/?50%.ResultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dialysis of current practice relative to the next least costly alternative is on average $129,090 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) ($61,294 per year), but its distribution within the population is wide; the interquartile range is $71,890 per QALY, while the 1st and 99th percentiles are $65,496 and $488,360 per QALY, respectively. Higher incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were associated with older age and more comorbid conditions. Sensitivity to model parameters was comparatively small, with most of the scenarios leading to a change of less than 10% in the ratio.ConclusionsThe value of a statistical year of life implied by dialysis practice currently averages $129,090 per QALY ($61,294 per year), but is distributed widely within the dialysis population. The spread suggests that coverage decisions using dialysis as the benchmark may need to incorporate percentile values (which are higher than the average) to be consistent with the Rawlsian principles of justice of preserving the rights and interests of society's most vulnerable patient groups.     

Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium/vilanterol combination therapy compared to tiotropium monotherapy among symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the UK

Background

The cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium bromide-vilanterol (UMEC/VI) versus tiotropium monotherapy in the UK was assessed using a UMEC/VI treatment-specific economic model based on a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) disease-progression model.

Methods

The model was implemented as a linked-equation model to estimate COPD progression and associated health service costs, and its impact on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and survival. Statistical risk equations for clinical endpoints and resource use were derived from the ECLIPSE and TORCH studies, respectively. For the selected timeframe (1–40 years) and probabilistic analysis, model outputs included disaggregated costs, total costs, exacerbations, life-years and QALYs gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results

Random-effects meta-analysis of tiotropium comparator trials estimated treatment effect of UMEC/VI as 92.17 mL (95 % confidence interval: 61.52, 122.82) in forced expiratory volume in 1 s. With this benefit, UMEC/VI resulted in an estimated annual exacerbation reduction of 0.04 exacerbations/patient and 0.36 life years gained compared to tiotropium over patient lifetime. With an additional 0.18 QALYs/patient and an additional lifetime cost of £372/patient at price parity, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of UMEC/VI compared to tiotropium was £2088/QALY. This ICER increased to £17,541/QALY when price of UMEC/VI was increased to that of indacaterol plus tiotropium in separate inhalers. The ICER improved when model duration was reduced from patient lifetime to 1 or 5 years, or when treatment effect was assumed to last for 12 months following treatment initiation.

Conclusion

UMEC/VI can be considered a cost-effective alternative to tiotropium at a certain price.

     

Optimizing the Position and Use of Omalizumab for Severe Persistent Allergic Asthma Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BackgroundThere has been some controversy on whether the costs of omalizumab outweigh its benefits for severe persistent allergic asthma.ObjectivesThis study aimed to resolve the uncertainties and limitations of previous analyses and establish the cost-effectiveness of omalizumab under the list price and Patient Access Scheme (PAS) discounted price for the UK National Health Service.MethodsA decision-analytic model was developed to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of omalizumab under the perspective of the National Health Service. Outcomes were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Patient subgroups were defined post hoc on the basis of data collected in clinical trials: previous hospitalization, on maintenance oral corticosteroids, and three or more previous exacerbations.ResultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio varied from £30,109 to £57,557 per QALY gained depending on the population considered using the PAS price; incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were over a third higher using the list price. Omalizumab is likely to be cost-effective at the threshold of £30,000 per QALY gained in the severe subgroups if the improvement in health-related quality of life from omalizumab is mapped from an asthma-specific measure to the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (vs. the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire directly collected from patients) or asthma mortality refers to death after hospitalization from asthma (vs. asthma-mortality risk in the community).ConclusionsAlthough the cost-effectiveness of omalizumab is more favorable under the PAS price, it represents good value for money only in severe subgroups and under optimistic assumptions regarding asthma mortality and improvement in health-related quality of life. For these reasons, omalizumab should be carefully targeted to ensure value for money.     

Cost-Effectiveness of Using a Molecular Diagnostic Test to Improve Preoperative Diagnosis of Thyroid Cancer

ObjectiveFine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) is a safe and inexpensive diagnostic procedure for evaluating thyroid nodules.Up to 25% of the results from an FNAB, however, may not be diagnostic or may be indeterminate, leading to a subsequent diagnostic thyroid surgery. A new molecularly based diagnostic test could potentially reduce indeterminate cytological results and, with high accuracy, provide a definitive diagnosis for cancer in thyroid nodules. The aim of the study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of utilizing a molecular diagnostic (DX) test as an adjunct to FNAB, compared with NoDX, to improve the preoperative diagnosis of thyroid nodules.MethodsWe constructed a patient-level simulation model to estimate the clinical and economic outcomes of using a DX test compared with current practice (NoDX) for the diagnosis of thyroid nodules. By using a cost-effectiveness framework, we measured incremental clinical benefits in terms of quality-adjusted life-years and incremental costs over a 10-year time horizon.ResultsAssuming 95% sensitivity and specificity of the Dx test when used as an adjunct to FNAB, the utilization of the DX test resulted in a gain of 0.046 quality-adjusted life-years (95% confidence interval 0.019–0.078) and a saving of $1087 (95% confidence interval $691–$1533) in direct costs per patient. If the cost of the Dx test is less than $1087 per test, we expect to save quality-adjusted life-years and reduce costs when it is utilized. Sensitivity of the DX test, compared with specificity, had a larger influence on the overall outcomes.     

