19 research outputs found

    ЀармакоэкономичСская ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒ примСнСния ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± Π² сравнСнии с Π΄Ρ€ΡƒΠ³ΠΈΠΌΠΈ ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π°ΠΌΠΈ PD-1 Ρƒ ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с распространСнным Π½Π΅ΠΌΠ΅Π»ΠΊΠΎΠΊΠ»Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΡ‡Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ Ρ€Π°ΠΊΠΎΠΌ Π»Π΅Π³ΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ послС ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄ΡˆΠ΅ΡΡ‚Π²ΡƒΡŽΡ‰Π΅ΠΉ Ρ…ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΎΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ

    Get PDF
    Aim: to evaluate the pharmacoeconomic efficacy of the application of the atesolizumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) preparation compared with other control point inhibitors (PD-1 inhibitors) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after chemothe rapy.Materials and methods. Study design included a retrospective analysis of literature data and modeling. Based on the calculations conducted in a Microsoft Excel model, we analyzed the effect of minimizing costs on using comparable drugs with comparable efficacy; we evaluated how the provision of all patients with NSCLC will impact the health system budget taking into consideration the fact that all these patients are currently provided with PD-1 inhibitors in the second and third lines and with the atezolizumab preparation. For calculations, we used the prices stated in the state register of maximum selling prices; the weighted average maximum wholesale premium was calculated according to the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS). Results. In the analysis of cost minimization, atesolizumab proved itself to be highly clinically and economically effective. It allowed reducing the costs by 28.6% over 3 years compared with the use of nivolumab, and by 31.3% compared with the use of pembrolizumab in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimen. Analysis of the impact on the budget showed that if all 848 patients currently receiving PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimens had been initially provided with atesolizumab, this would have reduced the pressure on budget by 21.90% or 664.25 million rubles for 3 years.Conclusion. The use of the atesolizumab preparation is pharmacoeconomically reasonable and appropriate in comparison with the use of nivolumab and pembrolizumab. It will allow reducing the cost of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimens. ЦСль – ΠΎΡ†Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ Ρ„Π°Ρ€ΠΌΠ°ΠΊΠΎΡΠΊΠΎΠ½ΠΎΠΌΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΡƒΡŽ ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒ примСнСния ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± (ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€ PD-L1) Π² сравнСнии с Π΄Ρ€ΡƒΠ³ΠΈΠΌΠΈ ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π°ΠΌΠΈ ΠΊΠΎΠ½Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… Ρ‚ΠΎΡ‡Π΅ΠΊ (ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹ PD-1) Ρƒ ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с распространСнным Π½Π΅ΠΌΠ΅Π»ΠΊΠΎΠΊΠ»Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΡ‡Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ Ρ€Π°ΠΊΠΎΠΌ Π»Π΅Π³ΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ (ΠΠœΠ Π›) послС ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄ΡˆΠ΅ΡΡ‚Π²ΡƒΡŽΡ‰Π΅ΠΉ Ρ…ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΎΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ.ΠœΠ°Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΠ°Π»Ρ‹ ΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹. Π”ΠΈΠ·Π°ΠΉΠ½ исслСдования – рСтроспСктивный Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· Π»ΠΈΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΡƒΡ€Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Π΄Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹Ρ… ΠΈ ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅. На основании расчСтов, ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Π² ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈ, построСнной Π½Π° Π±Π°Π·Π΅ ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ³Ρ€Π°ΠΌΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ обСспСчСния Microsoft Excel, ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· ΠΌΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠ·Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠΈ Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ Π½Π° ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ сравниваСмых ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ², ΠΎΠ±Π»Π°Π΄Π°ΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΡ… сопоставимой ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒΡŽ, ΠΎΡ†Π΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΎ влияниС Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ систСмы здравоохранСния ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ обСспСчСнии всСх ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с ΠΠœΠ Π›, Π² настоящСС врСмя обСспСчиваСмых ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π°ΠΌΠΈ PD-1 Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈ Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ΠΉ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΈ, ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠΌ Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±. Для расчСтов использовали зарСгистрированныС Ρ†Π΅Π½Ρ‹ согласно государствСнному рССстру ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… отпускных Ρ†Π΅Π½, ΡΡ€Π΅Π΄Π½Π΅Π²Π·Π²Π΅ΡˆΠ΅Π½Π½Π°Ρ ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½Π°Ρ оптовая Π½Π°Π΄Π±Π°Π²ΠΊΠ° – ΠΏΠΎ Π΄Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ Π€Π΅Π΄Π΅Ρ€Π°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π°Π½Ρ‚ΠΈΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ слуТбы (ЀАБ).