Average Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio Research Articles

Cost-Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccination in Healthy Children: A 10-Year Population-Based Study

Background/Objectives: Seasonal influenza annually puts a significant burden on the pediatric population, especially the youngest, causing severe illness and death. Additionally, associated healthcare costs cause a significant financial strain on healthcare systems. While vaccination is the most effective prevention method, its cost-effectiveness for healthy children remains unassessed. Methods: Using the Pedianet database spanning from 2009 to 2019, we analyzed influenza cases among 6-month-olds to 14-year-olds in Italy. Data included influenza-related medical visits, prescriptions, exams, emergency visits, hospitalizations, and costs. Adverse events and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were considered from the existing literature. A static decision-tree model compared annual vaccination strategies, assessing probabilities for influenza or influenza-like illnesses by vaccination status. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated, along with sensitivity analyses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curve generation. Results: Mean total influenza costs for vaccinated children averaged EUR 18.6 (range 0–3175.9, including EUR 15.79 for the influenza vaccination), whereas costs for unvaccinated children were consistently lower at around EUR 4.6 (range 0–3250.1). The average ICER for years where vaccine and virus strains are matched was EUR 29,831 per QALY, which is below the EUR 40,000 threshold set by the Italian National Health Services. The ICER values range from EUR 13,736 (2017/2018) to EUR 72,153 (2013/2014). Averted influenza costs averaged EUR 23 per case, with fluctuations over the years. In most observed years, influenza vaccination was cost-effective from the healthcare providers’ standpoint. The exception was 2009–2010, due to a mismatch between vaccine and virus strains. Conclusions: This study highlights the economic viability of influenza vaccination, especially when virus and vaccine strains align. It demonstrates the potential of vaccination programs in preserving children’s health and well-being while managing healthcare costs.

The Cost-effectiveness of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocols in Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction.

The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review on the cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction. Further, we reviewed the use of liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks in abdominal autologous reconstruction. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus were used for literature review, and PRISMA guidelines were followed. Included articles had full-text available, included cost data, and involved use of TAP block. Reviews, case reports, or comparisons between immediate and delayed breast reconstruction were excluded. Included articles were reviewed for data highlighting treatment cost and associated length of stay (LOS). Cost and LOS were further stratified by treatment group (ERAS versus non-ERAS) and method of postoperative pain control (TAP versus non-TAP). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to compare the impact of the above treatments on cost and LOS. Of the 381 initial articles, 11 were included. These contained 919 patients, of whom 421 participated in an ERAS pathway. The average ICER for ERAS pathways was $1664.45 per day (range, $952.70-$2860). Average LOS of ERAS pathways was 3.12 days versus 4.57 days for non-ERAS pathways. The average ICER of TAP blocks was $909.19 (range, $89.64-$1728.73) with an average LOS of 3.70 days for TAP blocks versus 4.09 days in controls. The use of ERAS pathways and postoperative pain control with liposomal bupivacaine TAP block during breast reconstruction is cost-effective. These interventions should be included in comprehensive perioperative plans aimed at positive outcomes with reduced costs.

Evaluation of the Cost-Effectiveness of Evidence-Based Interventions to Increase Female Breast and Cervical Cancer Screens: A Systematic Review.

To systematically review published cost-effectiveness analyses of Evidence-Based Interventions (EBIs) recommended by the United States Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) to increase breast and cervical cancer screening. We searched PubMed and Embase for prospective cost-effectiveness evaluations of EBIs for breast and cervical cancer screening since 1999. We reviewed studies according to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and compared the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs), defined as cost per additional woman screened, adjusted to 2021 USD, within and across EBIs by cancer type. We identified eleven studies meeting our review criteria: nine were breast cancer-focused, one breast and cervical cancer combined, and one cervical only, which together reported twenty-four cost-effectiveness assessments of outreach programs spanning eight EBIs. One-on-one education programs were the most common EBI evaluated. The average ICER across breast cancer studies was USD 545 (standard deviation [SD] = USD 729.3), while that for cervical cancer studies was USD 197 (SD = 186.6. Provider reminder/recall systems for women already linked to formal care were the most cost-effective, with an average ICERs of USD 41.3 and USD 10.6 for breast and cervical cancer, respectively. Variability in ICERs across and within EBIs reflect the population studied, the specific EBI, and study settings, and was relatively high. ICER estimate uncertainty and the potential for program replicability in other settings and with other populations were not addressed. Given these limitations, using existing cost-effectiveness estimates to inform program funding allocations is not warranted at this time. Additional research is needed on outreach programs for cervical cancer and those which serve minority populations for either of the female cancer screens.

