Economic analysis of lenograstim in the correction of neutropenia following chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

A prospective economic analysis of lenograstim and placebo was performed as part of a randomised double-blind trial in 162 patients receiving chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). The primary clinical end-point was the percentage of patients experiencing > or = 1 documented infection in each treatment group. The cost of hospitalisation and the cost of medical services used were the primary economic end-points. Economic analysis was based on the French Hospital perspective. Over the 56-day study period, patients in the placebo group received more days of inpatient intravenous (8.9 vs 5.3 days; p < 0.01) and oral (5.3 vs 4.2 days) antibiotic therapy than those in the lenograstim group. This difference was due to a higher rate of documented infection in the placebo group. Patients treated with placebo also spent more days in hospital for reasons other than administration of chemotherapy (18.5 vs 14.4; p < 0.05). The number of days of chemotherapy was significantly greater in the lenograstim group than in the placebo group (19.4 vs 17.5; p < 0.001) because of shorter delays between chemotherapy cycles in the lenograstim group. The use of lenograstim to prevent chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with NHL was associated with a reduction in total direct medical costs (excluding the cost of lenograstim) of FF7297 as a result of reduced patient morbidity. Furthermore, the higher rate of completion of chemotherapy in the lenograstim group may lead to better long term survival; this observation deserves further clinical investigation.     

Economic evaluation of lenograstim for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with small cell lung cancer

The impact of lenograstim, recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, on healthcare costs was evaluated on the basis of the results of a clinical trial of the drug in patients receiving VICE (vincristine, ifosfamide, carboplatin and etoposide) chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). The use of lenograstim resulted in a significant (p < 0.03) increase in the cumulative chemotherapy dose intensity (125% with lenograstim vs 118% without). Lenograstim was found to have no significant impact on the use of healthcare resources for administration of chemotherapy, chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, and associated infections. The cost of healthcare for the lenograstim group (excluding lenograstim acquisition costs) was 700 pounds higher per patient than that for the group not treated with lenograstim (95% CI -930 pounds to 2300 pounds). The use of lenograstim to intensify the chemotherapy dose is likely to increase the costs of treatment for SCLC. However, any increased costs need to be balanced against the potential cost savings associated with the possible long term benefits resulting from chemotherapy dose intensification.     

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of lenograstim. Conclusions and future directions

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of lenograstim, a new recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rHuG-CSF), as an adjunct to cancer chemotherapy, 3 phase III randomised clinical trials were recently conducted in Europe in patients with inflammatory breast cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and small cell lung cancer. To explore the economic implications of lenograstim therapy, a multinational pharmacoeconomics programme was undertaken using data collected during these clinical trials. This programme consisted of concurrent prospective economic evaluations undertaken by study teams in France (non-Hodgkin's lymphoma), Germany and Italy (a combined evaluation in inflammatory breast cancer) and the UK (small cell lung cancer). In these studies, attention was focused on the direct costs of medical care-principally the costs of cancer chemotherapy as well as its associated morbidity. In 2 of the pharmacoeconomic evaluations (i.e. the French, German/Italian), lenograstim was found to generate cost savings as a result of reductions in morbidity associated with chemotherapy. However, the cost of lenograstim therapy would be likely to exceed these savings, leading to an overall increase in the costs of cancer treatment. Whether the use of lenograstim is cost-effective will therefore largely depend on its impact on patient survival and quality of life, and current practical use. These issues are the focus of additional clinical studies currently underway. In addition, new research is focusing on the clinical benefits of lenograstim in other areas of oncology and haematology. Further pharmacoeconomic studies in these areas are also warranted.     

