The cost of warfarin treatment for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Russia from a collective perspective

Aims: Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are used for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), but necessitate regular monitoring of prothrombin time via international normalized ratio (INR) testing. This study explores the economic burden of VKA therapy for Russian patients with NVAF.

Method: Cardiologists provided clinical characteristics and healthcare resource use data relating to the patient’s first year of treatment. Data were used to quantify direct medical costs (INR testing, consultations, drug costs). The same patients completed a questionnaire providing data on direct non-medical costs (travel/expenses for attendance at VKA appointments) and indirect costs (opportunity cost and reduced work productivity). Mean costs per patient per year are described (US dollars).

Results: Cardiologists (n?=?50) provided data on 400 patients (mean age?=?63, 47% female), and 351 patients (88%) completed the patient questionnaire. Patients had a mean of nine INR tests. Estimated direct medical costs totaled $151.06, and 18.5% of direct medical costs were attributable to drug costs. Estimated annual direct non-medical costs were $22.89 per patient, and indirect costs were $275.59 per patient.

Limitations: Included patients had been treated for 12–24 months, so are not fully representative of the broader treatment population.

Conclusion: Although VKA drugs costs are relatively low, regular INR testing and consultations drive the economic burden for Russian NVAF patients treated with VKA.     

The cost of warfarin treatment for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Mexico from a collective perspective

Aims: To describe the collective costs of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) treatment for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). VKA drug costs are relatively low, but they necessitate frequent international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring. There are currently minimal data describing the economic impact of this in Mexico.

Materials and methods: Cardiologists provided data on their NVAF patients (n?=?400) to quantify direct medical costs (INR testing, appointments, drug costs). A sub-set of patients (n?=?301) completed a patient questionnaire providing data to calculate direct non-medical costs (travel and other expenses for attendance at VKA-associated appointments) and indirect costs (opportunity cost and reduced work productivity associated with VKA treatment).

Results: Estimated annual direct medical costs totaled $753.6 per patient. Annual direct non-medical and indirect costs were USD$149.8 and $132.1, respectively.

Limitations: Recruited patients were those who consulted with a cardiologist during the study period and selected due to inclusion criteria. All had received uninterrupted treatment for 12–24 months. Consequently, the results are not fully generalizable to all VKA treated NVAF patients.

Conclusions: The true cost of VKA treatment cannot be appreciated by a consideration of drug costs alone. Ongoing monitoring appointments incur additional expenses for both patients and the healthcare system.     

The economic burden of advanced Parkinson’s disease: an analysis of a UK patient dataset

Abstract

Background:

To evaluate the cost burden of patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD) according to the waking hours per day spent in OFF state. An analysis of resource use comprising medical services, professional care and informal care data from an observational, cross-sectional study was conducted.

Methods:

A total of 60 physicians comprising 40 neurologists and 20 geriatricians across the UK participating in the Adelphi PD Disease Specific Programme took part. There were 302 PD patients at H&Y stages 3–5. Patients were characterised according to the percentage of time per day spent in OFF state (<25%, 26–50%, 51–75%, >75%).

Results:

Average 12-monthly total costs increased according to the time spent in OFF state from £25,630 in patients spending less than 25% of their waking hours in OFF to £62,147 for patients spending more than 75% of their time in OFF. Overall, 7% of costs were attributed to direct medical care, while 93% were split between direct non-medical professional care (50%) and indirect informal care (43%).

Limitations:

Low patient numbers in the more advanced disease stages of PD led to very little or no data to directly inform some of the severe health states of the analysis. Data gaps were filled in with data derived from a regression analysis which may affect the robustness of the analysis.

Conclusion:

This study illustrates the increasing costs of advancing PD, in particular related to the time spent in OFF state, and identifies that the foremost cost burden is associated with the care needs of the patient rather than medical services.     

Economic burden of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in the United Kingdom

Abstract

To assess the economic burden of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in the United Kingdom, yearly direct medical costs were determined for four defined ALS health states (mild, moderate, severe and terminal disease stages). Resource utilisation patterns for each health state were obtained from United Kingdom neurologists and local costs (1996/97) were attached to the resources. The annual direct cost of the health states increased from £1185.20 in mild disease to £3127.51 in the terminal state. Hospitalisation was a major contributor to total cost in mild (43.3%), severe (31.6%) and terminal (45.1%) states. In contrast, in moderate disease the impact of hospitalisation was minimal (0.8%) compared to physician remuneration costs (59%). The economic burden of ALS is therefore directly related to the severity of the disease. The study identifies the major cost drivers in current ALS care and provides a means for determining how potential therapeutic interventions might affect the overall cost of the disease.     

