Management of vaccinations in Italy: a national survey after healthcare regionalization

Abstract

Objectives:

The main aim of this study was to describe the effects of regional organization and performance in managing vaccinations, in the light of the institutional devolution recently introduced in Italy.

Methods:

We analysed (1) the general organization of regions for vaccination programmes, (2) the management of four vaccination programmes (combined measles-rubella-parotitis, varicella for children, influenza, and pneumococcal 23-valent for adults).

First, we conducted preliminary face-to-face interviews with 16 regional managers of the infective disease prevention departments. Subsequently, we sent them a standardized questionnaire to obtain comparable information on general organization and on the four specific vaccination programmes considered. In all, 14 regions were eventually included.

Results:

The survey showed a widespread lack of regional staff involved in the management of vaccinations and a geographical variation in the availability of computerized data collection. We recorded poor coverage for varicella and pneumococcal 23-valent vaccinations compared to MRP and influenza. Prices of the four vaccines varied widely among regions, with only a weak correlation between prices and volumes.

Limitations and conclusions:

The major limitation of the survey was the lack of information available at regional level. The piecemeal diffusion of computerized systems and the widespread lack of sufficient staff should mainly explain this.

Economic incentives could be offered to regions that achieve national targets. Such incentives should encourage collaboration between central and regional authorities consistent with institutional trends in regional devolution.     

Medical costs in patients with heart failure after acute heart failure events: one-year follow-up study

Aims: This study investigated annual medical costs using real-world data focusing on acute heart failure.

Methods: The data were retrospectively collected from six tertiary hospitals in South Korea. Overall, 330 patients who were hospitalized for acute heart failure between January 2011 and July 2012 were selected. Data were collected on their follow-up medical visits for 1 year, including medical costs incurred toward treatment. Those who died within the observational period or who had no records of follow-up visits were excluded. Annual per patient medical costs were estimated according to the type of medical services, and factors contributing to the costs using Gamma Generalized Linear Models (GLM) with log link were analyzed.

Results: On average, total annual medical costs for each patient were USD 6,199 (±9,675), with hospitalization accounting for 95% of the total expenses. Hospitalization cost USD 5,904 (±9,666) per patient. Those who are re-admitted have 88.5% higher medical expenditure than those who have not been re-admitted in 1 year, and patients using intensive care units have 19.6% higher expenditure than those who do not. When the number of hospital days increased by 1?day, medical expenses increased by 6.7%.

Limitations: Outpatient drug costs were not included. There is a possibility that medical expenses for AHF may have been under-estimated.

Conclusion: It was found that hospitalization resulted in substantial costs for treatment of heart failure in South Korea, especially in patients with an acute heart failure event. Prevention strategies and appropriate management programs that would reduce both frequency of hospitalization and length of stay for patients with the underlying risk of heart failure are needed.     

The cost effectiveness of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (6/11/16/18) in Hungary

Abstract

Objective: A transmission dynamic model was used to assess the epidemiological and economic impact of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) (6/11/16/18) vaccine in preventing cervical cancer, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grades 2 and 3 (CIN 2/3), CIN 1 and genital warts in Hungary.

Methods: The routine vaccination of 12-year-old girls and the routine vaccination of 12-year-old girls plus a temporary catch-up programme for girls and women aged 12–24 years was evaluated.

Results: The model projected that at year 100, both strategies could reduce the incidence of HPV 6/11/16/18-related cervical cancer, CIN 2/3, CIN 1 and genital warts cases among Hungarian women by 90%, 90%, 85% and 93%, respectively. Twenty-five years after the introduction of HPV vaccination in the population, routine vaccination of girls by the age of 12 reduced the cumulative number of cases of cervical cancer, CIN 2/3, CIN 1 and genital warts by 685, 13,473, 3,423 and 163,987, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the two vaccination strategies were €9,577 and €10,646 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained over a time horizon of 100 years.

Key limitations: The model did not account for the health and economic impact of other HPV diseases which may result from HPV 16, 18, 6, and 11 infections such as vaginal, vulvar, penile, anal and head-neck cancers, and recurrent respiratory papillomatosis. Epidemiological data from Hungary on these other HPV diseases as well genital warts are needed.

Conclusion: A quadrivalent HPV vaccination programme can reduce the incidence of cervical cancer, CIN and genital warts in Hungary at a cost-per-QALY ratio within the range defined as cost effective.     