Ross procedure or mechanical aortic valve, which is the best lifetime option for an 18-year-old? A decision analysis

Objective(s)Identifying the optimal solution for young adults requiring aortic valve replacement (AVR) is challenging, given the variety of options and their lifetime complication risks, impacts on quality of life, and costs. Decision analytic techniques make comparisons incorporating these measures. We evaluated lifetime valve-related outcomes of mechanical aortic valve replacement (mAVR) versus the Ross procedure (Ross) using decision tree microsimulations modeling. MethodsTransition probabilities, utilities, and costs derived from published reports were entered into a Markov model decision tree to explore progression between health states for hypothetical 18-year-old patients. In total, 20,000 Monte Carlo microsimulations were performed to model mortality, quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs), and health care costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. Sensitivity analyses was performed to identify transition probabilities at which the preferred strategy switched from baseline. ResultsFrom modeling, average 20-year mortality was 16.3% and 23.2% for Ross and mAVR, respectively. Average 20-year freedom from stroke and major bleeding was 98.6% and 94.6% for Ross, and 90.0% and 82.2% for mAVR, respectively. Average individual lifetime (60 postoperative years) utility (28.3 vs 23.5 QALYs) and cost ($54,233 vs $507,240) favored Ross over mAVR. The average ICER demonstrated that each QALY would cost $95,345 more for mAVR. Sensitivity analysis revealed late annual probabilities of autograft/left ventricular outflow tract disease and homograft/right ventricular outflow tract disease after Ross, and late death after mAVR, to be important ICER determinants. ConclusionsOur modeling suggests that Ross is preferred to mAVR, with superior freedom from valve-related morbidity and mortality, and improved cost-utility for young adults requiring aortic valve surgery.

High-Efficiency Particulate Air Filters for Preventing Wildfire-related Asthma Complications: A Cost-Effectiveness Study.

Rationale: Air pollution caused by wildfire smoke is linked to adverse health outcomes, especially for people living with asthma. Objectives: To evaluate whether government rebates for high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, which reduce concentrations of smoke particles indoors, are cost effective in managing asthma and preventing exacerbations in British Columbia (BC), Canada. Methods: We used a Markov model to analyze health states for asthma control, exacerbation severity, and death over a retrospective time horizon of 5 years (2018-2022). Concentrations of wildfire smoke-derived particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter ⩽2.5 μm (PM2.5) from the Canadian Optimized Statistical Smoke Exposure Model and relevant literature informed the model. The base-case analysis assumed continuous use of a HEPA filter. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) resulting from varying rebates were computed for each Health Service Delivery Area (HSDA). Measurements and Main Results: In the base-case analysis, HEPA filter use resulted in increased costs of $83.34 (SE, $1.03) and increased QALYs of 0.0011 (SE, 0.0001) per person. The average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio among BC HSDAs was $74,652/QALY (SE, $3,517), with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from $40,509 to $89,206 per QALY in HSDAs. Across the province, the intervention was projected to prevent 4,418 exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, 643 emergency department visits, and 425 hospitalizations during the 5-year time horizon. A full rebate was cost effective in 1 of the 16 HSDAs across BC. The probability of cost-effectiveness ranged from 0.1% to 74.8% across HSDAs. A $100 rebate was cost effective in most HSDAs. Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness of HEPA filters in managing wildfire smoke-related asthma issues in BC varies by region. Government rebates up to two-thirds of the filter cost are generally cost effective, with a full rebate being cost effective only in Kootenay Boundary.

An economic evaluation of first-line cryoballoon ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation from a U.S. Medicare perspective.

