Abstract 200: Cost-Effectiveness of Newer Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendan L Limone ◽  
William L Baker ◽  
Craig I Coleman
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Treatment Comparison ◽  
Newer Anticoagulants ◽  
The Cost

Background: A number of new anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF) have gained regulatory approval or are in late-stage development. We sought to conduct a systematic review of economic models of dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban for SPAF. Methods: We searched the Medline, Embase, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database and Health Technology Assessment database along with the Tuft’s Registry through October 10, 2012. Included models assessed the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran (150mg, 110mg, sequential), rivaroxaban or apixaban for SPAF using a Markov model or discrete event simulation and were published in English. Results: Eighteen models were identified. All models utilized a lone randomized trial (or an indirect comparison utilizing a single study for any given direct comparison), and these trials were clinically and methodologically heterogeneous. Dabigatran 150mg was assessed in 9 of models, dabigatran 110mg in 8, sequential dabigatran in 9, rivaroxaban in 4 and apixaban in 4. Adjusted-dose warfarin (either trial-like, real-world prescribing or genotype-dosed) was a potential first-line therapy in 94% of models. Models were conducted from the perspective of the United States (44%), European countries (39%) and Canada (17%). In base-case analyses, patients typically were at moderate-risk of ischemic stroke, initiated anticoagulation between 65 and 73 years of age, and were followed for or near a lifetime. All models reported cost/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, and while 22% of models reported using a societal perspective, no model included costs of lost productivity. Four models reported an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for a newer anticoagulant (dabigatran 110mg (n=4)/150mg (n=2); rivaroxaban (n=1)) vs. warfarin above commonly reported willingness-to-pay thresholds. ICERs (in 2012US$) vs. warfarin ranged from $3,547-$86,000 for dabigatran 150mg, $20,713-$150,000 for dabigatran 110mg, $4,084-$21,466 for sequentially-dosed dabigatran and $23,065-$57,470 for rivaroxaban. In addition, apixaban was demonstrated to be an economically dominant strategy compared to aspirin and to be dominant or cost-effective ($11,400-$25,059) vs. warfarin. Based on separate indirect treatment comparison meta-analyses, 3 models compared the cost-effectiveness of these new agents and reported conflicting results. Conclusions: Cost-effectiveness models of newer anticoagulants for SPAF have been extensively published. Models have frequently found newer anticoagulants to be cost-effective, but due to the lack of head-to-head trial comparisons and heterogeneity in clinical characteristic of underlying trials and modeling methods, it is currently unclear which of these newer agents is most cost-effective.

scholarly journals Predicting Cost-Effectiveness of Generic Versus Brand Dabigatran Using Pharmacometric Estimates among Patients with Atrial Fibrillation in the United States

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ching-Yu Wang ◽  
Phuong N. Pham ◽  
Sarah Kim ◽  
Karthik Lingineni ◽  
Stephan Schmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Lifetime Cost ◽  
Systemic Exposure ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Payer Perspective ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Generic Medications ◽  
Newer Anticoagulants

ABSTRACTGeneric entry of newer anticoagulants is expected to decrease the costs of atrial fibrillation management. However, when making switches between brand and generic medications, bioequivalence failures are possible. The objectives of this study were to predict and compare the lifetime cost-effectiveness of brand dabigatran with hypothetical future generics. Markov micro-simulations were modified to predict the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years of patients on either brand or generic dabigatran from a U.S. private payer perspective. Event rates for generics were predicted using previously developed pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models. The analyses showed that generic dabigatran with lower-than-brand systemic exposure was dominant. Meanwhile, generic dabigatran with extremely high systemic exposure was not cost-effective compared to the brand reference. Cost-effectiveness of generic medications cannot always be assumed as shown in this example. Combined use of pharmacometric and pharmacoeconomic models can assist in decision making between brand and generic pharmacotherapies.

Cost-effectiveness of various maintenance therapies based on mutation status following first-line treatment of primary epithelial ovarian cancer in the United States.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19399-e19399
Author(s):  
Courtney Penn ◽  
Melissa Wong ◽  
Christine S. Walsh
Keyword(s):  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Maintenance Strategies ◽  
The Cost