Cost effectiveness and cost utility of risedronate for osteoporosis treatment and fracture prevention in women: a Swiss perspective

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of risedronate compared to no intervention in postmenopausal osteoporotic women in a Swiss perspective.

Methods: A previously validated Markov model was populated with epidemiological and cost data specific to Switzerland and published utility values, and run on a population of 1,000 women of 70 years with established osteoporosis and previous vertebral fracture, treated over 5 years with risedronate 35 mg weekly or no intervention (base case), and five cohorts (according to age at therapy start) with eight risk factor distributions and three lengths of residual effects.

Results: In the base case population, the ICER of averting a hip fracture and the ICUR per quality-adjusted life year gained were both dominant. In the presence of a previous vertebral fracture, the ICUR was below €45,000 (£30,000) in all the scenarios. For all osteoporotic women ≥ 70 years of age with at least one risk factor, the ICUR was below €45,000 or the intervention may even be cost saving. Age at the start of therapy and the fracture risk profile had a significant impact on results.

Conclusion: Assuming a 2-year residual effect, that ICUR of risedronate in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis is below accepted thresholds from the age of 65 and even cost saving above the age of 70 with at least one risk factor.     

A cost analysis of the management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children in the UK

SUMMARY

A decision analysis was performed to model the effects and health economic differences of current UK management approaches to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children aged between 6 and 16 years. The approaches modelled were: medication using a standard immediate-release methylphenidate (MPH-IR) (once, twice or three times daily); medication using CONCERTA®XL (OROS®* methylphenidate; MPH), a long-acting once-daily formulation of methylphenidate; or behavioural therapy (BEH). Starting treatment with BEH alone resulted in the highest annual cost (UK£2,147), while the costs of starting treatment with MPH-IR alone (£1,332), or OROS®* MPH alone (£1,362) were comparable. Treatment switches to behavioural treatment or combined treatment (medication and behavioural) due to treatment failure occurred in 11.8% of OROS®* MPH and 24.2% of MPH-IR patients. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that the results were sensitive towards treatment success and the proportion of patients with comorbidities, although conclusions were not altered. UK treatment costs over 1 year appear comparable regardless of whether patients were treated first with OROS®* MPH or MPH-IR. Treating patients first with BEH and then adding stimulant medication if needed resulted in higher overall annual treatment costs.

CONCERTA® XL and OROS® are trademarks of ALZA Corporation, USA.     

The cost effectiveness of palivizumab: a systematic review of the evidence

Abstract

Objective:

Palivizumab is a prophylactic therapy shown to reduce the number of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)-related hospitalizations but has a high acquisition cost. The objective was to systematically examine the cost effectiveness of palivizumab in defined infant groups and identify important cost and outcome determinants.

Methods:

Literature searches of MedLine, the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry and the UK NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) were conducted to identify economic evaluations of palivizumab compared to no prophylactic treatment for RSV prevention in any infant population. Study quality was evaluated using Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) criteria and results converted to 2009 CAN$ for comparison.

Results:

A total of 23 articles meeting inclusion criteria were identified, including 11 cost-utility analyses (CUAs) and 12 cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). Quality of individual analyses was fairly high (range 60–100, median 86). Results ranged from cost dominance for prophylaxis to $3,365,769/QALY depending on population, outcome measures, and input parameters. Base-case and sensitivity-analysis mortality rates varied between studies and influenced results.

Conclusions:

RSV prophylaxis with palivizumab is cost effective in specific groups of high-risk infants, especially those with multiple environmental risk factors. Cost-effectiveness estimates vary between populations and settings and are more positive in those at highest risk for RSV hospitalization.

Limitations:

Direct comparison of the published reports was limited by restriction to English language articles and the varied methodologies, input measures, and populations across the studies reviewed. Although reported currencies were converted to a common unit for comparison, this does not completely account for monetary and inflation differences.     

Ultrafiltration versus diuretics for the treatment of fluid overload in patients with heart failure: a hospital cost analysis

Abstract

Background: Heart failure (HF) is a common, serious disease in the US and Europe. Patients with HF often require treatment for fluid overload, resulting in costly inpatient visits; however, limited evidence exists on the costs of alternative treatments. This study performed a cost-analysis of ultrafiltration (UF) vs diuretic therapy (DIUR-T) for patients with HF from the hospital perspective.

Methods: The model used clinical data from the literature and hospital data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project to follow a decision-analytic framework reflecting treatment decisions, probabilistic outcomes, and associated costs for treating patients with HF and hypervolemia with veno-venous UF or intravenous DIUR-T. A 90-day timeframe was considered to account for hospital readmissions beyond 30?days. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to gauge the robustness of the results.