Three recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that, as an initial rhythm control strategy, first-line cryoballoon ablation (cryoablation) reduces atrial arrhythmia recurrence compared with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). The study sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line cryoablation compared with first-line AADs for treating symptomatic PAF from a U.S. Medicare payer perspective. Individual patient-level data from 703 participants with PAF enrolled into the Cryo-FIRST (NCT01803438), STOP AF First (NCT03118518), and EARLY-AF (NCT02825979) trials were used to derive parameters for the cost-effectiveness model. The cost-effectiveness model used a hybrid decision tree and Markov structure. The decision tree had a 1-year time horizon and was used to inform the initial health state allocation in the first cycleof the Markov model. The Markov model used a 40-year time horizon (3-month cycle length). Health benefits were expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs and benefits were discounted at 3% per year. Cryoablation was estimated to yield higher QALYs (+0.17) and higher costs (+$4274) per patient over a 40-year time horizon than AADs. Ultimately, this produced an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $24,637 per QALY gained. Independent of initial treatment, individuals were expected to receive ∼1.2 ablations over a lifetime. There was a 45% relative reduction in time spent in atrial fibrillation health states for those initially treated with cryoablation compared with AADs. Initial rhythm control with first-line cryoballoon ablation is highly cost-effective compared with first-line AADs from a U.S. Medicare payer perspective.

Economic evaluation of acupuncture as an adjunctive treatment with usual care for mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis: A Markov model-based analysis

BackgroundCollaborative care (CC), in which acupuncture is combined with usual care (UC), improves clinical outcomes and increases costs in knee osteoarthritis (KOA). We evaluated the economic feasibility of CC for Korean female patients with mild-to-moderate KOA by using a cost-effectiveness approach. MethodsTwo alternatives for KOA (1. UC as a comparator; and 2. CC as an intervention) were defined based on clinical guidelines, official Korean statistics, and expert validation. Each alternative was simulated in a Markov model every 6 months for 10 years. Estimates of costs, utilities, and transition probabilities were obtained from official statistics and previous studies. The effectiveness of CC was synthesized from randomized controlled trials. A base-case analysis of a limited societal perspective, univariate sensitivity analysis, and probability sensitivity analysis were performed. An annual discount rate of 4.5% and threshold of 20,000 United States dollar per Quality-adjusted life year (USD/QALY) were applied. ResultsEvery incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CC calculated from the analyses was sub-threshold. In the base-case analysis, with a limited societal perspective, the ICER was 11,085 USD/QALY. The ICERs from the univariate sensitivity analyses were -2,577–16,748 USD/QALY. The average ICER in the probability sensitivity analysis was 12,412 USD/QALY. When the threshold surpassed 8,000 USD/QALY, the cost-effectiveness of CC exceeded 50%. The probability was 70.27% when the threshold was 20,000 USD/QALY. ConclusionsCC for Korean female patients with mild-to-moderate KOA was generally cost-effective. Considering the limitations of the evidence, we propose a re-evaluation using further clinical studies in the future.

Role of Economic Evaluations on Pricing of Medicines Reimbursed by the Italian National Health Service.

The main objective of this study was to explore the extent to which the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), alongside other factors, predicts the final outcome of medicine price negotiation in Italy. The second objective was to depict the mean ICER of medicines obtained after negotiation. Data were extracted from company dossiers submitted to the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) from October 2016 to January 2021 and AIFA's internal database. Beta-based regression analyses were used to test the effect of ICER and other variables on the outcome of price negotiation (ΔP), defined as the percentage difference between the list price requested by manufacturers and the final price paid by the Italian National Health Service (INHS). In our dataset of 48 pricing and reimbursement procedures, the ICER before negotiation was one of the variables with a major impact on the outcome of negotiation when ≥ 40,000€/QALY. As resulting from multiple regression analyses, the effect of the ICER on ΔP seemed driven by medicines for non-onco-immunological and non-rare diseases. Overall, the negotiation process granted mean incremental costs of €64,688 and mean incremental QALYs of 1.96, yielding an average ICER of €33,004/QALY. This study provides support on the influence of cost-effectiveness analysis on price negotiation in the Italian context, providing an estimate of the mean ICER of reimbursed medicines, calculated using net confidential prices charged by the INHS. The role and use of economic evaluations in medicines pricing should be further improved to get the best value for money.