Retrospective database study to assess the economic impact of hip fracture in the United Kingdom

Objective:

Publications containing recent, real-world data on the economic impact of hip fractures in the UK are lacking. This retrospective electronic medical records database analysis assessed medication and healthcare resource use, direct healthcare costs, and factors predicting increased resource use and costs in adult UK hip fracture patients.

Methods:

Data were obtained from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics for adult patients hospitalized for their first hip fracture between January 1, 2006 and March 31, 2011 (index event); healthcare costs were calculated from the National Health Service perspective using 2011–2012 cost data.

Results:

Data from 8028 patients were analyzed. Resource use and costs were statistically significantly higher in the year following fracture (mean total [standard deviation (SD)] cost £7359 [£14,937]) compared with the year before fracture (mean total [SD] cost £3122 [£9435]; p?Conclusions:

Although we did not capture all pre- and post-index costs and healthcare utilization, this study provides important insights regarding the characteristics of patients with hip fracture, and information that will be useful in burden-of-illness and economic analyses.     

Modeling the fiscal costs and benefits of alternative treatment strategies in the United Kingdom for chronic hepatitis C

Background: Hepatitis C (HCV) infection causes substantial direct health costs, but also impacts broader societal and governmental costs, such as tax revenue and social protection benefits. This study investigated the broader fiscal costs and benefits of curative interventions for chronic Hepatitis C (CHC) that allow individuals to avoid long-term HCV attributed health conditions.

Methods: A prospective cohort model, assessing the long-term fiscal consequences of policy decisions, was developed for HCV infected individuals, following the generational accounting analytic framework that combines age-specific lifetime gross taxes paid and governmental transfers received (i.e. healthcare and social support costs). The analysis assessed the burden of a theoretical cohort of untreated HCV infected patients with the alternative of treating these patients with a highly efficacious curative intervention (ledipasvir/sofosbuvir [LDV/SOF]). It also compared treating patients at all fibrosis stages (Stages F0–F4) compared to late treatment (Stage F4).

Results: Based on projected lifetime work activity and taxes paid, the treated cohort paid an additional £5,900 per patient compared to the untreated cohort. Lifetime government disability costs of £97,555 and £125,359 per patient for treated cohort vs no treatment cohort were estimated, respectively. Lifetime direct healthcare costs in the treated cohort were £32,235, compared to non-treated cohort of £26,424, with an incremental healthcare costs increase of £5,901 per patient. The benefit cost ratio (BCR) of total government benefits and savings relative to government treatment costs (including LDV/SOF) ranged from 1.8–5.6. Treating patients early resulted in 77% less disability costs, 43% lower healthcare costs, and 33% higher tax revenue.

Conclusion: The ability to cure Hepatitis C offers considerable fiscal benefits beyond direct medical costs and savings attributed to reduced disability costs, public allowances, and improved tax revenue. Changes in parameters, such as productivity, wage growth, and tax rates, can influence the conclusions described here.     

Choice of angiotensin receptor blocker in moderate hypertension. A UK-based cost–benefit comparison of olmesartan- and candesartan-based regimens

Abstract

Introduction:

Selection of antihypertensive therapy hinges on an appropriate combination of efficacy, tolerability and compatibility with co-morbidities. Within a given class of antihypertensives, the choice of agent is often driven by cost, with the cheapest appropriate agent being chosen. Amongst the angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), this choice will often be losartan, as it is available in generic form. However, as the blood pressure lowering efficacy of losartan is modest, some patients will require an alternative ARB. In the UK this choice is often candesartan, although the agent with greatest BP lowering efficacy is olmesartan. The objective of this study was to use a cost-benefit model to compare the costs associated with target achievement using each of these two agents, in order to guide optimum use of prescribing budgets.

Method:

A probabilistic cost-benefit model was constructed for a cohort of patients with moderate hypertension, based on a standardised titration and maintenance algorithm using either olmesartan or candesartan, combined with thiazide and calcium channel blocker where required. Direct treatment costs were recorded, along with the proportion of patients achieving pre-defined treatment targets at each treatment level. Results were expressed as mean treatment cost per patient reaching target.