Results: Although initial hospitalization costs were higher, fluid removal by UF reduced hospital readmission days, leading to cost savings of $3,975 (14.4%) at the 90-day follow-up (UF costs, $23,633; DIUR-T costs, $27,608).

Conclusions: UF is a viable alternative to DIUR-T when treating fluid overload in HF patients because it reduces hospital readmission rates and durations, which substantially lowers costs over a 90-day period compared to DIUR-T.     

Oral semaglutide versus injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: a cost of control analysis

Abstract

Aims: The efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide, the first glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist developed for oral administration for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, was evaluated in the PIONEER clinical trial program, and a recently published network meta-analysis allowed comparison with further injectable GLP-1 receptor agonists. The present study aimed to assess the short-term cost- effectiveness of oral semaglutide 14?mg versus subcutaneous once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5?mg, once-weekly exenatide 2?mg, twice-daily exenatide 10?µg, once-daily liraglutide 1.8?mg, once-daily lixisenatide 20?µg, and once-weekly semaglutide 1?mg, in terms of the cost per patient achieving glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) targets (cost of control).

Materials and methods: Cost of control was calculated by dividing the annual treatment costs associated with an intervention by the proportion of patients achieving the treatment target with an intervention, with outcomes calculated for targets of HbA1c ≤6.5% and HbA1c <7.0% for all included GLP-1 receptor agonists. Annual treatment costs were accounted in 2019 United States dollars (USD), based on 2019 wholesale acquisition cost.

Results: For the treatment target of HbA1c ≤6.5%, once-weekly semaglutide 1?mg and oral semaglutide 14?mg were associated with the lowest costs of control, at USD 15,430 and USD 17,383 per patient achieving target, respectively. Similarly, the cost of control was lowest with once-weekly semaglutide 1?mg at USD 12,627 per patient achieving target, followed by oral semaglutide 14?mg at USD 13,493 per patient achieving target for the target of HbA1c <7.0%. All other interventions were associated with higher cost of control values for both targets.

Conclusions: Oral semaglutide 14?mg is likely to be cost-effective versus dulaglutide, exenatide (once weekly and twice daily), liraglutide, and lixisenatide in terms of bringing people with type 2 diabetes to glycemic control targets of HbA1c ≤6.5% and HbA1c <7.0% in the US.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ferric carboxymaltose in iron-deficient patients with chronic heart failure in Sweden

Abstract

Objective:

Iron deficiency is a common but treatable comorbidity in chronic heart failure (CHF) that is associated with impaired health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL). This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the intravenous iron preparation ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) for the treatment of iron deficiency in CHF from a Swedish healthcare perspective.     

Development of a health economic model to evaluate the potential benefits of optimal serum potassium management in patients with heart failure

Abstract

Aims: Patients with heart failure are at increased risk of hyperkalemia, particularly when treated with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) agents. This study developed a model to quantify the potential health and economic value associated with sustained potassium management and optimal RAASi therapy in heart failure patients.

Materials and methods: A patient-level, fixed-time increment stochastic simulation model was designed to characterize the progression of heart failure through New York Heart Association functional classes, and predict associations between serum potassium levels, RAASi use, and consequent long-term outcomes. Following internal and external validation exercises, model analyses sought to quantify the health and economic benefits of optimizing both serum potassium levels and RAASi therapy in heart failure patients. Analyses were conducted using a UK payer perspective, independent of costs and utilities related to pharmacological potassium management.

Results: Validation against multiple datasets demonstrated the predictive capability of the model. Compared to those who discontinued RAASi to manage serum potassium, patients with normokalemia and ongoing RAASi therapy benefited from longer life expectancy (+1.38 years), per-patient quality-adjusted life year gains (+0.53 QALYs), cost savings (£110), and associated net monetary benefit (£10,679 at £20,000 per QALY gained) over a lifetime horizon. The predicted value of sustained potassium management and ongoing RAASi treatment was largely driven by reduced mortality and hospitalization risks associated with optimal RAASi therapy.

Limitations: Several modeling assumptions were made to account for a current paucity of published literature; however, ongoing refinement and validation of the model will ensure its continued accuracy as the clinical landscape of hyperkalemia evolves.

Conclusions: Predictions generated by this novel modeling approach highlight the value of sustained potassium management to avoid hyperkalemia, enable RAASi therapy, and improve long-term health economic outcomes in patients with heart failure.     