Estimated Monetary Value of Future Research Clarifying Uncertainties Around the Optimal Adult Hearing Screening Schedule

Adult hearing screening is not routinely performed, and most individuals with hearing loss (HL) have never had their hearing tested as adults. To project the monetary value of future research clarifying uncertainties around the optimal adult hearing screening schedule. In this economic evaluation, a validated decision model of HL (DeciBHAL-US: Decision model of the Burden of Hearing loss Across the Lifespan) was used to simulate current detection and treatment of HL vs hearing screening schedules. Key model inputs included HL incidence (0.06%-10.42%/y), hearing aid uptake (0.54%-8.14%/y), screening effectiveness (1.62 × hearing aid uptake), utility benefits of hearing aids (+0.11), and hearing aid device costs ($3690). Distributions to model parameters for probabilistic uncertainty analysis were assigned. The expected value of perfect information (EVPI) and expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) using a willingness to pay of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was estimated. The EVPI and EVPPI estimate the upper bound of the dollar value of future research. This study was based on 40-year-old persons over their remaining lifetimes in a US primary care setting. Screening schedules beginning at ages 45, 55, 65, and 75 years, and frequencies of every 1 or 5 years. The main outcomes were QALYs and costs (2020 US dollars) from a health system perspective. The average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for yearly screening beginning at ages 55 to 75 years ranged from $39 200 to $80 200/QALY. Yearly screening beginning at age 55 years was the optimal screening schedule in 38% of probabilistic uncertainty analysis simulations. The population EVPI, or value of reducing all uncertainty, was $8.2 to $12.6 billion varying with willingness to pay and the EVPPI, or value of reducing all screening effectiveness uncertainty, was $2.4 billion. In this economic evaluation of US adult hearing screening, large uncertainty around the optimal adult hearing screening schedule was identified. Future research on hearing screening has a high potential value so is likely justified.

Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Pembrolizumab Monotherapy Versus Chemotherapy in High Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer in the Irish Healthcare Setting

ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab monotherapy in the first-line treatment of advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in adults whose tumors expressed programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) with a tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 50% in the Irish healthcare setting. MethodsEffectiveness inputs were derived from the 5-year analysis of KEYNOTE-024 phase III clinical trial. The intervention was pembrolizumab monotherapy; the comparator was a weighted average of the 5 chemotherapy regimens from the trial. The population included those with previously untreated advanced PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50% NSCLC. A de novo partitioned survival model was developed. Survival modeling was done using Bayesian model averaging on fitted parametric functions. Costs included drug acquisition, treatment initiation, administration and monitoring, adverse events, subsequent treatments, and terminal care. Costs and health state utilities were sourced from the literature and Irish sources. The model had a 20-year time horizon. The perspective taken was the Health Service Executive. A 4% discount rate was applied. Outcomes were expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), measured in terms of incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and 1-way sensitivity analyses were conducted. ResultsThe model estimated a base case ICER of €54 237 per QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis estimated an average ICER of €54 568 per QALY and a 11% probability of cost-effectiveness at the Irish cost-effectiveness threshold of €45 000 per QALY. ConclusionAt the current list price, first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy is not considered cost-effective for the treatment of advanced PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50% NSCLC in the Irish healthcare setting.