Results:

Based on the current QoF target of 150?mmHg systolic, 94.3% of patients on the olmesartan-based regimen reached target of 150?mmHg, compared with 89.0% of those on the candesartan-based regimen. 86% of olmesartan patients reached target on <3 drugs, compared with 74% of candesartan patients. The mean 12-month cost per patient reaching target was £171.36 for olmesartan versus £189.91 for candesartan. Ongoing annual maintenance costs for patients at target were £169.97 and £182.64, respectively. Similar results were obtained when considering alternative treatment targets

Limitations:

The study only compared two ARBs – candesartan and olmesartan and the results relate to prescribing costs only and do not include other healthcare costs. Additionally, the chosen outcome was blood pressure target achievement, rather than clinical endpoints. Given the stated objectives of the model, we do not believe these issues will have introduced bias in the direction of either comparator

Conclusion:

Although olmesartan has an apparently higher acquisition cost than candesartan, its superior BP lowering efficacy means that the overall cost per patient treated to target is actually lower. This result could have significant implications for making savings within primary care prescribing budgets in the UK.     

Cost-effectiveness of amisulpride compared with risperidone in patients with schizophrenia

SUMMARY

Amisulpride is an atypical antipsychotic, which has demonstrated efficacy across the range of symptoms of schizophrenia. This study compares the treatment costs of amisulpride (including drug costs, hospital costs, and costs of clinician and nurse visits) with those of risperidone over a 6-month treatment period, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Resource utilisation data were collected alongside an international, multicentre clinical trial comparing amisulpride (400-1000 mg/day) with risperidone (4-10 mg/day) in 198 patients with schizophrenia. As this trial demonstrated that amisulpride had at least equivalent efficacy to risperidone, the present study was a cost-minimisation analysis. Unit cost data for the UK were obtained from published sources and applied to the clinical data to calculate direct treatment costs. Amisulpride was associated with lower drug acquisition costs and lower resource utilisation costs than risperidone, although the differences did not reach statistical significance. Overall, the average total cost per patient for 6 months of treatment with amisulpride (£12,673; 95% CI: 10,628,14,717) was £2,145 less than for risperidone (£14,818; 95% CI: 12,323,17,312). These findings are similar to those of a previous study that compared the treatment costs of amisulpride with those of haloperidol, and found that

amisulpride was associated with significantly lower direct treatment costs than haloperidol. Amisulpride is a valuable treatment option in patients with schizophrenia.     

Economic evaluation of sevelamer for the treatment of hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease patients not on dialysis in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Objectives:

To determine the cost effectiveness of sevelamer vs calcium carbonate in patients with chronic kidney disease and not on dialysis (CKD-ND) from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK.

Methods:

A Markov decision analytic model was developed to estimate (1) total life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs for patients treated with sevelamer or calcium carbonate; and (2) incremental costs per LY gained (LYG) and per QALY gained for sevelamer vs calcium carbonate. Data informing probability transitions to all-cause death and dialysis inception in CKD-ND patients were taken directly from the INDEPENDENT-CKD study and were extrapolated beyond the 3-year clinical trial using Weibull regression analysis. Estimates of health utility and costs (in £2011) were derived from the published literature.

Results:

Over a lifetime horizon, sevelamer treatment resulted in a gain of 2.05 LYs and 1.56 QALYs per patient, an increase of £37,282 in total costs per patient vs calcium carbonate (3.5% discount), and a per-patient cost of £18,193/LYG and £23,878/QALY gained. Results were robust to alternative assumptions in key parameters; results were most sensitive to alternative assumptions regarding the mean daily dose of sevelamer, impact of sevelamer on dialysis initiation, cost of dialysis, and health utility estimates. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that sevelamer was cost-effective vs calcium carbonate in 93% of simulations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000/QALY gained.

Limitations:

While the model simulated a real-world clinical setting, this analysis was subject to limitations common to all decision analytic models, in that it used a mix of data sources and relied on several assumptions. Not all variables that impact real-world outcomes and costs were included in this model.

Conclusions:

Sevelamer is a cost-effective option compared to calcium carbonate for the first-line treatment of hyperphosphatemia in CKD-ND patients in the UK.     