e19399 Background: The recent SOLO1, PRIMA, and PAOLA trials all reported positive efficacy results, making it difficult to determine optimal upfront maintenance therapy for patients with primary, advanced ovarian cancer. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the maintenance strategies outlined in these trials for BRCA-positive patients, homologous-recombination deficient patients without a BRCA mutation (HRD-positive), and homologous-recombination proficient (HRD-negative) patients. Methods: Three decision analysis models were developed, one for each mutation status. We evaluated olaparib (SOLO1), olaparib/bevacizumab (PAOLA), bevacizumab alone (PAOLA), and niraparib (PRIMA) maintenance strategies. Base case 1 assessed olaparib vs olaparib/bevacizumab vs bevacizumab vs niraparib vs no maintenance therapy in BRCA-positive patients. Base cases 2 and 3 assessed olaparib/bevacizumab vs bevacizumab vs niraparib vs no maintenance therapy in HRD-positive and HRD-negative patients, respectively. Time horizon was 24 months. Costs, measured in U.S. dollars, were estimated from Medicare claims, wholesale acquisition prices, and previously published sources. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were in dollars per progression-free life-year saved (PF-LYS). One-way sensitivity analyses were performed varying drug cost and progression-free survival. Results: Assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/PF-LYS, none of the drug maintenance strategies could be considered cost effective compared with observation. In BRCA-positive patients (base case 1), olaparib monotherapy was the most cost-effective strategy, yielding an ICER of $181,059/PF-LYS. The third-party payer cost per 28-day supply of olaparib would need to be reduced from approximately $17,000 to $9,200 to be considered cost effective compared with observation. In HRD-positive patients (base case 2) and HRD-negative patients (base case 3), bevacizumab monotherapy was the most cost-effective option, with ICERs of $326,491/PF-LYS and $253,937/PF-LYS respectively. Conclusions: At current costs, maintenance therapy for primary ovarian cancer is not cost effective, regardless of mutation status. In BRCA-positive women, lowering the cost of olaparib may make it cost effective compared with observation.

scholarly journals A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of an Adjuvanted Subunit Vaccine for the Prevention of Herpes Zoster and Post-Herpetic Neuralgia

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S416-S417
Author(s):  
Christopher Carpenter ◽  
Annas Aljassem ◽  
Jerry Stassinopoulos ◽  
Giovanni Pisacreta ◽  
David Hutton
Keyword(s):  
Herpes Zoster ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Subunit Vaccine ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Post Herpetic Neuralgia ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽  
Live Attenuated Vaccine ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Herpes zoster (HZ) develops in up to 50% of unvaccinated individuals who live to 85 years of age, accounting for more than 1 million cases of HZ annually in the United States. A live attenuated vaccine (LAV) for HZ is U.S. FDA approved for persons 50 years or older, though CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommendations are only for persons beginning at age 60 years. LAV efficacy at preventing HZ is ~70% for persons 50–59 years of age, with lower efficacy in older adults, and it is efficacious in preventing post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN) beyond the HZ prevention. The efficacy of LAV after vaccination wanes over time. A new adjuvanted HZ subunit vaccine (SUV), administered as a two-dose series, has greater than 95% efficacy against HZ in persons 50–69 years of age. SUV efficacy remains greater than 90% in persons vaccinated at age 70 years and older, including the subgroup older than 80 years of age. Overall efficacy of SUV against PHN approaches 90%. The waning rate of efficacy after SUV vaccination is unknown. Methods To estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of SUV, LAV and no vaccination (NV) strategies, a Markov model was developed based on published trials and data on vaccine efficacy persistence, quality of life, resource utilization, costs and disease epidemiology. The perspective was U.S. societal, and the cycle length was one year with a lifelong time horizon. SUV efficacy was estimated for the base case to wane at the same rate as LAV, all persons were assumed to receive both doses of SUV, and the cost of SUV included both doses. Results For individuals vaccinated at age 50 years the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for LAV vs. NV was $142,811 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY); at age 60 years the ICER dropped to $59,482 per QALY. The cost-effectiveness ratio of SUV approached that of LAV when the SUV cost approached $500 for persons vaccinated at age 50 years and when the cost was $400 for those vaccinated at age 60 years. The SUV cost that would result in achieving an ICER target of $100,000 per QALY for SUV vaccination vs. NV at age 50 years was $316; at age 60 years the cost was $638. Conclusion Vaccination at age 60 years with SUV was more cost-effective than LAV when SUV cost was ~$450 or less. Vaccination with SUV at age 50 years appeared to be cost-effective if SUV cost was ~$315 or less. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Abstract 104: Cost-Effectiveness of Edoxaban vs. Rivaroxaban for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation (NVAF) in the US

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D Miller ◽  
Xin Ye ◽  
Gregory M Lenhart ◽  
Amanda M Farr ◽  
Oth V Tran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Healthcare Cost ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Cost Effective Treatment