Cost-Utility and Cost-effectiveness of MoodSwings 2.0, an Internet-Based Self-management Program for Bipolar Disorder: Economic Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Internet-delivered psychosocial interventions can overcome barriers to face-to-face psychosocial care, but limited evidence supports their cost-effectiveness for people with bipolar disorders (BDs). This study aimed to conduct within-trial cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of an internet-based intervention for people with BD, MoodSwings 2.0, from an Australian health sector perspective. MoodSwings 2.0 included an economic evaluation alongside an international, parallel, and individually stratified randomized controlled trial comparing an internet-based discussion forum (control; group 1), a discussion forum plus internet-based psychoeducation (group 2), and a discussion forum plus psychoeducation and cognitive behavioral tools (group 3). The trial enrolled adults (aged 21 to 65 years) with a diagnosis of BD assessed by telephone using a structured clinical interview. Health sector costs included intervention delivery and additional health care resources used by participants over the 12-month trial follow-up. Outcomes included depression symptoms measured by the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; the trial primary outcome) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) calculated using the short-form 6-dimension instrument derived from the 12-item version of the short-form health survey. Average incremental cost-effectiveness (cost per MADRS score) and cost-utility (cost per QALY) ratios were calculated using estimated mean differences between intervention and control groups from linear mixed effects models in the base case. In total, 304 participants were randomized. Average health sector cost was lowest for group 2 (Aus $9431, SD Aus $8540; Aus $1=US $0.7058) compared with the control group (Aus $15,175, SD Aus $17,206) and group 3 (Aus $15,518, SD Aus $30,523), but none was statistically significantly different. The average QALYs were not significantly different among the groups (group 1: 0.627, SD 0.062; group 2: 0.618, SD 0.094; and group 3: 0.622, SD 0.087). The MADRS scores were previously shown to differ significantly between group 2 and the control group at all follow-up time points (P<.05). Group 2 was dominant (lower costs and greater effects) compared with the control group for average incremental cost per point decrease in MADRS score over 12 months (95% CI dominated to Aus $331). Average cost per point change in MADRS score for group 3 versus the control group was dominant (95% CI dominant to Aus $22,585). Group 2 was dominant (95% CI Aus $43,000 to dominant) over the control group based on lower average health sector cost and average QALY benefit of 0.012 (95% CI -0.009 to 0.033). Group 3, compared with the control group, had an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dominant (95% CI dominated to Aus $19,978). Web-based psychoeducation through MoodSwings 2.0 has the potential to be a cost-effective intervention for people with BD. Additional research is needed to understand the lack of effectiveness for the addition of cognitive behavioral tools with the group 3 intervention.

Cost-effectiveness of a male catch-up human papillomavirus vaccination program in the Netherlands

In the Netherlands, the Health Council has advised that the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination should be offered to both boys and girls. Additionally, boys and men up to the age of 26 years should be included in a catch-up program. In this study, we examine the cost-effectiveness of this HPV catch-up program.We used a static Markov model to estimate the amount of cancers prevented and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for different scenarios.Vaccinating men from 12 until the age of 26 years would result in an average of 48 cancer cases prevented in every cohort (an estimated total of 720 cases), with an average ICER of €32,256.We found that the catch-up vaccination program results in a relevant number prevented cases against an acceptable cost-effectiveness ratio. Policymakers should take these findings into account when evaluating a gender-neutral HPV vaccination program in the Netherlands.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses of using implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in the Russian Federation

Objective: to evaluate cost-effectiveness and budget impact of using single and dual chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) adjunctive to the standard drug therapy (DT) compared to the standard DT alone for the primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD).Material and methods. Original partitioned survival analysis model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of using ICD within the modelling horizon of 8 years. The following model outcomes were used: life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Primary prevention model was focused on patients after myocardial infarction with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤30%, whilst secondary prevention model considered cardiac arrest survivors and/or patients diagnosed with ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation with LVEF ≤35%. The model summarizes treatment effect and costs for ICD and DT specific to the healthcare system of the Russian Federation (RF). The main scenario accounted for ICD implantation cost in accordance with general reimbursement price asserted in the high technology medical care list part 2 (HТMC 2). Additionally, alternative scenario of ICD reimbursement level was developed to account for general tariff split onto singleand dual-chamber ICD implantation reimbursement tariffs which can be financed through high technology medical care list part 1 (HТMC 1). Budget impact analysis compared the costs of using ICD within the current volume of the annual increase in ICD implantations and a threefold increased volume of ICD implantations.Results. By the end of the modelling period, additional 34% of patients survived in the ICD group compared to the DT group. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per 1 QALY constituted 2.8 and 2.2 million rubles for primary and secondary prevention, respectively. ICER values are slightly above or lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold of 2.5 million rubles per 1 QALY in the RF in the segment of primary and secondary SCD prevention, respectively. Additional HТMC 1 scenario incorporating lower ICD implantation prices resulted in an average ICER drop by 13% compared to HTMC 2. Overall patient population requiring SCD prevention comprised of 7,161 and 3,341 patients in primary and secondary prevention, respectively. Budget impact analysis showed that threefold rise in the ICD implantations rate will require additional 648 million rubles for primary prevention cohort to provide additional 573 patients with ICD, and 230 million rubles for secondary prevention cohort with additional 267 patients covered with ICD. ICD reimbursement price drop within the HТMC 1 scenario will save 133 million rubles and allow to provide additional 143 patients with ICDs for a given budget.Conclusion. ICD is a cost-effective option of secondary prevention of SCD. Additional analysis of ICD reimbursement price drop drives ICER downwards to a considerable extent which in turn increases the accessibility of ICDs to patients. In scenario of ICD implantation financing within HТMC 1, ICD is established to be a cost-effective option for primary and secondary prevention of SCD in the RF.

