Cost-utility analysis of imrecoxib compared with diclofenac for patients with osteoarthritis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
To estimate the cost -utility of imrecoxib compared with diclofenac, as well as the addition of a proton pump inhibitor to both two treatment strategies, for patients with osteoarthritis, from a Chinese healthcare perspective.Methods
A Markov model was built. Costs of managing osteoarthritis and initial adverse events were collected from a Medical Database which collected information from 170 hospitals. Other parameters were obtained from the literature. Subgroup analyses were conducted for people at high risk of gastrointestinal or cardiovascular adverse events. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.Results
Imrecoxib was highly cost-effective than diclofenac (the ICER was $401.58 and $492.77 in patients at low and high gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risk, respectively). The addition of a proton pump inhibitor was more cost -effective compared with single drug for both treatment strategies. Findings remained robust to sensitivity analyses. 59.04% and 57.16% probability for the co-prescription of imrecoxib and a proton pump inhibitor to be the most cost-effective strategy in all patients considered using the cost-effectiveness threshold of $30,000.Conclusions
The addition of a proton pump inhibitor to both imrecoxib and diclofenac was advised. Imrecoxib provides a valuable option for patients with osteoarthritis. Uncertainties existed in the model, and the suggestions can be adopted with caution.
SUBMITTER: Sun X
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8056517 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe objective of this study is to compare the long-term cost-utility of imrecoxib and celecoxib for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.MethodsAn economic model was built based on the model from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The simulation was carried out initially for 100 cycles of 3 months each, starting with 10,000 patients. A discount rate of 5% was applied both for cost and utility. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were adopted as the utility indicator, and real-world data from the hospital information systems of 170 hospitals was collected to indicate cost. The relative incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) with imrecoxib and celecoxib were collected from randomized controlled trials. Sensitivity analysis was performed to validate the robustness of the model.ResultsIn the base case analysis (6-month treatment duration, 55 years old and above), imrecoxib was the more cost-effective option compared to celecoxib, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $3,041.14. This finding remained unchanged after varying the treatment duration and the age of the patients. The main drivers of the results were the relative incidence of myocardial infarction (MI), the cost of imrecoxib, and the utility of OA patients without any AEs. Probability sensitivity analysis (PSA) showed that there was a 59.02% probability of imrecoxib as the more cost-effective option, with a threshold of $30,000.ConclusionsAlthough there were uncertainties, imrecoxib was the more cost-effective option compared to celecoxib, with a definite possibility. Due to the limitations of the original model and this study, the results of this study should be adopted with caution.
| S-EPMC8105807 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis suffer from reduced mobility and quality of life and the main surgical treatments are total ankle replacement (TAR) and ankle fusion (AF).ObjectivesOur aim was to calculate the mean incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of TAR compared with AF in patients with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis, over 52 weeks and over the patients' lifetime.MethodWe conducted a cost-utility analysis of 282 participants from 17 UK centres recruited to a randomised controlled trial (TARVA). QALYs were calculated using index values from EQ-5D-5L. Resource use information was collected from case report forms and self-completed questionnaires. Primary analysis was within-trial analysis from the National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective, while secondary analyses were within-trial analysis from wider perspective and long-term economic modelling. Adjustments were made for baseline resource use and index values.ResultsTotal cost at 52 weeks was higher in the TAR group compared with the AF group, from the NHS and PSS perspective (mean adjusted difference £2539, 95% confidence interval [CI] £1142, £3897). The difference became very small from the wider perspective (£155, 95% CI - £1947, £2331). There was no significant difference between TAR and AF in terms of QALYs (mean adjusted difference 0.02, 95% CI - 0.015, 0.05) at 52 weeks post-operation. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £131,999 per QALY gained 52 weeks post-operation. Long-term economic modelling resulted in an ICER of £4200 per QALY gained, and there is a 69% probability of TAR being cost effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained.ConclusionTAR does not appear to be cost effective over AF 52 weeks post-operation. A decision model suggests that TAR can be cost effective over the patients' lifetime but there is a need for longer-term prospectively collected data. Clinical trial registration ISRCTN60672307 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02128555.