Background: Edoxaban and rivaroxaban for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients with CHADS 2 ≥2 have been evaluated in pivotal trials versus warfarin. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of once-daily edoxaban (60 mg/30 mg dose-reduced) regimen versus rivaroxaban (20 mg/15 mg dose-reduced) for stroke prevention in patients with NVAF patients from a US health plan perspective. Methods: A Markov model simulated lifetime risk and treatment of stroke, systemic embolism, major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, myocardial infarction, and death in NVAF patients treated with edoxaban or rivaroxaban. Efficacy and safety data were from a network meta-analysis using data from patients enrolled in ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 and ROCKET-AF that were presented previously. 2015 wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) was used for edoxaban and rivaroxaban in the analysis. Healthcare cost and utility data were from published sources. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of <$50,000, $50,000-$150,000, and >$150,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were used as thresholds for highly cost-effective, cost-effective, and not cost-effective treatment option per guidance from the AHA/ACC statement on cost/value methodology in clinical practice guidelines and performance measures. Results: Edoxaban was dominant relative to rivaroxaban, such that it was associated with lower total healthcare cost and better effectiveness in terms of QALYs in the base case analysis (Table). Results were supported by probabilistic sensitivity analyses that showed edoxaban as either dominant or a highly cost-effective alternative (ICER<$50,000) to rivaroxaban 88.4% of the time. Conclusions: These results showed that once-daily edoxaban (60mg/30mg dose-reduced) regimen is a highly cost-effective treatment relative to rivaroxaban (20mg/15mg dose-reduced) for stroke prevention in NVAF patients.

Financial implications of dialysis modalities in the developing world: A Chinese perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-201
Author(s):  
Jing Liu ◽  
David W Hutton ◽  
Yonghong Gu ◽  
Yao Hu ◽  
Yi Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Direct Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Direct Costs ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost

Background: End-stage renal disease has been imposing a heavy economic burden on public health; however, few studies have been performed on the cost-effectiveness of dialysis modalities. We aim to estimate the cost-effectiveness of different dialysis modalities in China. Methods: Cost-effectiveness analyses were performed using Markov models based on published data of hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) modalities in China. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify key variables influencing the results. Results: Over a 10-year time horizon, the base-case cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that PD-first absolutely dominated the HD-first option by gaining 0.13 more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costing RMB ¥81,081 less. When using reported mortality of HD and PD from the United States, the PD-first option still dominated HD-first with higher QALYs and lower costs. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the results were more sensitive to the direct cost of HD, utility of HD, utility of PD, direct cost of PD, PD mortality, and HD mortality, while less sensitive to the indirect costs and transition probabilities. The HD utility needed to be at least 0.148 higher than PD utility for HD to be cost-effective. PD was about 72% likely to be considered cost-effective compared with HD, regardless of the willingness-to-pay for QALYs. Conclusion: PD appears to be more cost-effective than HD in China, and the major influential factors on the cost-effectiveness are the direct costs of HD, utility of HD, utility of PD, direct costs of PD, PD mortality, and HD mortality.

scholarly journals Cytomegalovirus Screening in Pregnancy: A Cost-Effectiveness and Threshold Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (07) ◽  
pp. 678-687 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine M. Albright ◽  
Erika F. Werner ◽  
Brenna L. Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Behavioral Intervention ◽  
Universal Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Intervention Effectiveness ◽  
Behavioral Counseling ◽  
The Cost ◽  
In Pregnancy

Objective To determine threshold cytomegalovirus (CMV) infectious rates and treatment effectiveness to make universal prenatal CMV screening cost-effective. Study Design Decision analysis comparing cost-effectiveness of two strategies for the prevention and treatment of congenital CMV: universal prenatal serum screening and routine, risk-based screening. The base case assumptions were a probability of primary CMV of 1% in seronegative women, hyperimmune globulin (HIG) effectiveness of 0%, and behavioral intervention effectiveness of 85%. Screen-positive women received monthly HIG and screen-negative women received behavioral counseling to decrease CMV seroconversion. The primary outcome was the cost per maternal quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with a willingness to pay of $100,000 per QALY. Results In the base case, universal screening is cost-effective, costing $84,773 per maternal QALY gained. In sensitivity analyses, universal screening is cost-effective only at a primary CMV incidence of more than 0.89% and behavioral intervention effectiveness of more than 75%. If HIG is 30% effective, primary CMV incidence can be 0.82% for universal screening to be cost-effective. Conclusion The cost-effectiveness of universal maternal screening for CMV is highly dependent on the incidence of primary CMV in pregnancy. If efficacious, HIG and behavioral counseling allow universal screening to be cost-effective at lower primary CMV rates.