Cost-utility analysis of rTMS as add-on therapy to standard care for the treatment of hallucinations in schizophrenia.

AbstractBackgroundThis research evaluates the cost-effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as add-on therapy to standard care for adults with schizophrenia from an Australian health system perspective.MethodsA Markov model estimated costs in 2021 Australian dollars and Disability-Adjusted Life-Years (DALYs) averted with rTMS added to standard care compared to standard care alone over 12-months for adults aged 25–65 years with hallucinations in schizophrenia refractory to other therapies. rTMS effect size was sourced from a meta-analysis and converted to a relative risk using the Cochrane conversion method. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis evaluated uncertainty in effect size and disability weights. One-way sensitivity analyses varied rTMS session cost and effectiveness, time horizon and inpatient costs.ResultsThe base-case average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $87,310/DALY averted (95% UI: $10,157–$97,877). Reducing rTMS session cost to $100 lowered the ICER to $9,127/DALY (95% UI: Dominant–$50,699). A 4-year time horizon resulted in rTMS being less costly and more effective (Dominant) than standard care. Decreasing the 3-month probability of relapse with rTMS to 4.6% resulted in a 71% probability of rTMS being cost-effective.ConclusionsUsing a threshold of $50,000/ DALY averted, rTMS as add-on therapy to standard care for the treatment of refractory hallucinations in schizophrenia would not be considered a cost-effective treatment option compared to standard care alone. However, given the refractory nature of this condition and the relatively small size of this population, it may be reasonable for decision-makers to adopt a higher ICER threshold.

Economic evaluation of endometrial scratching before the second IVF/ICSI treatment: a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial (SCRaTCH trial).