Comparison of lenograstim and filgrastim on haematological effects after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation with high-dose chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of lenograstim and filgrastim on haematological recovery following an autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) with high-dose chemotherapy. METHODS: A retrospective case-controlled study. RESULTS: Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) recovery above 0.5 x 10(9)/l and white blood cell (WBC) recovery above 4 x 10(9)/l for 3 consecutive days was achieved earlier with filgrastim than with lenograstim ((13.2 +/- 8.0 vs 19.0 +/- 10.0 days, p = 0.004), (16.9 +/- 9.7 vs 29.9 +/- 16.6 days, p = 0.001), respectively). The platelet recovery above 20 x 10(9)/l was also achieved earlier with filgrastim than with lenograstim (19.5 +/- 11.6 vs 27.2 +/- 13.8 days, p = 0.006). Furthermore, filgrastim-treated patients received fewer days of granulocyte colony simulating factor (G-CSF) administration (12.5 +/- 7.0 vs 18.6 +/- 8.5 days, p = 0.001) and spent less time in hospital (23.7 +/- 10.9 vs 32.0 +/- 17.6 days, p = 0.009). Duration of antibiotic administration was also significantly shorter in the filgrastim group (13.6 +/- 7.6 vs 29.1 +/- 19.8 days, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing PBSCT following high-dose chemotherapy, filgrastim significantly reduced the duration of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and days of G-CSF administration, and led to earlier hospital discharge compared with lenograstim.     

Effect of lenograstim on the cost of autologous bone marrow transplantation. A preliminary communication

High dose chemotherapy and autologous bone marrow transplantation (BMT) can produce prolonged remission in patients with malignant lymphoma or solid tumours. However, neutropenia is a serious complication of treatment in patients with these diseases. In this study, we investigated the costs and effects of using lenograstim, a recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, to treat neutropenia in 16 patients with lymphoma or solid tumours. The cost of lenograstim was not included in the calculations. The duration of neutropenia and hospitalisation were both lower in patients who received lenograstim compared with no treatment. The mean cost of autologous BMT was FF142,000 in patients who received lenograstim, compared with FF166,000 in patients who did not. Savings were largely attributable to decreased expenditure on hospitalisation in the lenograstim-treated group. The cost of 14 days' treatment with lenograstim was estimated at FF10,500, based on a daily dosage of 150 micrograms/m2/day.     

Alcoholism. The cost of illness in the Federal Republic of Germany

The purpose of this study was to estimate the direct and indirect costs of alcoholism in the Federal Republic of Germany. Direct costs comprised treatment costs, while indirect costs consisted mainly of costs incurred as a result of work time lost, as well as costs related to premature retirement and premature mortality. The costs of alcoholism were estimated using the aggregated statistics of several social security organisations and official statistics. For the purposes of this study, alcoholism was defined as alcohol dependence syndrome [9th revision of the International Classification of Diseases code (ICD) 303], alcoholic chronic liver disease and cirrhosis (ICD 571.0 to 571.3), and alcoholic psychoses (ICD 291). The reference period consisted of the years 1985 to 1991. All statistics and all analyses were limited to the so-called old states of Germany, within the boundaries as they were before 3rd October 1990. The overall monetary burden (in 1990 Deutschemarks) of alcoholism in the western part of Germany in 1990 was estimated to be DM5975 million. Alcoholism is associated with considerably more indirect costs (DM4422 million) than direct costs (DM1553 million). The predominance of indirect costs is mainly the result of the very high premature mortality of patients with alcoholism. Thus, the cost of premature mortality makes up more than half of the indirect costs of alcoholism (DM2284 million), while about a quarter of the indirect costs (DM1150 million) are associated with inability to work. Early retirement accounts for a similar amount (DM988 million). The majority of direct costs is accounted for by treatment in acute hospitals (DM869 million). Costs incurred as a result of rehabilitation treatment (DM373 million) and ambulatory care (DM331 million) are also considerable.     

Adverse drug reaction monitoring--cost and benefit considerations. Part II: cost and preventability of adverse drug reactions leading to hospital admission