| S-EPMC10884388 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundApixaban (2.5 mg) taken twice daily has been shown to substantially reduce the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared with placebo for the primary thromboprophylaxis of ambulatory patients with cancer who are starting chemotherapy and are at intermediate-to-high risk of VTE. We aimed to compare the health system costs and health benefits associated with primary thromboprophylaxis using apixaban with those associated with the current standard of care (where no primary thromboprophylaxis is given), from the perspective of Canada's publicly funded health care system in this subpopulation of patients with cancer over a lifetime horizon.MethodsWe performed a cost-utility analysis to estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with primary thromboprophylaxis using apixaban. We obtained baseline event rates and the efficacy of apixaban from the Apixaban for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in High-Risk Ambulatory Cancer Patients (AVERT) trial on apixaban prophylaxis. We estimated relative risk for bleeding, risk of complications associated with VTE treatment, mortality rates, costs and utilities from other published sources.ResultsOver a lifetime horizon, apixaban resulted in lower costs to the health system (Can$7902.98 v. Can$14 875.82) and an improvement in QALYs (9.089 v. 9.006). The key driver of cost-effectiveness results was the relative risk of VTE as a result of apixaban. Results from the probabilistic analysis showed that at a willingness to pay of Can$50 000 per QALY, the strategy with the highest probability of being most cost-effective was apixaban, with a probability of 99.87%.InterpretationWe found that apixaban is a cost-saving option for the primary thromboprophylaxis of ambulatory patients with cancer who are starting chemotherapy and are at intermediate-to-high risk of VTE.
| S-EPMC8568073 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDepression is a common mental health condition with considerable negative impact on health and well-being. Although antidepressants are recommended as first-line treatment, there is limited evidence regarding the cost effectiveness of long-term maintenance antidepressants for preventing relapse.ObjectivesOur objective was to calculate the mean incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over 12 months of discontinuing long-term antidepressant medication in well patients compared with maintenance, using patient-level trial data.MethodsWe conducted a cost-utility analysis of 478 participants from 150 UK general practices recruited to a randomised, double-blind trial (ANTLER). QALYs were calculated from EQ-5D-5L and 12-Item Short Form survey (SF-12) results, with primary analysis using the EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Resource use was collected from primary care patient electronic medical records and self-completed questionnaires capturing mental-health-related resource use. Costs were calculated by applying standard UK unit costs to resource use. Adjustments were made for baseline variables.ResultsParticipants randomised to discontinuation had significantly worse utility scores at 3 months (- 0.032; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.053 to - 0.011) but no significant difference in QALYs (- 0.011; 95% CI - 0.026 to 0.003) or costs (£3.11; 95% CI - 41.28 to 47.50) at 12 months. The probability that discontinuation was cost effective compared with maintenance was 12.9% at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained.ConclusionsDiscontinuation of antidepressants was unlikely to be cost effective compared with maintenance for currently well patients on long-term antidepressants. However, this analysis provides no information on the wider impact of antidepressants. Our findings provide information on the potential impact of discontinuing long-term maintenance antidepressants and facilitate improving guidance for shared patient-clinician decision making.Trial registrationEudraCT number 2015-004210-26; ISRCTN number ISRCTN15969819.
| S-EPMC8847280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesAortic valve disease is the most frequent indication for heart valve replacement with the highest prevalence in elderly. Tissue-engineered heart valves (TEHV) are foreseen to have important advantages over currently used bioprosthetic heart valve substitutes, most importantly reducing valve degeneration with subsequent reduction of re-intervention. We performed early Health Technology Assessment of hypothetical TEHV in elderly patients (≥ 70 years) requiring surgical (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to assess the potential of TEHV and to inform future development decisions.MethodsUsing a patient-level simulation model, the potential cost-effectiveness of TEHV compared with bioprostheses was predicted from a societal perspective. Anticipated, but currently hypothetical improvements in performance of TEHV, divided in durability, thrombogenicity, and infection resistance, were explored in scenario analyses to estimate quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain, cost reduction, headroom, and budget impact.ResultsDurability of TEHV had the highest impact on QALY gain and costs, followed by infection resistance. Improved TEHV performance (- 50% prosthetic valve-related events) resulted in lifetime QALY gains of 0.131 and 0.043, lifetime cost reductions of €639 and €368, translating to headrooms of €3255 and €2498 per hypothetical TEHV compared to SAVR and TAVI, respectively. National savings in the first decade after implementation varied between €2.8 and €11.2 million (SAVR) and €3.2-€12.8 million (TAVI) for TEHV substitution rates of 25-100%.ConclusionsDespite the relatively short life expectancy of elderly patients undergoing SAVR/TAVI, hypothetical TEHV are predicted to be cost-effective compared to bioprostheses, commercially viable and result in national cost savings when biomedical engineers succeed in realising improved durability and/or infection resistance of TEHV.