STUDY QUESTIONIs a single endometrial scratch prior to the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment cost-effective compared to no scratch, when evaluated over a 12-month follow-up period?SUMMARY ANSWERThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for an endometrial scratch was €6524 per additional live birth, but due to uncertainty regarding the increase in live birth rate this has to be interpreted with caution.WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADYEndometrial scratching is thought to improve the chances of success in couples with previously failed embryo implantation in IVF/ICSI treatment. It has been widely implemented in daily practice, despite the lack of conclusive evidence of its effectiveness and without investigating whether scratching allows for a cost-effective method to reduce the number of IVF/ICSI cycles needed to achieve a live birth.STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATIONThis economic evaluation is based on a multicentre randomized controlled trial carried out in the Netherlands (SCRaTCH trial) that compared a single scratch prior to the second IVF/ICSI treatment with no scratch in couples with a failed full first IVF/ICSI cycle. Follow-up was 12 months after randomization.Economic evaluation was performed from a healthcare and societal perspective by taking both direct medical costs and lost productivity costs into account. It was performed for the primary outcome of biochemical pregnancy leading to live birth after 12 months of follow-up as well as the secondary outcome of live birth after the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment (i.e. the first after randomization). To allow for worldwide interpretation of the data, cost level scenario analysis and sensitivity analysis was performed.PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODSFrom January 2016 until July 2018, 933 women with a failed first IVF/ICSI cycle were included in the trial. Data on treatment and pregnancy were recorded up until 12 months after randomization, and the resulting live birth outcomes (even if after 12 months) were also recorded.Total costs were calculated for the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment and for the full 12 month period for each participant. We included costs of all treatments, medication, complications and lost productivity costs. Cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out by calculating ICERs for scratch compared to control. Bootstrap resampling was used to estimate the uncertainty around cost and effect differences and ICERs. In the sensitivity and scenario analyses, various unit costs for a single scratch were introduced, amongst them, unit costs as they apply for the United Kingdom (UK).MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCEMore live births occurred in the scratch group, but this also came with increased costs over a 12-month period. The estimated chance of a live birth after 12 months of follow-up was 44.1% in the scratch group compared to 39.3% in the control group (risk difference 4.8%, 95% CI −1.6% to +11.2%). The mean costs were on average €283 (95% CI: −€299 to €810) higher in the scratch group so that the point average ICER was €5846 per additional live birth. The ICER estimate was surrounded with a high level of uncertainty, as indicated by the fact that the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) showed that there is an 80% chance that endometrial scratching is cost-effective if society is willing to pay ∼€17 500 for each additional live birth.LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTIONThere was a high uncertainty surrounding the effects, mainly in the clinical effect, i.e. the difference in the chance of live birth, which meant that a single straightforward conclusion could not be ascertained as for now.WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGSThis is the first formal cost-effectiveness analysis of endometrial scratching in women undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment. The results presented in this manuscript cannot provide a clear-cut expenditure for one additional birth, but they do allow for estimating costs per additional live birth in different scenarios once the clinical effectiveness of scratching is known. As the SCRaTCH trial was the only trial with a follow-up of 12 months, it allows for the most complete estimation of costs to date.STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)This study was funded by ZonMW, the Dutch organization for funding healthcare research. A.E.P.C., F.J.M.B., E.R.G. and C.B. L. reported having received fees or grants during, but outside of, this trial.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERNetherlands Trial Register (NL5193/NTR 5342).

Impact and cost-effectiveness of potential interventions against infant respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in 131 low-income and middle-income countries using a static cohort model

ObjectivesInterventions to prevent childhood respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease are limited and costly. New interventions are in advanced stages of development and could be available soon. This study aims to...

Cost-Effectiveness of Two Dry Needling Interventions for Plantar Heel Pain: A Secondary Analysis of an RCT.

Plantar heel pain is a common cause of foot pain that affects patients’ quality of life and represents a significant cost for the healthcare system. Dry needling and percutaneous needle electrolysis are two minimally invasive treatments that were shown to be effective for the management of plantar heel pain. The aim of our study was to compare these two treatments in terms of health and economic consequences based on the results of a published randomized controlled trial. For this, we evaluated the costs from the point of view of the hospital and we carried out a cost-effectiveness study using quality of life as the main variable according to the Eq-5D-5L questionnaire. The cost of the complete treatment with dry needling (DN) was €178.86, while the percutaneous needle electrolysis (PNE) was €200.90. The quality of life of patients improved and was translated into +0.615 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for DN and +0.669 for PNE. PNE presented an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €411.34/QALY against DN. These results indicate that PNE had a better cost-effectiveness ratio for the treatment of plantar heel pain than DN.

The cost-effectiveness of glasdegib in combination with low-dose cytarabine, for the treatment of newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia in adult patients who are not eligible to receive intensive induction chemotherapy in Canada

Aim The clinical efficacy and safety of DAURISMO (glasdegib) combined with low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) were demonstrated in the BRIGHT AML 1003 study among newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia patients who are not eligible to receive intensive chemotherapy. This study aims to evaluate its cost-effectiveness versus LDAC alone and azacitidine from a Canadian payer perspective. Materials and Methods A partitioned-survival model was developed with three health states: progression-free survival (PFS), relapse/progression and death. Clinical inputs were obtained from the BRIGHT AML 1003 study for glasdegib and LDAC, and from the two trial publications and indirect treatment comparison for azacitidine. Drug acquisition/administration, disease management, adverse event and end-of-life costs were considered. All costs were measured in Canadian dollars. Cost-effectiveness of glasdegib + LDAC was assessed against LDAC alone in main population, and against azacitidine by bone marrow blasts (BMB). A weighted average ICER was calculated to represent the current treatment use of Canadian clinical practice. The reference-case analysis was conducted probabilistically, and numerous probabilistic scenario analyses were conducted. Results The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) compared to LDAC alone was CAD $177,065 (a mean gain of 0.41 QALYs and an incremental cost of CAD $72,695), to azacitidine in 20–30% and >30% BMB group were CAD $178,201 (a mean gain of 0.34 QALYs and an incremental cost of CAD $59,889) and dominant (a mean gain of 0.28 QALYs while reducing costs by CAD $7,856) respectively, resulting in a weighted average ICER of CAD $81,310 per QALY. Limitations and conclusions Though uncertainties remain with the generated PFS curve, the derived azacitidine curves, administration and vial wastage, the model has been built under the best available evidence and relied on clinical opinions where there were data gaps. The weighted average ICER suggests that glasdegib + LDAC is cost-effective at a CAD $100,000 willingness-to-pay threshold.