A New Type 2 Diabetes Microsimulation Model to Estimate Long-Term Health Outcomes,Costs, and Cost-Effectiveness

ObjectivesThis study aimed to develop a microsimulation model to estimate the health effects, costs, and cost-effectiveness of public health and clinical interventions for preventing/managing type 2 diabetes.MethodsWe combined newly developed equations for complications, mortality, risk factor progression, patient utility, and cost—all based on US studies—in a microsimulation model. We performed internal and external validation of the model. To demonstrate the model’s utility, we predicted remaining life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and lifetime medical cost for a representative cohort of 10 000 US adults with type 2 diabetes. We then estimated the cost-effectiveness of reducing hemoglobin A1c from 9% to 7% among adults with type 2 diabetes, using low-cost, generic, oral medications.ResultsThe model performed well in internal validation; the average absolute difference between simulated and observed incidence for 17 complications was < 8%. In external validation, the model was better at predicting outcomes in clinical trials than in observational studies. The cohort of US adults with type 2 diabetes was projected to have an average of 19.95 remaining life-years (from mean age 61), incur $187 729 in discounted medical costs, and accrue 8.79 discounted QALYs. The intervention to reduce hemoglobin A1c increased medical costs by $1256 and QALYs by 0.39, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $9103 per QALY.ConclusionsUsing equations exclusively derived from US studies, this new microsimulation model achieves good prediction accuracy in US populations. The model can be used to estimate the long-term health impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of interventions for type 2 diabetes in the United States.     

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Alternative Antiviral Strategies for the Treatment of HBeAg-Positive and HBeAg-Negative Chronic Hepatitis B in the United Kingdom

BackgroundSeven drugs are licensed for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in the United Kingdom. Which initial treatment, secondary therapy, and whether antivirals should be given alone or in combination are questions of considerable uncertainty.ObjectiveThe aim of this model was to undertake a comprehensive economic evaluation of all antiviral treatments for CHB to recommend the most cost-effective therapeutic sequence.MethodsWe developed a probabilistic Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of all clinically relevant antiviral treatment sequences for nucleos(t)ide-naive adults with hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg)-positive or HBeAg-negative CHB. Relative rates of HBeAg seroconversion and viral suppression were obtained from a network meta-analysis. Data on mortality, antiviral drug resistance, durability of response, adverse events, and costs were obtained from published literature. Results are reported in terms of lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and expected net benefit.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, pegylated interferon alpha-2a (peg-IFN α-2a) followed by tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was most effective and cost-effective in HBeAg-positive patients, with a cost of £7488 per QALY gained compared with no treatment. In HBeAg-negative patients, peg-IFN α-2a followed by entecavir was most effective and cost-effective, with a cost of £6981 per QALY gained. The model was robust to a wide range of sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsPeg-IFN α-2a followed by tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or entecavir is the most effective antiviral treatment strategy for people with both variants of CHB. At a cost of less than £10,000 per QALY gained, these sequences are considered cost-effective in England and Wales. The results of this analysis were used to inform 2013 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline recommendations.     

Cost Effectiveness of the Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor Sacubitril/Valsartan for Patients with Chronic Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction in the Netherlands: A Country Adaptation Analysis Under the Former and Current Dutch Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines

Objectives

To describe the adaptation of a global health economic model to determine whether treatment with the angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 is cost effective compared with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril in adult patients with chronic heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in the Netherlands; and to explore the effect of performing the cost-effectiveness analyses according to the new pharmacoeconomic Dutch guidelines (updated during the submission process of LCZ696), which require a value-of-information analysis and the inclusion of indirect medical costs of life-years gained.

