Economic evaluation of ramipril in the treatment of patients at high risk for cardiovascular events

SUMMARY

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a primary cause of death and morbidity in the United Kingdom (UK). Recently, the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) trial demonstrated significant survival and morbidity benefits associated with ramipril use in the treatment of patients at high risk for cardiovascular events. The purpose of this paper is to assess whether and to what extent, these clinical benefits might translate into economic benefits from the perspective of the UK NHS. Using trial data and a decision-analytic model, our base case estimate of cost-effectiveness is £4,406 per life-year saved (undiscounted) and £5,544 per life-year saved (discounted). The extreme values of our sensitivity analyses ranged from a best case of £2,814 per life-year saved (undiscounted) to a worst case of £10,291 per life-year saved (undiscounted). Our base case estimate of cost-effectiveness suggests that treating patients at high risk for CVD events with ramipril is likely to be a good investment of NHS resources.     

An economic evaluation of ramipril in the treatment of patients at high risk for cardiovascular events due to diabetes mellitus

SUMMARY

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of death and morbidity in the United Kingdom (UK) and carries with it a significant financial cost through health care resource use. More than one in three people die from CVD events, and the cost to the UK National Health Service (NHS) was £1.6 billion in 1996¹. The recently published MICRO-HOPE study evaluated the treatment of 3,577 patients at high risk for cardiovascular events from diabetes mellitus and demonstrated significant survival and morbidity benefits associated with ramipril.

The purpose of this paper is to assess whether the significant clinical benefits offered by ramipril can be translated into economic benefits, and to what extent it can reduce the economic burden of CVD to the UK NHS.

Applying the same analytical framework used in a previous economic analysis of the HOPE study, our base case estimate of cost-effectiveness for ramipril in the MICRO HOPE study is £2,396 per life-year saved (undiscounted) and £2,971 per life-year saved (discounted). A sensitivity analysis was performed which ranged from a best case of £1,954 per life-year saved (undiscounted) to a worst case of £2,964 per life-year saved (undiscounted). Our base case estimate of cost-effectiveness suggests that treating patients at high risk for CVD events with ramipril is likely to be a good investment of NHS resources.     

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 impact of introducing TYRX amongst patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction undergoing implanted cardiac device procedures: a retrospective model based cost analysis

Background and aims: Infection is a serious and expensive complication of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device (CIED) procedures. A retrospective based cost analysis was performed to estimate Trust level savings of using the TYRX antibacterial envelope as a primary prevention measure against infection in a tertiary referral centre in South London, UK.

Methods: A retrospective cohort of heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction undergoing Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) or Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy (CRT) procedures were evaluated. Decision-analytic modelling was performed to determine economic savings of using the envelope during CIED procedure vs CIED procedure alone.

Results: Over a 12?month follow-up period following CIED procedure, the observed infection rate was 3.14% (n?=?5/159). The average cost of a CIED infection inpatient admission was £41,820 and, further to economic analysis, the additional costs attributable to infection was calculated at £62,213.94. A cost saving of £624 per patient by using TYRX during CIED procedure as a primary preventative measure against infection was estimated.

Conclusions: TYRX would be a cost-saving treatment option amongst heart failure patients undergoing ICD and CRT device procedures based on analysis in the local geographical area of South London. If upscaled to the UK population, we estimate potential cost savings for the National Health Service (NHS).     

Cost-effectiveness of continuous subcutaneous apomorphine in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease in the UK and Germany

Abstract

Background:

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disease, affecting ～5.2 million people worldwide. Continuous subcutaneous apomorphine (CSAI) represents an alternative treatment option for advanced PD with motor fluctuation. The purpose of this analysis was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of CSAI compared with Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel (LCIG), Deep-Brain-Stimulation (DBS) and Standard-of-care (SOC).

Methods:

A multi-country Markov-Model to simulate the long-term consequences, disease progression (Hoehn & Yahr stages 3–5, percentage of waking-time in the OFF-state), complications, and adverse events was developed. Monte-Carlo simulation accounted for uncertainty. Probabilities were derived from RCT and open-label studies. Costs were estimated from the UK and German healthcare provider’s perspective. QALYs, life-years (LYs), and costs were projected over a life-time horizon.