| S-EPMC7214484 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Topical corticosteroids or dietary elimination are recommended as first-line therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis, but data to directly compare these therapies are scant. We performed a cost utility comparison of topical corticosteroids and the 6-food elimination diet (SFED) in treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis, from the payer perspective.We used a modified Markov model based on current clinical guidelines, in which transition between states depended on histologic response simulated at the individual cohort-member level. Simulation parameters were defined by systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the base-case estimates and bounds of uncertainty for sensitivity analysis. Meta-regression models included adjustment for differences in study and cohort characteristics.In the base-case scenario, topical fluticasone was about as effective as SFED but more expensive at a 5-year time horizon ($9261.58 vs $5719.72 per person). SFED was more effective and less expensive than topical fluticasone and topical budesonide in the base-case scenario. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed little uncertainty in relative treatment effectiveness. There was somewhat greater uncertainty in the relative cost of treatments; most simulations found SFED to be less expensive.In a cost utility analysis comparing topical corticosteroids and SFED for first-line treatment of eosinophilic esophagitis, the therapies were similar in effectiveness. SFED was on average less expensive, and more cost effective in most simulations, than topical budesonide and topical fluticasone, from a payer perspective and not accounting for patient-level costs or quality of life.
| S-EPMC5440206 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The objective was to evaluate cost-utility of bariatric surgery in Germany for a lifetime and 10-year horizon from a health care payer perspective.State-transition Markov model provided absolute and incremental clinical and monetary results. In the model, obese patients could undergo surgery, develop post-surgery complications, experience diabetes type II, cardiovascular diseases or die. German Quality Assurance in Bariatric Surgery Registry and literature sources provided data on clinical effectiveness and safety. The model considered three types of surgeries: gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, and adjustable gastric banding. The model was extensively validated, and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate uncertainty. Cost data were obtained from German sources and presented in 2012 euros (€).Over 10 years, bariatric surgery led to the incremental cost of €2909, generated additional 0.03 years of life and 1.2 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Bariatric surgery was cost-effective at 10 years with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2457 per QALY. Over a lifetime, surgery led to savings of €8522 and generated an increment of 0.7 years of life or 3.2 QALYs. The analysis also depicted an association between surgery and a reduction of obesity-related adverse events (diabetes, cardiovascular disorders). Delaying surgery for up to 3 years, resulted in a reduction of life years and QALYs gained, in addition to a moderate reduction in associated healthcare costs.Bariatric surgery is cost-effective at 10 years post-surgery and may result in a substantial reduction in the financial burden on the healthcare system over the lifetime of the treated individuals. It is also observed that delays in the provision of surgery may lead to a significant loss of clinical benefits.
| S-EPMC5543597 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the cost-effectiveness (cost-utility) of introducing general practitioner screening for anxiety and depression in patients consulting for osteoarthritis (OA).MethodsA cluster-randomized trial-based economic evaluation to assess general practitioners screening for anxiety and depression symptoms in patients consulting for OA compared to usual care (screening for pain intensity) was undertaken over a 12-month period from a UK National Health Service and societal perspective. Patient-level mean costs and mean quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated, and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves controlling for cluster-level data were constructed. The base-case analysis used the net benefit regressions approach. The 2-stage nonparametric sampling technique was explored in a sensitivity analysis.ResultsThe base-case analysis demonstrated that the intervention was as costly as, and less effective than, the control (QALY differential -0.029 [95% confidence interval -0.062, 0.003]). In the base-case analyses, general practitioner screening for anxiety and depression was unlikely to be a cost-effective option (probability <5% at £20,000/QALY). Similar results were observed in all sensitivity analyses.ConclusionPrompting general practitioners to routinely screen and manage comorbid anxiety and depression in patients presenting with OA is unlikely to be cost-effective. Further research is needed to explore clinically effective and cost-effective models of managing anxiety and depression in patients presenting with clinical OA.