Economic evaluation of the use of Innohep® in the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism

Summary

This article reports the cost implications of using Innohep® (tinzaparin), a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), instead of intravenous (iv) unfractionated heparin (UFH) in the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). The expected cost per patient, including initial treatment costs and the cost of managing adverse outcomes (but excluding costs common to both regimes) was found to be £191.81 for patients treated with UFH and £186.64 for patients treated with Innohep® (costs estimated as of end 1997). Therefore, the use of Innohep® reduces the expected cost per patient by £5.17 or 3%. When the costs of managing adverse outcomes occurring after cessation of UFH/Innohep® therapy are excluded, expected costs per patient for UFH and Innohep® treatment are £136.70 and £120.22, respectively. Therefore, when outcomes not directly attributable to the choice between UFH and Innohep® treatment are reduced, the use of Innohep® reduces the expected cost per patient by £16.48 or 12%.

Innohep® reduces costs through greater ease of administration, by removing the need for extensive laboratory monitoring and by saving staff time. These results are generally robust to variations in key assumptions. Sensitivity analysis demonstrates that if patients treated with Innohep® can be discharged from hospital earlier, with their treatment continuing at home, substantial cost savings may result.     

Assessment of Resource Use and Costs Associated with Parathyroidectomy for Secondary Hyperparathyroidism in End Stage Renal Disease in the UK

Introduction:

Secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) is a major complication of end stage renal disease (ESRD). For the National Health Service (NHS) to make appropriate choices between medical and surgical management, it needs to understand the cost implications of each. A recent pilot study suggested that the current NHS healthcare resource group tariff for parathyroidectomy (PTX) (£2071 and £1859 in patients with and without complications, respectively) is not representative of the true costs of surgery in patients with SHPT.

Objective:

This study aims to provide an estimate of healthcare resources used to manage patients and estimate the cost of PTX in a UK tertiary care centre.

Methods:

Resource use was identified by combining data from the Proton renal database and routine hospital data for adults undergoing PTX for SHPT at the University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, from 2000–2008. Data were supplemented by a questionnaire, completed by clinicians in six centres across the UK. Costs were obtained from NHS reference costs, British National Formulary and published literature. Costs were applied for the pre-surgical, surgical, peri-surgical, and post-surgical periods so as to calculate the total cost associated with PTX.

Results:

One hundred and twenty-four patients (mean age?=?51.0 years) were identified in the database and 79 from the questionnaires. The main costs identified in the database were the surgical stay (mean?=?£4066, SD?=?£,130), the first month post-discharge (£465, SD?=?£176), and 3 months prior to surgery (£399, SD?=?£188); the average total cost was £4932 (SD?=?£4129). From the questionnaires the total cost was £5459 (SD?=?£943). It is possible that the study was limited due to missing data within the database, as well as the possibility of recall bias associated with the clinicians completing the questionnaires.

Conclusion:

This analysis suggests that the costs associated with PTX in SHPT exceed the current NHS tariffs for PTX. The cost implications associated with PTX need to be considered in the context of clinical assessment and decision-making, but healthcare policy and planning may warrant review in the light of these results.     

Economic burden of healthcare-associated infection in US acute care hospitals: societal perspective

Abstract

Background:

Assessing the costs of healthcare-associated infection (HAI) is challenging. Methodological issues abound. Previous estimates have been derived in diverse ways from varied perspectives in different settings with dissimilar data. Results can be confusing. Full societal costs, which are more inclusive than commonly reported direct hospital costs, have never been fully measured or reported.

Objective:

To update, combine, and expand previous cost estimates to determine the annual societal burden of illness (direct medical, non-medical, and indirect costs) arising from HAIs in US acute-care hospitals.

Methods:

The research approach encompassed literature and internet searches; reference identification, selection, and review; then data abstraction, compilation, and analyses to estimate full societal costs. Previously published systemic reviews, surveillance reports, and individual clinical studies, along with newly computed component costs, all contributed to final estimates.

Results:

HAIs in US acute-care hospitals lead to direct and indirect costs totaling $96–$147 billion annually. These results are subject to the same limitations as previous studies from which contributing data were derived.

Conclusion:

The enormous clinical and economic burden of infection places HAIs high on the list of devastating and costly illnesses, such as cancer, heart attack, stroke, and diabetes, thereby mandating further research and greater efforts to contain a pressing healthcare problem.     