Results:

UK lifetime costs associated with CSAI amounts to £78,251.49 and generates 2.85 QALYs and 6.28 LYs (€104,500.08, 2.92 QALYs and 6.49 LYs for Germany). Costs associated with LCIG are £130,011.34, achieves 3.06 QALYs and 6.93 LYs (€175,004.43, 3.18 QALYs and 7.18 LYs for Germany). The incremental-cost per QALY gained (ICER) was £244,684.69 (€272,914.58). Costs for DBS are £87,730.22, associated with 2.75 QALYs and 6.38 LYs (€105,737.08, 2.85 QALYs and 6.61 LYs for Germany). CSAI dominates DBS. SOC associated UK costs are £76,793.49; 2.62 QALYs and 5.76 LYs were reached (€90,011.91, 2.73 QALYs and 6 LYs for Germany).

Conclusions:

From a health economic perspective, CSAI is a cost-effective therapy and could be seen as an alternative treatment to LCIG or DBS for patients with advanced PD.     

Use of opioid substitution therapies in the treatment of opioid use disorder: results of a UK cost-effectiveness modelling study

Aims: This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) and methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) vs no opioid substitution therapy (OST) for the treatment of opioid use disorder, from the UK National Health Service (NHS)/personal social services (PSS) and societal perspectives over 1 year.

Methods: Cost-effectiveness of OST vs no OST was evaluated by first replicating and then expanding an existing UK health technology assessment model. The expanded model included the impact of OST on infection rates of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

Results: Versus no OST, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for BMT and MMT were £13,923 and £14,206 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), respectively, from a NHS/PSS perspective. When total costs (NHS/PSS and societal) are considered, there are substantial savings associated with adopting OST; these savings are in excess of £14,032 for BMT vs no OST and £17,174 for MMT vs no OST over 1 year. This is primarily driven by a reduction in victim costs. OST treatment also impacted other aspects of criminality and healthcare resource use.

Limitations: The model’s 1-year timeframe means long-term costs and benefits, and the influence of changes over time are not captured.

Conclusions: OST can be considered cost-effective vs no OST from the UK NHS/PSS perspective, with a cost per QALY well below the UK’s willingness-to-pay threshold. There were only small differences between BMT and MMT. The availability of two or more cost-effective options is beneficial to retaining patients in OST programs. From a societal perspective, OST is estimated to save over £14,032 and £17,174 per year for BMT and MMT vs no OST, respectively, due to savings in victim costs. Further work is required to fully quantify the clinical and health economic impacts of different OST formulations and their societal impact over the long-term.     

Nabumetone compared with Ibuprofen and a weighted NSAID combination: an economic evaluation

Summary

An economic evaluation has been performed to assess the cost effectiveness of using nabumetone to treat Osteoarthritis (OA) or Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) compared to alternative NSAIDs (plain NSAIDs only, ie. excludes combinations). Clinical decision analysis has been used to model the costs and outcomes of treatment building on the results of a large, open label, randomised, controlled, multicentre US clinical study, from an NHS perspective. In the treatment of OA/RA, nabumetone carries a lower risk of major side effects and potential associated mortality, than either ibuprofen or a weighted NSAID comparator. The cost per life year gained, by prescribing nabumetone, in place of other NSAIDs, ranges from £1,656 to £3,087.

If reducing the risk of major side effects is a priority then the additional potential costs of prescribing Nabumetone to achieve this end compares favourably to many expenditures already made within the NHS. On this basis, prescribing nabumetone for OA/RA may be considered a cost effective use of resources from a health service perspective.     

The Cost of Obesity in the United Kingdom

Summary

This study provides economic information on the costs of obesity in the UK using a modified method of attributable risk to establish the full resource implications of treating obesity and associated diseases. Prevalence estimates of obesity, defined as a Body Mass Index (BMI) greater than 30 kg/m², together with estimates of the risk of obesity-related diseases relative to a BMI range close to ideal, are used as the basis of the costing. The total costs of treating obesity and its related diseases are estimated at £355 million (in 1995 prices). The total costs of treating obesity directly, estimated at £3.8 million, are dominated by the costs arising from the treatment of attributable diseases, estimated at £351 million.     

The cost-effectiveness of 5-FU-SA in the treatment of actinic keratoses of the face and scalp in the UK secondary care setting

Objective: The objective of this analysis was to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of Actikerall¹ (5-FU-SA) vs cryotherapy in a secondary care setting in the UK, for lesion-directed treatment in patients with actinic keratoses (AK) of the face and scalp.