Although adverse drug reactions (ADR) are common, there is little knowledge on their direct, indirect and intangible costs. Our study is focused on the direct costs caused by ADR leading to hospital admission. The objective is to quantify the achievable financial benefits if avoidable ADRs were actually prevented by appropriate measures. A literature search on two subjects was done, first on length of stay (LOS) of hospital admissions due to ADR as a proxy measure for direct costs and second on their preventability. Thirteen studies on the length of stay of hospital admissions due to ADR, published between 1975 and 1996, were identified. The median LOS is 8.7 days (lower quartile=8.0 days; upper quartile=12.3 days). Assuming 4.5 million admissions to departments of internal medicine in Germany with a cost of DM 465 per hospital day and a median proportion of 5.8% of medical hospital admission to be due to ADR this yields direct costs of 1050 million DM per year in Germany. A cost table for other regions is provided. Preventability of ADR was the subject of 14 publications that revealed about 30% of all ADRs to be preventable. With regard to Germany this means that 350 million DM per year could be saved by preventing adverse drug reactions. These conservative estimates-no indirect and intangible costs, no ADRs that occur during hospital stay, no ADRs in outpatient care are included-show a considerable economic burden of ADRs. As about 30% of these ADRs are considered avoidable policy-makers are asked to invest more into ADR monitoring and preventive measures. Their benefit would surmount costs and at the same time increase the quality of care.     

Cost effectiveness of fluticasone and budesonide in patients with moderate asthma

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the relative cost effectiveness of fluticasone via metered dose inhaler and budesonide via Turbuhaler((R)) in corticosteroid-naive patients with moderate asthma from a third-party payer perspective (German Sickness Funds). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective economic assessment of direct medication costs of treatment was performed on data from a prospective, randomised, parallel group, 6-week clinical trial. 457 corticosteroid-naive patients between the ages of 18 and 70 years with moderate asthma were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: The fluticasone group had a higher proportion of successfully treated patients (those with a peak expiratory flow rate improvement of >/=10%) [47 vs 42%], a higher average proportion of symptom-free days (40 vs 34%) and lower direct healthcare costs [1997 Deutschmarks (DM)] per day (DM4.23 vs DM5.19) than the budesonide group. Therefore, the daily costs per successfully treated patient (DM9.00 vs DM12.36) and the cost per symptom-free day (DM10.58 vs DM15.26) were both lower with fluticasone than with budesonide. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that these results were relatively robust over a wide range of plausible assumptions. CONCLUSION: These results showed that from the perspective of a third-party payer, fluticasone was more cost effective than budesonide over the 6-week study period.     

A Markov process analysis comparing the cost effectiveness of maintenance therapy with citalopram versus standard therapy in major depression

The objective of this study was to demonstrate the cost effectiveness of long term maintenance treatment with citalopram versus standard therapy (defined as short term antidepressant treatment) in patients with major depression in Germany. We chose doxepin, amitriptyline and trimipramine as standard therapy because these drugs are the leading antidepressants in that country. A Markov process analysis was used to model health status and economic outcomes as they accrued over a 1-year follow-up period. The main outcome measures were time without depression, direct costs and indirect costs (work days lost). All costs were in 1993 Deutsche marks. The clinical data were obtained from the published literature and US clinical practice guidelines; the associated unit costs of the medical resources used were derived from official German tariff lists. The results show that, compared with standard therapy, long-term maintenance treatment with citalopram is associated with a mean increase in time without depression of 7.9% (8.2 vs 7.6 months). The total costs of maintenance treatment with citalopram were substantially lower than with standard therapy (DM7985 vs DM11,948 per patient per year. In addition, both the direct and indirect costs of maintenance treatment with citalopram (DM3764 vs DM4221 per patient, respectively) were lower than with standard therapy (DM4577 vs DM7371 per patient, respectively). In conclusion, the study demonstrates that one year's maintenance treatment with citalopram is both more effective and less costly than standard therapy in the treatment of patients with major depression.     

Cost effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and reliever therapy versus salmeterol/fluticasone plus salbutamol in the treatment of asthma