Π Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹. Π’ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Π΅ ΠΌΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠ·Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠΈ Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Ρ‹Π²Π°Π΅Ρ‚ Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΡˆΡƒΡŽ ΠΊΠ»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠΎ-ΡΠΊΠΎΠ½ΠΎΠΌΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΡƒΡŽ ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒ – Π΅Π³ΠΎ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ позволяСт ΡΠ½ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ Π½Π° 28,6% Π·Π° 3 Π³ΠΎΠ΄Π° Π² сравнСнии с ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ Π½ΠΈΠ²ΠΎΠ»ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π°, ΠΈ Π½Π° 31,3% Π² сравнСнии с ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ ΠΏΠ΅ΠΌΠ±Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈ Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ΠΉ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΈ Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ ΠΠœΠ Π›. Анализ влияния Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π», Ρ‡Ρ‚ΠΎ Ссли Π±Ρ‹ всС 848 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ², Π² настоящСС врСмя ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡƒΡ‡Π°ΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹ PD-1/PD-L1 Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈ Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ΠΉ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΈ Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ ΠΠœΠ Π›, ΠΈΠ·Π½Π°Ρ‡Π°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎ Π±Ρ‹Π»ΠΈ обСспСчСны Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±ΠΎΠΌ, это ΠΏΠΎΠ·Π²ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ»ΠΎ Π±Ρ‹ ΡΠ½ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ Π½Π°Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ·ΠΊΡƒ Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ Π·Π° 3 Π³ΠΎΠ΄Π° Π½Π° 21,90%, ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π° 664,25 ΠΌΠ»Π½ Ρ€ΡƒΠ±.Π—Π°ΠΊΠ»ΡŽΡ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅. ΠŸΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± являСтся фармакоэкономичСски обоснованным ΠΈ цСлСсообразным ΠΏΠΎ ΡΡ€Π°Π²Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΡŽ с ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ Π½ΠΈΠ²ΠΎΠ»ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΈ ΠΏΠ΅ΠΌΠ±Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ·Π²ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡ‚ ΡΠ½ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ расходы Π½Π° ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹ PD-1/PD-L1 Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈ Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ΠΉ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΈ Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ ΠΠœΠ Π›

    Π‘Ρ€Π°Π²Π½ΠΈΡ‚Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹ΠΉ фармакоэкономичСский Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· использования Π³Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΈΠ½ΠΆΠ΅Π½Π΅Ρ€Π½Ρ‹Ρ… биологичСских ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ Π»Π΅Ρ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… Π½Π΅ΠΊΠΎΠ½Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡ€ΡƒΠ΅ΠΌΠΎΠΉ срСднСтяТСлой ΠΈ тяТСлой атопичСской Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…ΠΈΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ астмой

    Get PDF
    Objective – to conduct a pharmacoeconomic analysis of using omalizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab in the treatment of patients with uncontrolled moderate and severe atopic asthma in the healthcare setting of the Russian Federation.Materials and Methods. A pharmacoeconomic model based on clinical data was created. The cost-effectiveness ratios for omalizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab were calculated and compared. Budget impact analysis for the partial replacement of omalizumab with mepolizumab and/or reslizumab has been performed.Results. The use of omalizumab costs 13.3% less than that of reslizumab and 1.6% more than that of mepolizumab. The cost-effectiveness ratio for omalizumab is significantly lower vs the competitors. To prevent asthma exacerbations by omalizumab requires 463 805 rubles, which is 24.80% less than for reslizumab and by 382,640 or 20.89% less than for mepolizumab. The results are robust and resistant to 10% fluctuations in prices for the compared products. According to the budget impact analysis, by introducing reslizumab instead of omalizumab for a 3-year therapy in 210 patients with asthma and blood eosinophilia β‰₯400 cells/Β΅l, will increase the burden on the budget by 13.25% or by 83.2 million rubles. In a group of 594 patients with eosinophilia β‰₯150 cells/Β΅l, using mepolizumab instead of omalizumab will increase the budget burden by 1.58% or by 24.0 million rubles. In the total group of 759 patients receiving genetically-engineered products, switching to mepolizumab and reslizumab will increase the budget spending by 3.3% or 67.2 million rubles for 3 years.Conclusion. The analysis shows that using omalizumab in patients with severe asthma that is uncontrolled by medium and high doses of inhaled corticosteroids, has the lowest burden on the budget of the healthcare system and is more effective compared to mepolizumab and reslizumab.