Direct medical costs associated with atopic diseases among young children in Thailand

Abstract

Objective:

Allergic diseases are the most common childhood illness in Thailand. Their prevalence has been rising over time, with several studies having revealed substantial economic burden. However, no such study had yet been conducted for Thailand. The aim of this study was to estimate direct medical costs associated with atopic diseases among children aged 0–5 years in Thailand.

Research design and methods:

A cost-of-illness model was constructed to estimate the total direct medical costs of atopic diseases comprising atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinitis, asthma (i.e., recurrent wheeze), and cow’s milk allergy. The model employed a prevalence-based approach, considering a total number of atopic cases in 2010. Direct medical costs were estimated using a bottom-up analysis with the estimation of the quantity of healthcare resource use and the unit costs. Epidemiological data were obtained from literature and Thai surveys, whereas treatment unit costs were from either a hospital database or Thai standard cost list. Expert opinion informed type, frequency, and quantity of medical resources utilized. Key limitations included lack of data-driven evidences on severity distribution for this particular age group, indirect costs, and medical resource use associated with each condition.

Results:

Total direct cost was estimated to be THB 27.8 billion (US$899 million). Treatments contributed largest to the total costs (46%), followed by inpatient care (37%), outpatient care (12%), and monitoring and labs (5%). Costs per treated patient were highest in cow’s milk allergy (THB 64,383; US$2077), followed by rhinitis (THB 12,669; US$409), asthma (THB 9633; US$312), and atopic dermatitis (THB 5432; US$175).

Conclusion:

Atopic diseases in young children are associated with substantial burden in direct medical costs to Thailand. These costs can be diminished through nutritional intervention recognized to effectively decrease the incidence of atopic diseases.     

Cost-effectiveness of Viridal Duo compared to MUSE and Viagra in the treatment of erectile dysfunction in the UK - a preliminary model

Summary

This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of starting erectile dysfunction (ED) treatment with Viridal Duo relative to MUSE and Viagra over one year, from the perspective of the National Health Service. Decision analysis techniques were used to estimate the expected costs and consequences of managing ED, stratified by initial treatment. The model was based on estimates of clinical outcome and resource use obtained from published literature and a Delphi panel.

Viridal Duo is a registered trademark of Schwarz Pharma;

MUSE is a registered trademark of Astra Pharmaceuticals;

Viagra is a registered trademark of Pfizer Consumer Healthcare

Starting ED treatment with Viridal Duo instead of Viagra leads to an average 0.8 additional months during which a man can achieve successful erections (from 6.5 to 7.3 months) over one year, for an additional cost of £106 per patient (from £369 to £475). Starting ED treatment with Viagra instead of MUSE leads to an average 1.1 additional months during which a man can achieve successful erections (from 5.4 to 6.5 months) over one year and reduces the cost per patient by £85 (from £454 to £369).

Fifty-two percent of patients who start treatment with Viridal Duo continue successfully over one year. This compares to 38% and 18% of patients who start treatment with Viagra and MUSE respectively. Eighty-seven percent of the total success with Viridal Duo can be directly attributed to this treatment when used first-line. In contrast, 68% and 44% of the total success attributed to Viagra and MUSE respectively can be attributed to these treatments when chosen first-line. Moreover, an additional 44% and 27% of the expected total success with MUSE and Viagra is attributable to Viridal Duo.

Starting ED treatment with Viridal Duo rather than MUSE, when Viagra is either unavailable or contraindicated, increases the period during which a man can achieve successful erections by 1.8 months (from 5.5 to 7.3 months) for an additional cost of £14 per patient (from £460 to £474). Additionally, in patients who have previously failed Viagra, starting second-line treatment with Viridal Duo rather than MUSE leads to an average 1.6 additional months during which a man can achieve successful erections (from 4.0 to 5.6 months) over one year and reduces the cost per patient by £15 (from £493 to £478).

In conclusion, Viridal Duo is clinically more effective than Viagra and MUSE. Therefore, starting ED treatment with Viridal Duo instead of Viagra or MUSE increases the period during which a man can achieve successful erections, albeit for an additional cost. In patients who have previously failed first-line treatment with Viagra, starting second-line treatment with Viridal Duo instead of MUSE increases the period during which a man can achieve successful erections (by 40% at one year) and reduces healthcare costs (by £15 per patient).     