Methods: The model was a simple decision tree, with a 6-month time horizon. The perspective was that of the UK National Health Service (NHS). Modeled treatment effects included reported per-patient histological clearance and recurrence rates. Cost inputs comprised professional consultation time and cost of medication. Health-related utility estimation followed previously published methodology. Adverse events were not modeled. The key data and model structural assumptions followed expected UK practice. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess structural and parameter uncertainty.

Results: 5-FU-SA was found to be less costly (?£204) and more effective (+0.001 QALY) in base case and sensitivity analyses. In the probabilistic analysis there was 100% probability of being cost-effective over cryotherapy at £20,000 willingness to pay. Cost of professional time was a key driver of the model outcome. 5-FU-SA remained dominant across a range of scenario analyses, including exploration of assumptions around setting of care.

Limitations: The time horizon of the analysis was short and data were not extrapolated beyond the duration of the clinical trial; however, this approach is consistent with likely follow-up of an AK patient. The clinical outcomes observed in the trial were based on a large proportion of cryotherapy patients undergoing an additional cycle of treatment; this may not occur or be required in an experienced secondary care setting.

Conclusion: 5-FU-SA could be considered as a cost-effective choice for treatment of AK lesions of the face and scalp in secondary and mixed care settings in the UK. Use of 5-FU-SA in patients who would otherwise be managed with cryotherapy has the potential to result in cost savings.     

Cost-effectiveness of oxaliplatin in combination with 5-FU/FA compared with 5-FU/FA alone

SUMMARY

We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to assess the cost-effectiveness of oxaliplatin in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and folinic acid (FA), compared with 5-FU/FA alone to achieve an additional progression-free month or year from the UK NHS perspective. Clinical data from a Phase III clinical trial were used to determine efficacy, in terms of progression-free survival. The average drug-acquisition cost for each cycle of treatment was then calculated. Any toxicities that resulted in hospitalisation of the patient were determined, and the costs incurred were calculated depending on the type of ward to which the patient was admitted. The costs for oxaliplatin in combination with 5-FU/FA compared with 5-FU/FA alone gave the incremental cost to achieve the improvement in progression-free survival. Sensitivity analyses were performed on costs and progression-free survival to give a range of possible values when costs and outcome were varied. The results of the analysis indicate that the costs to achieve an additional progression-free month are around £2,133. In the sensitivity analysis, the majority of scenarios gave similar cost-effectiveness ratios. This gives an average incremental cost of £25,600 to achieve an additional progression-free year. The cost-effectiveness ratio is within acceptable limits and supports the use of oxaliplatin combination therapy in the management of advanced colorectal cancer.     

Mucodyne: the economics of preventing surgery for grommets

Summary

Prudent management for glue ear currently entails a month period of watchful waiting before grommet insertion if the problem has not been resolved. The costs of administering Mucodyne during the watchful waiting period and the potential resources released from a reduction in the number of grommet insertions were assessed from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. A decision analysis model was used to estimate the probability of resolution of glue ear with both approaches, and the costs of them combined with the resource implications of surgery and its outcomes. The cost difference between the two approaches amounts to £11.06 per patient, based on a difference of 9% between the Mucodyne group and watchful waiting - this represents a number needed to treat (NNT) of 11. The 'break-even' NNT to prevent grommet surgery is 15.2 - an absolute difference of 6.5% of children benefiting from the Mucodyne treatment.     

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.     

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.     

Addressing shortfalls in TIA care in the UK: an economic perspective

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the clinical outcomes and costs associated with reconfiguring the management of TIA in the UK to offer patients rapid access to outpatient clinics for specialist assessment and treatment.

Methods: An economic deterministic model was run comparing two pathways – one arm representing current clinical care based on national guidelines and clinical practice and patient referral to a weekly outpatient clinic, and a revised care pathway replicating phase 2 of the EXPRESS study with patient referral to a daily outpatient clinic. The outcomes of the model were measured in terms of recurrent strokes avoided and net budget impact to secondary care.

Results: Reconfiguring TIA care pathways in the UK could result in the avoidance of 8,164 recurrent stroke events. The model predicts savings of £25,573,279 for the UK healthcare system over 12 months. Annual net savings are predicted in England (£24,916,011), Scotland (£80,554) and Northern Ireland (£1,041,817). In Wales, increased costs of £450,435 are estimated.