INTRODUCTION: Budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort) Maintenance And Reliever Therapy (SMART) is an effective and well tolerated treatment option for patients with asthma. We compared the cost effectiveness from a societal perspective of this one-inhaler regimen with that of maintenance salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (Seretide) plus salbutamol (albuterol) as needed (Seretide) Fixed Combination [SFC]). STUDY DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed based on effectiveness and resource-utilisation data collected prospectively in a randomised, 12-month study performed in 2143 patients in 16 countries. Resource utilisation data were pooled and unit costs (euro, year 2003 values) from Italy, France, the UK and Germany were used to generate estimates of direct and total costs per patient per year and cost per severe exacerbation avoided. METHODS: Adolescents and adults with asthma (n = 2143; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)] 73% predicted; mean inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] dose 884 microg/day) were randomised to SMART or SFC. The effectiveness measure used was the number of severe exacerbations per patient per year. Direct costs included medication use (budesonide/formoterol 160microg/4.5microg or salmeterol/fluticasone 50microg/100microg, 50microg/250microg or 50microg/500microg plus salbutamol) and nonmedication-related resource use, including days in hospital, emergency room visits, specialist or primary care physician visits and other healthcare provider contacts. Indirect costs, including the number of days when the patient or their carer was unable to attend to their normal daily activities, were also assessed. The study assumed a European societal perspective (i.e. including direct and indirect costs). RESULTS: Treatment with SMART resulted in significantly fewer severe exacerbations per patient per year compared with SFC (0.24 vs 0.31 events per patient per year; p = 0.0025). Resource use was low in both groups. Medication costs accounted for the majority of the total costs. The increased effectiveness of SMART was achieved at a reduced or similar cost compared with SFC. SMART dominated when German unit costs were applied (i.e. there was a statistically significant reduction in both costs and number of exacerbations). In all other countries, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios showed that there was a reduction in mean total cost per exacerbation avoided; however, this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrates that, compared with SFC, SMART may be cost effective from a societal perspective for the treatment of patients with asthma in Italy, Germany, France and the UK. SMART provided a reduction in the number of severe exacerbations per patient per year, at no statistically significant increase in cost - or even at a lower cost - compared with SFC plus as-needed reliever salbutamol.     

Cost-minimisation analysis of sequential treatment with ofloxacin or ciprofloxacin in hospitalised patients

This study evaluated the cost of sequential treatment with once-daily ofloxacin or twice-daily ciprofloxacin in 474 hospitalised patients in different countries. The patients were treated intravenously for at least 3 days, then orally for 7 to 10 days or for 3 days beyond the disappearance of infection-related symptoms. The overall clinical cure rate (86.8% with ofloxacin and 89.6% with ciprofloxacin) and the overall bacteriological response rate (89.9 and 89.0%, respectively) were similar, and a cost-minimisation analysis was conducted. The acquisition costs for ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin in Greece, Israel, Slovenia and Turkey were used and converted to Deutschmarks (DM), and the costs of administration were analysed for each hospital. The different cost categories for oral and intravenous (IV) treatment (e.g. antimicrobial acquisition, drug monitoring, drug delivery costs) were used to identify any differences. The total costs per patient varied between the countries involved, but were higher for ciprofloxacin (ofloxacin: DM239 to DM724; ciprofloxacin: DM540 to DM976). In a sensitivity analysis using identical daily acquisition costs for the 2 fluoroquinolones, the total cost of treatment was higher for ciprofloxacin, as a result of the lower cost of administration of ofloxacin in the once-daily regimen. Continuing IV therapy would be approximately 50% more expensive than switching to oral administration; however, whenever possible, both drugs can be switched from IV to oral treatment.     

Hospitalization rates among patients with community-acquired pneumonia treated with telithromycin vs clarithromycin: results from two randomized, double-blind, clinical trials