Cost-effectiveness of mobile health-based integrated care for atrial fibrillation: Model development and data analysis (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xueyan Luo ◽  
Wei Xu ◽  
Quan Yuan ◽  
Han Lai ◽  
Chunji Huang
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Integrated Care ◽  
Mobile Health ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Mhealth Technology

BACKGROUND Mobile health (mhealth) technology is increasingly used in disease management. Using mhealth tools to integrate and streamline care was found to improve atrial fibrillation (AF) patients’ clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to investigate the potential clinical and health economic outcomes of mhealth-based integrated care for AF from the perspective of a public healthcare provider in China. METHODS A Markov model was designed to compare outcomes of mhealth-based care and usual care in a hypothetical cohort of AF patients in China. The time horizon was 30 years with monthly cycles. Model outcomes measured were direct medical cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of base-case results. RESULTS In the base-case analysis, mhealth-based care gained higher QALYs of 0.0818 with an incurred cost of USD1,778. Using USD33,438 per QALY (three times gross domestic product) as the willingness-to-pay threshold, mhealth-based care was cost-effective, with an ICER of USD21,739 per QALY. The one-way sensitivity analysis found compliance to mhealth-based care had the greatest impact on the ICER. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, mhealth-based care was accepted as cost-effective in 80.91% of 10,000 iterations. CONCLUSIONS This study suggested that the use of mhealth technology in streamlining and integrating care for AF patients was cost-effective in China.

scholarly journals The Cost-Effectiveness of Epilepsy Surgery and Surgical Evaluation in the United States

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shehryar R Sheikh ◽  
Michael P Steinmetz ◽  
Michael W Kattan ◽  
Mendel Singer ◽  
Belinda Udeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Epilepsy Surgery ◽  
Medical Management ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Effective Strategies ◽  
Surgical Evaluation ◽  
The Cost

Abstract INTRODUCTION Surgery is an effective treatment for many pharmacoresistant temporal lobe epilepsy patients, but incurs considerable cost. It is unknown whether surgery and surgical evaluation are cost-effective strategies in the United States. We aim to evaluate whether 1) surgery is cost-effective for patients who have been deemed surgical candidates when compared to continued medical management, 2) surgical evaluation is cost-effective for patients who have drug-resistant temporal epilepsy and may or may not ultimately be deemed surgical candidates METHODS We use a Monte Carlo simulation method to assess the cost-effectiveness of surgery and surgical evaluation over a lifetime horizon. Patients transition between two health states (‘seizure free’ and ‘having seizures’) as part of a Markov process, based on literature estimates. We adopt both healthcare and societal perspectives, including direct healthcare costs and indirect costs such as lost earnings by patients and care providers. We estimate variability of model predictions using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS 1) Epilepsy surgery is cost effective in surgically eligible patients by virtue of being cost saving and more effective than medical management in the long run, with 95% of 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations favoring surgery. From a societal perspective, surgery becomes cost effective within 3 yr. At 5 yr, surgery has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $31,600, which is significantly below the societal willingness-to-pay (∼ $100,000/quality-adjusted life years (QALY)) and comparable to hip/knee arthroplasty. 2) Surgical evaluation is cost-effective in pharmacoresistant patients even if the probability of being deemed a surgical candidate is low (5%-10%). Even if the probability of surgical eligibility is only 10%, surgical referral has an ICER of $96,000/QALY, which is below societal willingness-to-pay. CONCLUSION Epilepsy surgery and surgical evaluation are both cost-effective strategies in the United States. Pharmacoresistant temporal lobe epilepsy patients should be referred for surgical evaluation without hesitation on cost-effectiveness grounds.

scholarly journals Nutrient Cost-Effectiveness of Fortified Blended Food Aid Products

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 326-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory K. Regier ◽  
Brian L. Lindshield ◽  
Nina K. Lilja
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Transportation Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Food Aid ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Nutrient Value ◽  
Nutritional Data ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Blended Food

Background: Sorghum-Soy Blend (SSB) and Sorghum-Cowpea Blend (SCB) fortified blended food aid porridge products were developed as alternatives to Corn-Soy Blend Plus (CSB+) and Super Cereal Plus (SC+), the most widely used fortified blended food aid products. However, the cost and nutrient cost-effectiveness of these products procured from different geographical areas have not been determined. Objective: The objective of this study is to determine the nutrient cost-effectiveness of SSB and SCB compared to existing fortified blended foods. Methods: Nutritional data as well as ingredient, processing, and transportation cost for SSB, SCB, and existing fortified blended foods were compiled. Using the omega value, the ratio of the fortified blended food’s Nutrient Value Score to the total cost of the fortified blended food divided by an identical ratio of a different fortified blended food or the same fortified blended food produced in a different country and the nutrient cost-effectiveness of each of the fortified blended foods procured in the United States and several African countries were determined. Results: Both CSB+ and SC+ are less expensive than SSB and SCB, but they also have lower Nutrient Value Scores of 7.7 and 8.6, respectively. However, the omega values of CSB+ and SC+ are all above 1 when compared to SSB and SCB, suggesting that the existing fortified blended foods are more nutrient cost-effective. Conclusions: Comparing the nutrient cost-effectiveness of various food aid products could provide valuable information to food aid agencies prior to making procurement decisions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document