De-escalation from micafungin is a cost-effective alternative to traditional escalation from fluconazole in the treatment of patients with systemic Candida infections

Abstract

Background:

Systemic Candida infections (SCI) occur predominantly in intensive care unit patients and are a common cause of morbidity and mortality. Recently, changes in Candida epidemiology with an increasing prevalence of SCI caused by Candida non-albicans species have been reported. Resistance to fluconazole and azoles in general is not uncommon for non-albicans species. Despite guidelines recommending initial treatment with broad-spectrum antifungals such as echinocandins with subsequent switch to fluconazole if isolates are sensitive (de-escalation strategy), fluconazole is still the preferred first-line antifungal (escalation) in many clinical practice settings. After diagnosis of the pathogen, the initial therapy with fluconazole is switched to a broad-spectrum antifungal if a non-albicans is identified.

Methods:

The cost-effectiveness of initial treatment with micafungin (de-escalation) vs fluconazole (escalation) in patients with SCI was estimated using decision analysis based on clinical and microbiological data from pertinent studies. The model horizon was 42 days, and was extrapolated to cover a lifetime horizon. All costs were analyzed from the UK NHS perspective. Several assumptions were taken to address uncertainties; the limitations of these assumptions are discussed in the article.

Results:

In patients with fluconazole-resistant isolates, initial treatment with micafungin avoids 30% more deaths and successfully treats 23% more patients than initial treatment with fluconazole, with cost savings of £1621 per treated patient. In the overall SCI population, de-escalation results in 1.2% fewer deaths at a marginal cost of £740 per patient. Over a lifetime horizon, the incremental cost-effectiveness of de-escalation vs escalation was £15,522 per life-year and £25,673 per QALY.

Conclusions:

De-escalation from micafungin may improve clinical outcomes and overall survival, particularly among patients with fluconazole-resistant Candida strains. De-escalation from initial treatment with micafungin is a cost-effective alternative to escalation from a UK NHS perspective, with a differential cost per QALY below the ‘willingness-to-pay’ threshold of £30,000.     

Therapy conversion to biphasic insulin aspart 30 improves long-term outcomes and reduces the costs of type 2 diabetes in Saudi Arabia

Objective: An observational study in Saudi Arabia indicated that conversion to biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) from human insulin (HI) was associated with improvement of glycaemic control.

Methods: A validated computer simulation model of diabetes was used to project long-term outcomes (such as quality-adjusted life expectancy and direct medical costs) based on patient characteristics and treatment effects observed in the Saudi Arabian PRESENT subgroup (n=598). Baseline prevalence of comorbidities was obtained from published sources. Primary research was performed in Riyadh and Jeddah to derive diabetes-related complication costs and patient management practices.

Results: Conversion to BIAsp 30 from HI was projected to increase life expectancy by 0.62 years (11.77 ± 0.20 vs. 11.15 ± 0.19 years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.96 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (7.03 ± 0.12 vs. 6.07 ± 0.11 QALYs). Direct medical cost savings of Saudi Arabian Riyals (SAR) 53,879 per patient were projected for conversion to BIAsp 30 therapy (SAR 84,761 ± 3102 vs. SAR 138,640 ± 4102 per patient). Cost savings were driven by lower costs of hypoglycaemia (SAR 286 vs. SAR 57,437 per patient), and lower costs of renal complications (SAR 18,848 vs. SAR 31,228) over patient lifetimes.

Conclusion: Conversion to BIAsp 30 from HI was projected to improve life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy while reducing lifetime direct medical costs.     

Distribution and drivers of costs in type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with oral hypoglycemic agents: a retrospective claims data analysis

Objective:

To describe the distribution of costs and to identify the drivers of high costs among adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving oral hypoglycemic agents.

Methods:

T2DM patients using oral hypoglycemic agents and having HbA1c test data were identified from the Truven MarketScan databases of Commercial and Medicare Supplemental insurance claims (2004–2010). All-cause and diabetes-related annual direct healthcare costs were measured and reported by cost components. The 25% most costly patients in the study sample were defined as high-cost patients. Drivers of high costs were identified in multivariate logistic regressions.