Cost and effectiveness of ciprofloxacin + hydrocortisone versus neomycin + polymyxin B + hydrocortisone in France for the treatment of acute otitis externa

Summary

The cost-effectiveness of two topical otic combinations, ciprofloxacin + hydrocortisone and polymyxin B — neomycin — hydrocortisone (PNH), was assessed in the treatment of acute otitis externa (AOE). Two randomised controlled double-masked trials compared their clinical and bacteriological efficacy and safety after 7 to 10 days of qid treatment. The treatment failure cost was established from a panel of ENT specialists and GPs. A decision-tree analysis was constructed to reproduce the results of empirical treatment. The most often encountered species were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (82.4%) and Staphylococcus aureus (9.7%). Patients documented with P aeruginosa had a better ciprofloxacin + hydrocortisone bacterial and clinical efficacy. The cost of AOE first-line failure was EUR 94.44 (Societal) and EUR 57.24 (Sécurité Sociale). The savings associated with ciprofloxacin + hydrocortisone (Cipro HC ®) were respectively EUR 3.87 and EUR 2.85. This model shows that topical ciprofloxacin + hydrocortisone could be a cost saving alternative in the treatment of AOE, provided its public price does not exceed EUR 10.60.

Cipro HC® is a registered trademark of Alcon, France.     

Evaluating drug cost per responder and number needed to treat associated with lixisenatide on top of glargine when compared to rapid-acting insulin intensification regimens on top of glargine,in patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK,Italy, and Spain

Objectives: This study investigated the cost per responder and number needed to treat (NNT) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients for lixisenatide compared to insulin intensification regimens using composite endpoints in the UK, Italy, and Spain.

Methods: Efficacy and safety outcomes were obtained from GetGoal Duo-2, a 26-week phase 3 trial comparing lixisenatide vs insulin glulisine (IG) once daily (QD) and three times daily (TID). Response at week 26 was extrapolated to 52 weeks, assuming a maintained treatment effect, based on long-term evidence in other T2DM populations. Responders were defined using composite end-points, based on an HbA1c threshold and/or no weight gain and/or no hypoglycemia. The HbA1c threshold was varied in sensitivity analyses. Annual treatment costs were estimated in euros (1 GBP?=?1.26 EUR), including drug acquisition and resource use costs. Cost per responder was computed by dividing annual treatment costs per patient by the proportion of responders.

Results: Lixisenatide was associated with the lowest cost per responder for all composite end-points that included a weight-related component. For the main composite end-point of HbA1c ≤7.5% AND no weight gain AND no symptomatic hypoglycemia, cost per responder results were: UK: 6,867€, 8,746€, and 12,410€; Italy: 7,057€, 9,160€, and 12,844€; Spain: 8,370€, 11,365€, and 17,038€, for lixisenatide, IG QD, and TID, respectively. The NNT analysis showed that, for every 6.85 and 5.86 patients treated with lixisenatide, there was approximately one additional responder compared to IG QD and TID, respectively.

Limitations: A limitation of the clinical inputs is the lack of 52-week trial data from GetGoal Duo-2, which led to the assumption of a maintained treatment effect from week 26 to 52.

Conclusions: This analysis suggests lixisenatide is an efficient economic resource allocation in the UK, Italy, and Spain.     

Estimated cost savings associated with the use of valsartan in heart failure in a large US health plan

Summary

Results from a large, randomised clinical trial demonstrated reduced rates of hospitalisation and mortality, and reduced length of stay associated with valsartan added to the usual care of heart failure patients not currently receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs). These results were used in a budget impact model for a large US health plan. Administrative claims data were used to estimate cost savings over 1 year. In the study health plan, 63,218 patients were identified with heart failure, with 55% not currently receiving ACEI or valsartan. Using health plan-specific cost data, care for the untreated heart failure patients with valsartan would reduce hospitalisation costs from $135 million to $43 million owing to averted heart failure-related hospitalisations and shortened length of stay for the remaining hospitalisations. Economic effects of other aspects of treatment with valsartan (e.g. outpatient or physician visits or adverse events) were not considered. Taking into account only hospitalisations and the costs of valsartan therapy, net savings in the study health plan would be expected to be $64 million.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis in the Spanish setting of the PEAK trial of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab in combination with mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin) vs bevacizumab in combination with mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Spain.