AIMS: To compare hospitalization rates among patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) treated with oral telithromycin and clarithromycin, based on pooled data from two randomized, double-blind, multinational clinical trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with CAP eligible for oral therapy (Study 1, n = 448; Study 2, n = 575) received telithromycin 800 mg once daily for 10 (Study 1, 2-arms), 5 or 7 (Study 2, 3-arms) days, or clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 10 days. Frequency of CAP-related hospitalizations, physician visits/tests/procedures, and additional respiratory tract infection-related antibacterial use, as well as CAP-related length of hospital stay and hospitalization costs, were compared by treatment group (intent to treat populations) up until the late post-therapy visit (Days 31-36). Study investigators blinded to treatment regimen assessed whether hospital admissions were CAP related. RESULTS: Despite equivalent clinical efficacy for telithromycin vs clarithromycin in the clinically evaluable per-protocol populations (n = 784) (88.8% [428/482] vs 90.1% [272/302]--difference: -1.3%; 95% CI: -6.0, 3.4), telithromycin treatment for 5, 7, or 10 days was associated with significantly fewer CAP-related hospitalizations (p = 0.023) and CAP-related hospital days (p = 0.025) vs clarithromycin (reduction of 2.3 hospitalizations and 23.4 hospital days per 100 patients). Accordingly, estimated CAP-related hospitalization costs were significantly lower (p = 0.025) for telithromycin recipients (30,231 US dollars less per 100 patients). CAP-related hospitalizations, duration of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs for 7- to 10-day telithromycin--the approved dosing regimen for CAP--were significantly lower (p = 0.023, 0.025, and 0.025, respectively) than for clarithromycin. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study indicate that telithromycin 800 mg once daily for 5, 7, or 10 days provides an effective therapy for patients with CAP, and may be associated with fewer CAP-related hospitalizations and hospital days than clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 10 days. Treatment with telithromycin could, therefore, potentially translate into cost savings in the management of CAP.     

The pharmacoeconomic impact of amlodipine use on coronary artery disease.

The most frequent cause of mortality and morbidity in industrialized countries is coronary artery disease (CAD), which in Europe alone is responsible for around two million deaths per year. In 2001 it accounted for about 260,000 hospital discharges in Italy. The costs of CAD treatment in Italy--which were borne by the Italian state, the third-party payer--amounted to 800 million euros. We propose to assess the pharmacoeconomic implications of using amlodipine besylate treatment in Italy for patients with coronary artery disease. The study is based on a post-hoc cost-effectiveness analysis that compared standard care supplemented by amlodipine besylate with ordinary standard care over a 36-month time horizon. The clinical outcome data were based on the prospective randomized evaluation of vascular effect of norvasc trial (PREVENT). Direct medical costs referred to the purchase costs of amlodipine besylate and the cost of National Health Service (NHS) hospitalization. The costs were discounted back at an annual rate of 5%. Patients administered amlodipine besylate exhibited a significant risk reduction with respect to any major vascular event or procedure when compared to the placebo group. The reduction mainly referred to unstable angina events and revascularization procedures. We estimated that the total cost of adding amlodipine besylate to standard care amounted to 139,050 euros per 1000 patients treated for 36 months. This represents a cost of 1780 euros per patient remaining free of any vascular event. Results were sensitive to both clinical and economic variables. The incremental costs of the alternative therapy ranged from 296 euros to 5066 per patient free of any event in, respectively, the best and worst scenario. Amlodipine besylate therapy can be a cost-effective strategy for CAD treatment in Italy. Our economic evaluation demonstrated, first, that by reducing vascular events and the need for revascularization procedures savings were achieved in hospital expenditure, and, second, that such savings could significantly offset drug costs.     

Comparison of lenograstim and filgrastim on haematological effects after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation with high-dose chemotherapy

SUMMARY

Objective: To compare the efficacy of lenograstim and filgrastim on haematological recovery following an autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) with high-dose chemotherapy.

Methods: A retrospective case-controlled study.

Results: Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) recovery above 0.5?×?10⁹?l^?1 and white blood cell (WBC) recovery above 4?×?10⁹?l^?1 for 3 consecutive days was achieved earlier with filgrastim than with lenograstim ((13.2?±?8.0 vs 19.0?±?10.0 days, p?=?0.004), (16.9?±?9.7 vs 29.9?±?16.6 days, p?=?0.001), respectively). The platelet recovery above 20 x 10⁹/l was also achieved earlier with filgrastim than with lenograstim (19.5?±?11.6 vs

27.2?±?13.8 days, p?=?0.006). Furthermore, filgrastim-treated patients received fewer days of granulocyte colony simulating factor (G-CSF) administration (12.5?±?7.0 vs 18.6?±?8.5 days, p?=?0.001) and spent less time in hospital (23.7?±?10.9 vs 32.0?±?17.6 days, p?=?0.009). Duration of antibiotic administration was also significantly shorter in the filgrastim group (13.6?±?7.6 vs 29.1?±?19.8 days, p?=?0.001). Conclusion: In patients undergoing PBSCT following high-dose chemotherapy, filgrastim significantly reduced the duration of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and days of G-CSF administration, and led to earlier hospital discharge compared with lenograstim.     

Cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of ondansetron versus metoclopramide regimens: a hospital perspective from Italy

In a large double-blind study of antiemetic therapy conducted in Italy, 289 patients underwent 3 consecutive cycles of cisplatin chemotherapy. Antiemetic treatment with ondansetron plus dexamethasone was more efficacious and better tolerated, but also more expensive, than treatment with metoclopramide plus both dexamethasone and diphenhydramine. To evaluate the different costs of the 2 antiemetic regimens, we conducted a retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis from a hospital perspective. Direct costs of antiemetic therapy (acquisition cost of drugs, materials and time spent by nurses to prepare and administer therapies), cleanup after emesis, rescue medication and adverse events were evaluated. Antiemetic drug acquisition costs per patient were 5.23-fold higher for the ondansetron regimen than for the metoclopramide regimen. However, when the costs of materials and nursing time required to prepare and administer the antiemetic regimens were included, this ratio was 3.77. Furthermore, including the cost of emesis, rescue antiemetic treatments and medication used to treat adverse events, hospital costs per patient were 3.21-fold higher with the ondansetron regimen during the first cycle, 3.08-fold higher during second cycle and 2.89-fold higher during third cycle of chemotherapy. Complete protection from vomiting and from both vomiting and nausea with ondansetron occurred, respectively, in 78.7 and 69.1% of patients in the first cycle, 73.8 and 57.3% in the second cycle, and 74.2 and 58.1% in third cycle of chemotherapy. Corresponding figures for the metoclopramide regimen were 59.5 and 50.4%, 53.6 and 37.1%, and 46.8 and 27.3%, respectively. Thus, the cost per successfully treated (completely protected) patient was 2.43- and 2.34-fold higher, respectively, for ondansetron at the first cycle, 2.23- and 1.99-fold higher, respectively, at second cycle, and 1.82- and 1.36-fold higher, respectively, at third cycle. In conclusion, the study demonstrates that, while ondansetron has a greater acquisition cost than metoclopramide, the ondansetron regimen costs per successfully-treated patient substantially decrease when all direct hospital costs are taken into account.     

A cost comparison of oral tegafur plus uracil/folinic acid and parenteral fluorouracil for colorectal cancer in Canada

BACKGROUND: Two randomised, controlled trials (n = 1396) comparing (i) intravenous fluorouracil (FU) plus oral folinic acid (leucovorin) and (ii) oral tegafur plus uracil (UFT) plus folinic acid for the treatment of metastatic colorectal carcinoma found both regimens to have equivalent efficacy in terms of survival, tumour response and time to disease progression. The UFT/folinic acid regimen was associated with a better toxicity profile than FU/folinic acid. OBJECTIVE: To determine the comparative frequencies and costs of healthcare resources utilised in the treatment of patients with these two regimens from a hospital and government perspective. DESIGN: A cost-minimisation analysis of a subgroup of patients from the trials (n = 154) was conducted. Costs considered included those for hospital admissions, outpatient clinics, laboratories, imaging modalities, other diagnostic procedures, physician resources, other health professionals, other procedures such as surgery and transfusion, and concomitant medications. The cost of study medications was not included in the analysis. The endpoint was a total average cost per patient per treatment and per cycle. RESULTS: Patients on the oral UFT regimen had fewer outpatient clinic visits and used fewer laboratory resources than patients treated with FU. However, those on the oral regimen had more days of hospitalisation than the patients treated with the intravenous regimen. Patients treated with UFT used 21% less concomitant medication; however, in both groups these medications accounted for a similar percentage compared with the total costs of the treatment. Physicians' fees were similar for both groups but patients treated with UFT were seen more often by an attending physician. Patients on the UFT regimen visited outpatient oncology clinics less often and this was reflected by a maximum 826 Canadian dollars (Canadian dollars; 1996 values) total cost savings per patient per cycle and 3221 Canadian dollars per patient per treatment. An efficiency analysis showed that the use of the UFT/folinic acid regimen saved 4.5 hours per patient per month in the chemotherapy treatment unit compared with the FU regimen. CONCLUSIONS: In regard to the two therapeutic approaches, the cost of treatment per patient and per cycle using oral UFT/folinic acid was less than that using intravenous FU/folinic acid.     