PDG40 The Potential of a Weighted Average Icer As a Supplementary Decision Tool WHEN Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of MULTI-Indication Pharmaceuticals

Marketing authorisation holders are compelled to set a single uniform price for multi-indication pharmaceuticals entailing limited flexibility in adjusting the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of each indication. Indication-specific pricing has been suggested; however, this is often not feasible due to lack of detailed drug consumption data. In light of this, a novel method of expanding the ICER into a weighted average variant dependent on the sizes of the respective indications’ eligible patient populations has been suggested. The objectives of this early study were to examine the practical and methodological potentials of a weighted average ICER as a supplementary decision tool when assessing the cost-effectiveness of multi-indication pharmaceuticals. A weighted average ICER was computed with nivolumab as a case example, for six out of eight of nivolumab's monotherapy indications. The expected costs and Quality-adjusted Life Years (QALYs) were estimated using partitioned survival analysis to construct cost-utility analyses. Efficacy data was from registrational CheckMate trials. Costs included resource use at the hospital, adverse events and patient's time and transport and were estimated using a mixed micro- and macro costing approach. The pharmaceutical acquisition costs were based on list prices. Utility weights were estimated using EQ-5D-3L. This study succeeded in establishing a weighted average ICER for nivolumab at € 100,999/QALY. The use of a weighted average ICER could entail improved patient access of multi-indication pharmaceuticals and promote a supplier-incentive to research and develop in add-on indications with small patient populations. A weighted average ICER could decrease the transparency in the decision-making process and would require a shift in how the ICER is interpreted. This early study identified the practical and methodological potential of a weighted average ICER and suggests that the method could be applied as a supplementary decision tool when assessing the cost-effectiveness of multi-indication pharmaceuticals.

Cost-effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine versus single screening and treatment for the control of malaria in pregnancy in Papua, Indonesia: a provider perspective analysis from a cluster-randomised trial

Malaria infection during pregnancy is associated with serious adverse maternal and birth outcomes. A randomised controlled trial in Papua, Indonesia, comparing the efficacy of intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with the current strategy of single screening and treatment showed that intermittent preventive treatment is a promising alternative treatment for the reduction of malaria in pregnancy. We aimed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine compared with single screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. We did a provider perspective analysis. A decision tree model was analysed from a health provider perspective over a lifetime horizon. Model parameters were used in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Simulations were run in hypothetical cohorts of 1000 women who received intermittent preventive treatment or single screening and treatment. Disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for fetal loss or neonatal death, low birthweight, moderate or severe maternal anaemia, and clinical malaria were calculated from trial data and cost estimates in 2016 US dollars from observational studies, health facility costings and public procurement databases. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost per DALY averted. Relative to single screening and treatment, intermittent preventive treatment resulted in an incremental cost of US$5657 (95% CI 1827 to 9448) and 107·4 incremental DALYs averted (-719·7 to 904·1) per 1000 women; the average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $53 per DALY averted. Intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine offers a cost-effective alternative to single screening and treatment for the prevention of the adverse effects of malaria infection in pregnancy in the context of the moderate malaria transmission setting of Papua. The higher cost of intermittent preventive treatment was driven by monthly administration, as compared with single-administration single screening and treatment. However, acceptability and feasibility considerations will also be needed to inform decision making. Medical Research Council, Department for International Development, and Wellcome Trust.