Methods: A semi-Markov model was developed including the following health states: Progression free; Progressive disease: Treat with best supportive care; Progressive disease: Treat with subsequent active therapy; Attempted resection of metastases; Disease free after metastases resection; Progressive disease: after resection and relapse; and Death. Parametric survival analyses of patient-level progression free survival and overall survival data from the PEAK Phase II clinical trial were used to estimate health state transitions. Additional data from the PEAK trial were considered for the dose and duration of therapy, the use of subsequent therapy, the occurrence of adverse events, and the incidence and probability of time to metastasis resection. Utility weightings were calculated from patient-level data from panitumumab trials evaluating first-, second-, and third-line treatments. The study was performed from the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective including only direct costs. A life-time horizon was applied. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and scenario sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model.

Results: Based on the PEAK trial, which demonstrated greater efficacy of panitumumab vs bevacizumab, both in combination with mFOLFOX6 first-line in wild-type RAS mCRC patients, the estimated incremental cost per life-year gained was €16,567 and the estimated incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained was €22,794. The sensitivity analyses showed the model was robust to alternative parameters and assumptions.

Limitations: The analysis was based on a simulation model and, therefore, the results should be interpreted cautiously.

Conclusions: Based on the PEAK Phase II clinical trial and taking into account Spanish costs, the results of the analysis showed that first-line treatment of mCRC with panitumumab?+?mFOLFOX6 could be considered a cost-effective option compared with bevacizumab?+?mFOLFOX6 for the Spanish NHS.     

Pharmacological control of secondary hyperparathyroidism in hemodialysis subjects: a cost consequences analysis of data from the FARO study

Abstract

Background and objectives:

Secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) is a frequent complication of CKD with incidence, prevalence, and costs increasing worldwide. The objective of this analysis was to estimate therapy cost of SHPT in a sub-population of the FARO study.

Materials and Methods:

In the FARO study, an observational survey aimed to evaluate patterns of treatment in patients with SHPT who had undergone hemodialysis, pharmacological treatments and biochemical parameters evolution data were collected in four surveys. Patients maintaining the same treatment in all sessions were grouped by type of treatment and evaluated for costs from the Italian National Health Service perspective.

Results:

Four cohorts were identified: patients treated with oral (PO) calcitriol (n?=?182), intravenous (IV) calcitriol (n?=?34), IV paricalcitol (n?=?62), and IV paricalcitol?+?cinacalcet therapy (n?=?20); the cinacalcet monotherapy group was not analysed due to low number of patients (n?=?9). Parathyroid hormone (PTH) level at baseline and effectiveness of treatments in suppressing PTH level were assessed to test comparability among cohorts: calcitriol PO patients were significantly less severe than others (PTH level at baseline lower than 300?pg/ml; p?<?0.0001); calcitriol IV patients did not reach significant reduction in PTH level. Paricalcitol and paricalcitol?+?cinacalcet treatment groups results were comparable, while only the IV paricalcitol cohort’s PTH level, weekly dosage, and cost decreased significantly from the first to the fourth survey (p?=?0.020, p?=?0.012, and p?=?0.0124, respectively). Total costs per week of treatment (including calcium-based phosphate binder and sevelamer) were significantly lower in the paricalcitol vs paricalcitol?+?cinacalcet cohort (p?<?0.001). Major limitations of this study are related to the survey design: not controlled and lack of comparability between cohorts; however, reflective of true practice patterns.

Conclusions:

The IV Paricalcitol cohort had significantly lower treatment costs compared with patients treated with paricalcitol?+?calcimemtics (p?<?0.001), without a significant difference in terms of baseline severity and PTH control.     

Cost-effectiveness of obinutuzumab plus bendamustine followed by obinutuzumab monotherapy for the treatment of follicular lymphoma patients who relapse after or are refractory to a rituximab-containing regimen in the US

Aims: Obinutuzumab (GA101, G) was approved in February 2016 by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat follicular lymphoma (FL) patients who relapsed after, or are refractory to (R/R), a rituximab-containing regimen (R/R-rituximab). In the GADOLIN trial, R/R-rituximab patients who received G plus bendamustine (B) followed by G-monotherapy (G?+?B) for up to 2 years had significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared to patients receiving B-monotherapy. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of G?+?B vs B-monotherapy for R/R-rituximab FL patients from a US payer perspective.

Materials and methods: Patient outcomes were simulated using a 3-state area under the curve model including progression-free survival, progressive disease, and death. This study used R/R-rituximab data from the National LymphoCare Study to extrapolate the GADOLIN trial’s refractory FL progression-free and overall survival data to a R/R-rituximab FL population. Drug utilization and adverse events were based on trial data, and costs were based on Medicare reimbursements and drug wholesale acquisition costs in 2016. Utility estimates were derived from published literature. Post-progression treatment costs were based on observed post-progression therapies in GADOLIN. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess model uncertainty.