A multi-country economic evaluation of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: Low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) is standard care in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The use of low-dose aspirin in primary prevention is not yet fully established, although meta-analyses and US and European guidelines support its use in people at increased risk of CVD. The primary objective of this study was to assess the economic consequences of the use of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD in four European countries (UK, Germany, Spain and Italy). METHODS: Based on results (benefits and harms) reported in meta-analyses, a state-transition model was developed to predict the cost effectiveness of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD. The model consists of five health states: no history of CVD, history of stroke, history of myocardial infarction (MI), history of stroke and MI, and death. A 10-year time horizon and 1-year cycles were used. Secondary prevention data were derived from the aspirin arm of the CAPRIE (Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischaemic Events) study.Direct costs from the public healthcare payer's perspective were used (euro, 2003 values). Effects were expressed in life-years (LY) and QALYs gained. Quality weights were obtained from published data.Country-specific discounting was applied on effects and costs (3.5% for the UK, 5% for Germany and 3% for Spain and Italy). Univariate sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulation were performed to assess uncertainty in the results. RESULTS: For patients with an annual risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) of 1.5%, the model resulted in 10-year savings with low-dose aspirin of on average euro 201 (95% CI 81, 331), euro 281 (95% CI 141, 422), euro 797 (95% CI 301, 1331) and euro 427 (95% CI 122, 731) per patient in the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy, respectively. Average total cost was almost 3- to 4-fold higher in Spain and Italy than in the UK and Germany. Savings (non-significant) start in the first year of treatment in all countries.Sensitivity analyses on cost of complications, utility, discounting, stroke rate and gastrointestinal bleeding rate showed the robustness of the results. From an annual risk of CHD of 0.236% for the UK, 0.324% for Germany, 0.244% for Spain and 0.560% for Italy, low-dose aspirin was cost saving compared with placebo. Monte Carlo analysis showed aspirin dominance in about 97% of cases for the three studied annual risks of CHD (0.6%, 1.0% and 1.5%) in the UK, Germany and Spain. In Italy, aspirin dominance in > 95% of cases was seen at annual risks of 1% and 1.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Administering low-dose aspirin to patients with an annual risk of CHD of > or = 1% appears to be significantly cost saving from the healthcare payer's perspective in all countries analysed. Sensitivity analyses (CHD risk and bleedings) suggested the results were robust.     

Cost analyses of adjunct colony stimulating factors for older patients with acute myeloid leukaemia : can they improve clinical decision making?

Colony stimulating factors (CSF) have been shown to reduce the duration of neutropenia following intensive chemotherapy in a variety of settings, with many of these studies targeting older patients with leukaemia. We review the clinical and economic findings for use of growth factors for older adults with acute myelogenous leukaemia (AML). The cost analyses were based on the perspective of the third party payer. One study, conducted by the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) randomised 207 AML patients to receive granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) or placebo and found no significant difference in number of infections and in days of hospitalisation, 3 fewer days with an absolute neutrophil count <500 cells/microL with G-CSF, and an estimated incremental cost of only US 120 dollars with G-CSF over placebo (1997 costs). A second study, conducted by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), randomised 119 AML patients to receive granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) or placebo and found a reduction in severe infections, 4 fewer days with an absolute neutrophil count <500 cells/microL, no significant difference in the duration of hospitalisation, and estimated cost savings of US 2310 dollars with GM-CSF (1997 costs). These data may be useful to physicians faced with concerns over clinical and economic factors associated with CSF use as adjunct therapy for older persons with AML.     