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Catheter Ablation and Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Atrial Fibrillation Treatment Using Discrete Event Simulation

ObjectivesTo evaluate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of 3 widely used atrial fibrillation (AF) treatments from the perspectives of Chinese healthcare system: antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs), ThermoCool SmartTouch guided by ablation index (STAI), and second-generation cryoballoon (CB2).MethodsA discrete event simulation (DES) model was implemented to compare the lifetime cost-effectiveness of AADs, STAI, and CB2. AF disease progression was explicitly modeled based on the Atrial Fibrillation Progression Trial clinical study results. The base-case analysis assumed that patients with paroxysmal AF (PAF) entered the model at the age of 55 years and had a CHA2DS2-VASc (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ( > 65 = 1 point, > 75 = 2 points), Diabetes, previous Stroke/transient ischemic attack (2 points)-Vascular disease (peripheral arterial disease, previous myocardial infarction, aortic atheroma), Age 65 to 74 years, and Sex category) score of 2 for males and 3 for females. Model parameter uncertainties were incorporated throughout the DES simulation with full probabilistic model parameterization.ResultsThe lifetime cost-effectiveness evaluations showed that patients treated with AADs gained an average of 4.98 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and 9.63 life-years (LYs) at an average cost of US dollar (USD) 15 374. Patients treated with CB2 gained 5.92 QALYs and 10.74 LYs at an average cost of USD 26 811. The STAI group gained an average of 6.55 QALYs and 11.57 LYs at an average cost of USD 24 722. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios was USD 5927 and USD 12 167 per QALY for STAI versus AADs and CB2 versus AADs, respectively. Assuming the willingness-to-pay threshold for China is USD 30 390 per QALY, both ablation treatments will be cost-effective compared with AADs for patients with PAF.ConclusionsThe DES model demonstrated that catheter ablations are more cost-effective than AADs for patients with PAF under the healthcare system in China. Among catheter ablation technologies, STAI provides better outcomes at lower costs.     

Cost-Utility Analysis Comparing Heavy-Weight and Light-Weight Mesh in Laparoscopic Surgery for Unilateral Inguinal Hernias

Background

Hernioplasty is one of the most frequent surgeries in the UK. Light-weight mesh (LWM) has the potential to reduce chronic groin pain but its cost-effectiveness compared with heavy-weight mesh (HWM) is unknown.

Objective

Our objective was to conduct a cost-utility analysis between laparoscopic hernioplasty with HWM and LWM for unilateral inguinal hernias.

Methods

A Markov model simulated costs and health outcomes over a period of 1 year (2012) from the societal and National Health Service (NHS) perspective (England). The main outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Surgery results were gleaned from the randomized control trial by Bittner et al. Other input parameters were drawn from the literature and public sources of the NHS.

Results

From the societal perspective, LWM induces lower incremental costs (?£88.85) than HWM but yields a slightly smaller incremental effect (?0.00094 QALYs). The deterministic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for HWM compared with LWM amounts to £94,899 per QALY, while the probabilistic ICER is £118,750 (95 % confidence interval [CI] £57,603–180,920). Owing to the withdrawal of productivity losses from the NHS perspective, LWM causes higher incremental costs (£13.09) and an inferior incremental effect (?0.00093), resulting in a dominance of HWM over LWM (ICER 95 % CI ?£12,382 to ?£21,590).

Conclusions

There is no support for the adoption of LWM as standard treatment from an NHS perspective. However, given the small differences between HWM and LWM, LWM has at least the potential of improving patient outcomes and reducing expenditure from the societal perspective.     

Comparing the Cost-Effectiveness of Rituximab Maintenance and Radioimmunotherapy Consolidation versus Observation Following First-Line Therapy in Patients with Follicular Lymphoma

BackgroundPhase 3 randomized trials have shown that maintenance rituximab (MR) therapy or radioimmunotherapy (RIT) consolidation following frontline therapy can improve progression-free survival for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL), but the cost-effectiveness of these approaches with respect to observation has not been examined using a common modeling framework.ObjectivesTo evaluate and compare the economic impact of MR and RIT consolidation versus observation, respectively, following the first-line induction therapy for patients with advanced-stage FL.MethodsWe developed Markov models to estimate patients’ lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and life-years (LYs) after MR, RIT, and observation following frontline FL treatment from the US payer’s perspective. Progression risks, adverse event probabilities, costs, and utilities were estimated from clinical data of Primary RItuximab and MAintenance (PRIMA) trial, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) trial (for MR), and First-line Indolent Trial (for RIT) and the published literature. We evaluated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for direct comparisons between MR/RIT and observation. Model robustness was addressed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ResultsCompared with observation, MR provided an additional 1.089 QALYs (1.099 LYs) and 1.399 QALYs (1.391 LYs) on the basis of the PRIMA trial and the ECOG trial, respectively, and RIT provided an additional 1.026 QALYs (1.034 LYs). The incremental cost per QALY gained was $40,335 (PRIMA) or $37,412 (ECOG) for MR and $40,851 for RIT. MR and RIT had comparable incremental QALYs before first progression, whereas RIT had higher incremental costs of adverse events due to higher incidences of cytopenias.ConclusionsMR and RIT following frontline FL therapy demonstrated favorable and similar cost-effectiveness profiles. The model results should be interpreted within the specific clinical settings of each trial. Selection of MR, RIT, or observation should be based on patient characteristics and expected trade-offs for these alternatives.