Results: G?+?B resulted in an increase in quality-adjusted life years relative to B-monotherapy of 1.24 (95% CR?=?0.61–1.87); the incremental total cost was $58,100 (95% CR?=?$54,500–$61,500). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $47,000 per QALY gained, and, based on probabilistic simulations, there was a 98% probability that G?+?B was cost-effective at the $100,000 per QALY threshold.

Limitations and conclusions: This US-based analysis suggests that treatment with G?+?B compared to B-monotherapy is likely cost-effective in R/R-rituximab FL patients. Modeling a R/R-rituximab population based on a synthesis of GADOLIN and the National LymphoCare Study data introduces uncertainty in the analysis. However, the findings were robust to sensitivity analyses.     

Quality of life benefits and cost impact of prolonged release oxycodone/naloxone versus prolonged release oxycodone in patients with moderate-to-severe non-malignant pain and opioid-induced constipation: a UK cost-utility analysis

Abstract

Objective:

To compare the cost effectiveness of prolonged release oxycodone/naloxone (OXN) tablets (Targinact) and prolonged release oxycodone (OXY) tablets (OxyContin) in patients with moderate-to-severe non-malignant pain and opioid-induced constipation (OIC) from the perspective of the UK healthcare system.

Methods:

A cohort model used data from a phase III randomised, controlled trial (RCT). It calculated the cost difference between treatments by combining the cost of pain therapy with costs of laxatives and other resources used to manage constipated patients. SF-36 scores were converted into EQ-5D utility values to calculate the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results:

The incremental cost of OXN versus OXY was £159.68 for the average treatment duration of 301 days. OXN gave an incremental QALY gain of 0.0273. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £5841.56 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses gave a maximum ICER of £10,347.03. In some scenarios, OXN dominated with a cost saving of up to £4254.70. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that OXN had approximately 96.6% probability of cost effectiveness at the £20,000 threshold.

Limitations:

The model was conservative in predicting the probability of constipation beyond the 12-week RCT period. UK cost of constipation data were limited and based on primary care physician opinion.

Conclusions:

In the base case, direct treatment costs were slightly higher for patients treated with OXN than for those treated with OXY. However, patients treated with OXN experienced a quality of life gain, and had an ICER considerably below thresholds commonly applied in the UK. The model was most sensitive to the estimated cost of constipation with a number of realistic scenarios in the sensitivity analysis demonstrating a cost saving with OXN (OXN dominant). OXN is therefore estimated to be a cost-effective option for treating patients with severe non-malignant pain and OIC.     

Management and cost analysis of cancer patients treated with G-CSF: a cohort study based on the French national healthcare insurance database

Objectives: To describe the management and costs associated with G-CSF therapy in cancer patients in France.

Methods: This study analyzed a representative random population sample from the French national healthcare insurance database, focusing on 1,612 patients with hematological or solid malignancies who were reimbursed in 2013 or 2014 for at least one G-CSF treatment dispensed in a retail pharmacy. Patient characteristics and treatment costs were analyzed according to the type of cancer. Then the costs and characteristics of patients associated with the use of different G-CSF products were analyzed in the sub-set of breast cancer patients.

Results: The most frequent malignancies in the database population were breast cancer (23.3%), hematological malignancies (22.2%), and lung cancer (12.4%). The reimbursed G-CSF was pegfilgrastim in 34.1% of cases, lenograstim in 26.7%, and filgrastim in 17.9%. More than one G-CSF product was reimbursed to 21.3% of patients. The total annual reimbursed health expenses per patient, according to the type of G-CSF, were €27,001, €24,511, and €20,802 for patients treated with filgrastim, lenograstim, and pegfilgrastim, respectively. Ambulatory care accounted for, respectively, 35%, 38%, and 41% of those costs. In patients with breast cancer, ambulatory care cost was €7,915 with filgrastim, €7,750 with lenograstim, and €6,989 with pegfilgrastim, and the respective cost of G-CSF was €1,733, €1,559, and €3,668.

Conclusion: All available G-CSF products have been shown to be effective in cancer patients, and both daily G-CSFs and pegylated G-CSF are recommended in international guidelines. Nevertheless, this analysis of G-CSF reimbursement indicates that the choice of product can markedly affect the total cost of ambulatory care.