Evaluation of non-medical costs associated with visual impairment in four European countries: France, Italy, Germany and the UK

INTRODUCTION: Visual impairment is a severe disability that puts a heavy burden on individuals, families and society. In developed countries, the two major diseases leading to irreversible visual impairment are glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration. Their prevalence will increase dramatically with population aging. The economic consequences of visual impairment are considerable, but have rarely been documented, apart from some 'top-down' estimates based on national statistics. We estimated the non-medical costs related to visual impairment in four European countries: France, Italy, Germany and the UK. METHODS: Prevalence rates of visual impairment, defined according to local regulations, were taken from national registers and, for France, from two recent nationwide surveys conducted by the French Institute for National Statistics and Economic Studies (Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques [INSEE]). Estimates of the number of non-registered persons were obtained from the literature and expert opinion. Estimates of non-medical costs included institutional care, non-medical devices, residential adaptations, burden on carer, paid home help, loss of income and social allowances related to visual impairment. Unit costs (year 2004) were extracted from national databases and manufacturers. Healthcare professionals were interviewed to estimate the duration of assistance required by visually impaired persons. These durations were used to evaluate the cost of paid assistance at home in the four countries. RESULTS: The numbers of visually impaired persons were 1.27 million in France, 0.73 million in Germany, 1.03 million in Italy and 1.11 million in the UK, including, respectively, 56%, 11%, 80% and 72% non-registered persons. The frequency of institutionalisation for visually impaired persons were, respectively, 7.8%, 9.6%, 10.9% and 10%. Total annual costs for visually impaired persons were estimated at euro 10,749 million in France, euro 9214 million in Germany, euro 12,069 million in Italy and euro 15,180 million in the UK. This translated into average annual costs per affected individual of euro 8434, euro 12,662, euro 11,701 and euro 13,674, respectively. The main cost components of visual impairment in the community were 'loss of income' (23-43% of community costs), 'burden on carer' (24-39%) and 'paid assistance' (13-29%). CONCLUSION: Total non-medical costs associated with visual impairment are considerable. The present analysis demonstrates that the preponderant economic consequences of visual impairment lie beyond healthcare systems, and that visual impairment has a considerable negative impact on productivity. Considering the non-medical social dimensions of visual impairment related to the consequent incapacity and dependency should encourage payers to finance health innovations that aim to preserve vision.     

Hospitalization rates among patients with community-acquired pneumonia treated with telithromycin vs clarithromycin: results from two randomized,double-blind,clinical trials

SUMMARY

Aims: To compare hospitalization rates among patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) treated with oral telithromycin and clarithromycin, based on pooled data from two randomized, double-blind, multinational clinical trials.

Patients and methods: Adult patients with CAP eligible for oral therapy (Study 1, n = 448; Study 2, n = 575) received telithromycin 800?mg once daily for 10 (Study 1, 2-arms), 5 or 7 (Study 2, 3-arms) days, or clarithromycin 500?mg twice daily for 10?days. Frequency of CAP-related hospitalizations, physician visits/tests/procedures, and additional respiratory tract infection-related antibacterial use, as well as CAP-related length of hospital stay and hospitalization costs, were compared by treatment group (intent to treat populations) up until the late post-therapy visit (Days 31–36). Study investigators blinded to treatment regimen assessed whether hospital admissions were CAP related.

Results: Despite equivalent clinical efficacy for telithromycin vs clarithromycin in the clinically evaluable per-protocol populations (n = 784) (88.8% [428/482] vs 90.1% [272/302] – difference: –1.3%; 95% CI: –6.0, 3.4), telithromycin treatment for 5, 7, or 10?days was associated with significantly fewer CAP-related hospitalizations (?p = 0.023) and CAP-related hospital days (?p = 0.025) vs clarithromycin (reduction of 2.3 hospitalizations and 23.4 hospital days per 100 patients). Accordingly, estimated CAP-related hospitalization costs were significantly lower (?p = 0.025) for telithromycin recipients (US$30?231 less per 100 patients). CAP-related hospitalizations, duration of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs for 7- to 10-day telithromycin – the approved dosing regimen for CAP – were significantly lower (?p = 0.023, 0.025, and 0.025, respectively) than for clarithromycin.

Conclusions: Data from this study indicate that telithromycin 800?mg once daily for 5, 7, or 10?days provides an effective therapy for patients with CAP, and may be associated with fewer CAP-related hospitalizations and hospital days than clarithromycin 500?mg twice daily for 10?days. Treatment with telithromycin could, therefore, potentially translate into cost savings in the management of CAP.