The cost-effectiveness and monetary benefits of dabigatran in the prevention of arterial thromboembolism for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) causes a significant health and economic burden to the Dutch society. Dabigatran was proven to have at least similar efficacy and a similar or better safety profile when compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in preventing arterial thromboembolism in patients with AF. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and monetary benefit of dabigatran versus VKAs in Dutch patients with non-valvular AF. Value-based pricing considerations and corresponding negotiations on dabigatran will be explicitly considered. METHODS: The base case economic analysis was conducted from the societal perspective. Health effects and costs were analysed using a Markov model. The main model inputs were derived from the RE-LY trial and Dutch observational data. Univariate, probabilistic sensitivity, and various scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: Dabigatran was cost saving compared to VKAs. A total of 4,552 QALYs were gained and €13,892,288 was saved in a cohort of 10,000 AF patients. The economic value of dabigatran was strongly related to the costs of VKA control that are averted. Notably, dabigatran was cost saving compared to VKAs if annual costs of VKA control exceeded €159 per person or dabigatran costs were below €2.81 per day. CONCLUSION: Dabigatran was cost saving compared to VKAs for the prevention of atrial thromboembolism in patients with non-valvular AF in the Netherlands. This result appeared robust in the sensitivity analysis. Furthermore, volume based reduction of the price in the Netherlands will further increase the monetary benefits of dabigatran

Cost-effectiveness of tipranavir versus comparator protease inhibitor regimens in HIV infected patients previously exposed to antiretroviral therapy in the Netherlands

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study compares the costs and effects of a regimen with ritonavir-boosted tipranavir (TPV/r) to a physician-selected genotypically-defined standard-of-care comparator protease inhibitor regimen boosted with ritonavir (CPI/r) in HIV infected patients that were previously exposed to antiretroviral therapy in the Netherlands.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We compared the projected lifetime costs and effects of two theoretical groups of 1000 patients, one receiving a standard of care regimen with TPV/r as a component and the other receiving a standard of care regimen with CPI/r. A 3-stage Markov model was formulated to represent three different consecutive HAART regimens. The model uses 12 health states based on viral load and CD4+ count to simulate disease progression. The transition probabilities for the Markov model were derived from a United States cohort of treatment experienced HIV patients. Furthermore, the study design was based on 48-week data from the RESIST-2 clinical trial and local Dutch costing data. Cost and health effects were discounted at 4% and 1.5% respectively according to the Dutch guideline. The analysis was conducted from the Dutch healthcare perspective using 2006 unit cost prices.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Our model projects an accumulated discounted cost to the Dutch healthcare system per patient receiving the TPV/r regimen of €167,200 compared to €145,400 for the CPI/r regimen. This results in an incremental cost of €21,800 per patient. The accumulated discounted effect is 7.43 life years or 6.31 quality adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient receiving TPV/r, compared to 6.91 life years or 5.80 QALYs per patient receiving CPI/r. This translates into an incremental effect of TPV/r over CPI/r of 0.52 life years gained (LYG) or 0.51 QALYs gained. The corresponding incremental cost effectiveness ratios (iCERs) are €41,600 per LYG and €42,500 per QALY.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We estimated the iCER for TPV/r compared to CPI/r at approximately €40,000 in treatment experienced HIV-1 infected patients in the Netherlands. This ratio may well be in range of what is acceptable and warrants reimbursement for new drug treatments in the Netherlands, in particular in therapeutic areas as end-stage oncology and HIV and other last-resort health-care interventions.</p

Nevirapine and efavirenz pharmacokinetics and covariate analysis in the 2NN study

The aim of this 2NN pharmacokinetic substudy was to investigate the population pharmacokinetics of nevirapine and efavirenz. Treatment-naive, HIV-1-infected patients received nevirapine (once or twice daily), efavirenz or a combination with lamivudine and stavudine. Blood samples were collected on day 3 and weeks 1, 2, 4, 24 and 48. Using non-linear mixed effects modelling, pharmacokinetics of nevirapine and efavirenz and factors involved in the inter-individual variability were investigated. Clearance of nevirapine in the induction phase ( 28 days) were 2.02 I/h and 2.81 I/h, respectively. Volume of distribution and absorption rate constant were 77.0 l and 1.66 h(-1), respectively. Clearance of nevirapine was lower in females (13.8%) and in patients with hepatitis B (19.5%). Patients from South America and Western countries had higher clearance of nevirapine compared with Thai and South African patients. The clearances of efavirenz in the induction phase and at steady state were 7.95 l/h and 8.82 l/h, respectively. The volume of distribution and absorption rate constant were 4181 and 0.287 h(-1), respectively. Concomitant use of nevirapine increased clearance of efavirenz (43%). Patients from Thailand had lower clearance than the rest of the population. The population pharmacokinetics of nevirapine and efavirenz were assessed in the 2NN trial. For both drugs, an induction phase was distinguished from the steady-state phase. Gender, hepatitis B and geographical region were involved in the variability of the pharmacokinetics of nevirapine. Region and concomitantly used nevirapine were determinants of the pharmacokinetics of efaviren