Results:

Total 1-year all-cause costs for the 4104 study patients were $55,599,311 (mean cost per patient?=?$13,548). Diabetes-related costs accounted for 33.8% of all-cause costs (mean cost per patient?=?$4583). Medical service costs accounted for the majority of all-cause and diabetes-related total costs (63.7% and 59.5%, respectively), with a minority of patients incurring >80% of these costs (23.5% and 14.7%, respectively). Within the medical claims, inpatient admission for diabetes-complications was the strongest cost driver for both all-cause (OR?=?13.5, 95% CI?=?8.1–23.6) and diabetes-related costs (OR?=?9.7, 95% CI?=?6.3–15.1), with macrovascular complications accounting for most inpatient admissions. Other cost drivers included heavier hypoglycemic agent use, diabetes complications, and chronic diseases.

Limitations:

The study reports a conservative estimate for the relative share of diabetes-related costs relative to total cost. The findings of this study apply mainly to T2DM patients under 65 years of age.

Conclusions:

Among the T2DM patients receiving oral hypoglycemic agents, 23.5% of patients incurred 80% of the all-cause healthcare costs, with these costs being driven by inpatient admissions, complications of diabetes, and chronic diseases. Interventions targeting inpatient admissions and/or complications of diabetes may contribute to the decrease of the diabetes economic burden.     

A cost-effectiveness analysis of MMX mesalazine compared with mesalazine in the treatment of mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis from a UK perspective

Abstract

Objectives: To perform a cost-utility analysis of a new formulation of mesalazine (Mezavant XL, MMX mesalazine) versus an existing oral mesalazine (Asacol; mesalazine) from the UK National Health Service perspective.

Methods: A 5-year Markov cohort model was developed. Costs were obtained from the literature and utilities from an independent study. Uncertainty was evaluated using one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). The potential effect of dosing frequency on adherence and possible long-term effects of remission maintenance on colorectal cancer (CRC) rates were also investigated.

Results: The model suggested that 5-year therapy with MMX mesalazine was likely to generate gains when compared with mesalazine, including a gain of 0.011 QALYs per patient, 19 more remission days, and 12% fewer hospitalizations and surgical episodes. These gains came at an increase in total NHS direct cost of £8, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £749. The PSA suggested that MMX mesalazine had a 62% chance of resulting in cost savings, and a 74% chance of being cost effective (£20,000 threshold). Extended analysis including adherence and CRC effects suggested further incremental benefit of MMX mesalazine over mesalazine could be expected. Limitations include uncertainty in extrapolation to a 5-year time horizon and impact of adherence and drug acquisition costs on outcomes.

Conclusion: The pharmacoeconomic analysis suggested that MMX mesalazine is likely to produce small, but worthwhile, increases in total NHS direct cost while increasing time in remission and associated quality of life, when compared with mesalazine. Advantages in adherence to treatment with MMX mesalazine relative to mesalazine suggested that further health gains and cost savings can be obtained. Overall, these results suggest that MMX mesalazine is a cost-effective treatment for UC.     

Migraine burden and costs in France: a nationwide claims database analysis of triptan users

Objectives: To estimate the burden of migraine in the population of French patients identified as specific migraine acute treatment users compared to a control group.

Methods: A cross-sectional retrospective analysis was performed on the Echantillon Généraliste des Bénéficiaires claims database, a 1/97 random sample of the French public insurance database. A representative sample of all adults with at least one delivery of triptans, ergot derivatives or acetylsalicylic acid/metoclopramide (all drugs with a specific label in migraine acute treatment – SMAT) in 2014 was selected with a control group matched on age, gender and geographic region. Among triptan users, a sub-group of over-users was defined according to their level of triptan uptake expressed in defined daily doses (DDD – a standard daily dose of treatment of acute migraine) per month over 3?months and more, was also compared with controls. The cost analysis was performed in a societal perspective for direct costs. Sick leave indirect costs were estimated using the human capital approach.

Results: In total 8639 SMAT users (mean age: 44.6?years; 78.7% women) were selected representing a crude prevalence rate of 1.7%. The annual per capita total healthcare expenditures were higher by €280 in this group compared to controls (€2463 vs. €2183). Triptans contributed 47.8% to this extra cost. They used significantly (p?Conclusions: Due to its high prevalence, migraine costs generate a significant societal burden. The group of over-users concentrates high per capita direct and indirect costs.