| S-EPMC6563477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo analyze the cost-effective ratio of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the osteoarthritis (OA) treatment of at a regional medical center in China.MethodsOne hundred thirty-nine patients with osteoarthritis who underwent TKA at the Department of Osteoarthritis in Luhe hospital (Tongzhou, Beijing) from January 2011 to January 2012 were followed up. Their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was evaluated using Short-Form Health Survey (SF) -36 Chinese version, and compared with those of the normal population to assess quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained after surgery for its effectiveness of the treatment. The total expense was the cost of patient hospitalization. The cost per QALY was calculated. The cost-benefit ratio (CBR) was expressed as a ratio of each QALY's expenditure to per capita gross domestic product (GDP). Factors affecting the cost, including age, gender, length of stay, and ICU experience, were also considered.ResultsThe total hospitalization fee was Ұ8,053,736.68, Ұ57,940.55 in average, of which, 81.59% constituted out-of-pocket expenses. The SF-36 scores were as follows: Physical Function: 25.14, Role Physical: 7.12, Bodily Pain: 9.60, Role emotional: 5.58, Vitality: 19.9, Mental Health: 25.84, Social Function: 9.86 and General Health: 21.15. Compared with normal people of the same age and sex, a total of Ұ2487.74 QALYs and Ұ3237.37/QALY were gained, 10% less than the regional GDP per capita. The cost-effective ratio of TKA for osteoarthritis in China was 1: 10.78. The main cost of the patient was the cost of prosthesis (61.78%). The average cost afforded by patients' themselves was Ұ47,242.64 after the deduction of government subsidies. There were Ұ31,306.64 difference compared with the annual average income of the local people. The cost might be affected by length of stay and ICU experience. Longer stay caused more cost of treatment. Patients who remained in ICU after surgery had higher overall costs and blood transfusion costs.ConclusionThe factors that affect TKA cost are hospital and postsurgical ICU stay. It is cost-effective for regional medical care center to treat osteoarthritis using TKA economically. However, considering the average income of patients in the area, it is necessary to reduce the cost of the treatment.
| S-EPMC6734290 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsLower-cost biosimilar infliximab may address affordability concerns in the treatment of adults with Crohn's disease (CD), however, evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of switching from reference to biosimilar is warranted. The aim of this research was to assess the incremental cost of switching from treatment with reference infliximab to biosimilar compared with maintaining reference infliximab in adults with CD per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.MethodsA probabilistic cohort Markov model with 8-week cycle lengths was constructed to estimate the incremental costs and effects of switching over a 5-year time horizon from a public payer perspective. Base-case clinical inputs were obtained from NOR-SWITCH subgroup analyses and other published trials. Costs were obtained from Canadian sources. A total of 10,000 simulations were run. Sensitivity analysis was used to test the robustness of the results to variations in uncertain parameters.ResultsSwitching to biosimilar infliximab was less costly but also less effective with incremental savings of $46,194 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $42,420, $50,455) and a loss in QALYs of -0.13 (95% CI: -0.16, -0.07). Eighty-three per cent of the simulations demonstrated incremental cost savings and an incremental loss of effectiveness. The model was sensitive to differences in rates of disease worsening between reference and biosimilar infliximab.ConclusionsWhile biosimilar infliximab is associated with incremental savings for patients on maintenance therapy who are switched from reference infliximab, funding decision makers must decide whether a small loss of effectiveness is justified. Further evidence will help to inform reimbursement policy.
| S-EPMC7898373 | biostudies-literature