Limitations: Using the data published from the EXPRESS study, it is not possible to model a stepwise approach to implementing the revised TIA care pathway. It is therefore assumed that it would be possible to implement the revised TIA care pathway as detailed in the EXPRESS study across the UK and achieve the reduction in recurrent stroke risk that was reported.

Conclusions: The model suggests that the reconfiguration of TIA care pathways in the UK to offer rapid access to treatment and assessment could prevent TIA-related future stroke events and potentially result in cost savings to the healthcare system.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of proton pump inhibitors compared to omeprazole in the healing of reflux oesophagitis

Summary

In 1998, the National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales spent over £314 million on proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance on the use of PPIs in dyspepsia advises that the least expensive appropriate PPI be used. Consequently, the objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of all PPIs for the healing of reflux oesophagitis over 8 weeks from the perspective of the UK's NHS.

A decision analysis model was developed using healing rates derived from a systematic review of all PPIs using omeprazole as a common comparator. The economic analysis indicates that esomeprazole is cost-effective compared with all other PPIs currently available for healing reflux oesophagitis.     

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.     

Cost of illness associated with Niemann-Pick disease type C in the UK

Abstract

Objective: Niemann-Pick disease type C (NP-C) is a rare and devastating genetic disorder characterised by a range of progressive neurological symptoms, which imposes a burden on patients, family members, the healthcare system and society overall. The objective of this study was to assess direct and indirect costs associated with NP-C in the UK.

Methods: This was a non-interventional, retrospective, cross-sectional cohort study based on responses from patients and/or their carers/guardians recruited from a UK NP-C database. Resource use and direct medical, direct non-medical and indirect costs were evaluated using data collected via postal survey in October 2007, which included a Medical Resource Use questionnaire. Total annual costs per patient were estimated.

Results: In total, 18 Medical Resource Use questionnaires (29% response rate) were received and analysed. The mean total annual cost (SD) of NP-C per patient was £39,168 (£50,315); 46% were direct medical costs, to which home visits and residential care contributed 68% and 15%, respectively. Direct non-medical costs accounted for 24% of the average annual cost per patient, mainly due to specialist education, and indirect costs 30%. If only direct medical costs were considered, the mean annual cost (SD) per patient was reduced to £18,012 (£46,536).

Conclusions: The direct annual per-patient cost of NP-C illness in 2007 appears moderate when compared with other rare and severely disabling diseases. However, cost estimates may be conservative, since findings are limited by a small sample size, low survey response rate and potential recall bias. As demonstrated by this study, a substantial proportion of the cost is shifted from the healthcare system to the patient, family and non-medical providers. These findings highlight the need for treatments that can slow or stop disease progression in NP-C.     

Cost-effectiveness implications of increased survival with anastrozole in the treatment of advanced breast cancer

Summary

Anastrozole (Arimidex*) has a survival benefit compared with megestrol acetate in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer who have failed on tamoxifen. It was felt appropriate that such a clinical finding should be subjected to economic evaluation.

A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken from the viewpoint of a third-party payer, of the data from a combined analysis of two clinical studies. The outcome measures were duration of drug treatment and life years gained. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of anastrozole was £1,608 per life year gained based on UK NHS drug prices in April 1998. Sensitivity analysis showed that the ICER could vary between £5 and £1,643, depending on relative drug costs in a number of countries, between £1,056 and £1,761, depending on the method used to calculate duration of treatment and survival, and could increase to £3,730, based on treatment provided during the extra period of survival.

Anastrozole is a highly cost-effective alternative to megestrol acetate for postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer.     

The implications for the UK Exchequer of an ethical arms export policy

For the UK, defence exports provide many jobs but critics point to the morality and human rights aspects of the arms trade. Recent speeches by the foreign secretary suggest that Mr Cook is acutely aware of the trade-off between a more ethical arms export policy and jobs in the defence industry. Recent research suggests that government subsidies for arms exports cost the UK taxpayer between £228 million and £708 million per annum. However, these figures ignore the Exchequer costs of the jobs lost as a result of the reduction in arms exports. This study uses information on the expected number of job losses, and the Exchequer cost per job destroyed, to estimate the employment costs to the Exchequer associated with a one-third reduction in UK defence exports. These costs are then subtracted from the subsidy savings to derive the overall net financial saving to the taxpayer for a one-third reduction in UK arms exports.     

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.