ЦСль – провСсти ΡΡ€Π°Π²Π½ΠΈΡ‚Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹ΠΉ фармакоэкономичСский Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· лСкарствСнных ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±, ΠΌΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± ΠΈ рСслизумаб ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ Π»Π΅Ρ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… Π½Π΅ΠΊΠΎΠ½Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡ€ΡƒΠ΅ΠΌΠΎΠΉ срСднСтяТСлой ΠΈ тяТСлой атопичСской Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…ΠΈΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ астмой Π² условиях российского здравоохранСния.ΠœΠ°Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΠ°Π»Ρ‹ ΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹. На основС ΠΎΠΏΡƒΠ±Π»ΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Ρ€Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² клиничСских исслСдований построСна фармакоэкономичСская модСль. ΠŸΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½ ΡΡ€Π°Π²Π½ΠΈΡ‚Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹ΠΉ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· Β«Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹-ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒΒ» для ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±, ΠΌΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± ΠΈ рСслизумаб, Π° Ρ‚Π°ΠΊΠΆΠ΅ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· влияния Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ частичной Π·Π°ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅ ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± Π½Π° ΠΌΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± ΠΈ/ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ рСслизумаб.Π Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹. ΠŸΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Π±ΡƒΠ΅Ρ‚ Π½Π° 13,3% мСньшС Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚, Ρ‡Π΅ΠΌ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ рСслизумаба, ΠΈ Π½Π° 1,6% большС, Ρ‡Π΅ΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π°. Π‘ΠΎΠΎΡ‚Π½ΠΎΡˆΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ ΠΈ эффСктивности ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± сущСствСнно Π½ΠΈΠΆΠ΅, Ρ‡Π΅ΠΌ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² сравнСния. Для прСдотвращСния обострСний Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…ΠΈΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ астмы ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° потрСбуСтся ΠΏΠΎΡ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ Π½Π° 463 805 Ρ€ΡƒΠ±., ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π° 24,80% мСньшС, Ρ‡Π΅ΠΌ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ использовании рСслизумаба, ΠΈ Π½Π° 382 640 Ρ€ΡƒΠ±., ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π° 20,89% Π½ΠΈΠΆΠ΅, Ρ‡Π΅ΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π°. ΠŸΠΎΠ»ΡƒΡ‡Π΅Π½Π½Ρ‹Π΅ Ρ€Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ устойчивы ΠΊ колСбаниям Ρ†Π΅Π½ Π½Π° сравниваСмыС ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ Π½Π° 10%. Богласно Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Ρƒ влияния Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚, Π·Π° 3 Π³ΠΎΠ΄Π° Π² Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΏΠ΅ 210 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с эозинофилиСй β‰₯400 ΠΊΠ»Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠΊ/ΠΌΠΊΠ» ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ рСслизумаба вмСсто ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΡƒΠ²Π΅Π»ΠΈΡ‡ΠΈΡ‚ Π½Π°Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ·ΠΊΡƒ Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ Π½Π° 13,25%, ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π° 83,2 ΠΌΠ»Π½ Ρ€ΡƒΠ±. Π’ Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΏΠ΅ 594 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с эозинофилиСй β‰₯150 ΠΊΠ»Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠΊ/ΠΌΠΊΠ» ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° вмСсто ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Ρ‚ ΠΊ ΡƒΠ²Π΅Π»ΠΈΡ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΡŽ Π½Π°Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ·ΠΊΠΈ Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ Π½Π° 1,58%, ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π° 24,0 ΠΌΠ»Π½ Ρ€ΡƒΠ±. Π’ ΠΎΠ±Ρ‰Π΅ΠΉ Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠΏΠΏΠ΅ 759 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…ΠΈΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ астмой, ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡƒΡ‡Π°ΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΡ… Π³Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎ-ΠΈΠ½ΠΆΠ΅Π½Π΅Ρ€Π½Ρ‹Π΅ биологичСскиС ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ (Π“Π˜Π‘ΠŸ), ΠΏΠ΅Ρ€Π΅ΠΊΠ»ΡŽΡ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ всСх ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ², ΠΈΠΌΠ΅ΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΡ… показания, Π½Π° ΠΌΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± ΠΈ рСслизумаб, ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ²ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡ‚ ΠΊ ΡƒΠ²Π΅Π»ΠΈΡ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΡŽ Π½Π°Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ·ΠΊΠΈ Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ Π½Π° 3,3%, ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π° 67,2 ΠΌΠ»Π½ Ρ€ΡƒΠ±. Π·Π° 3 Π³ΠΎΠ΄Π°.Π—Π°ΠΊΠ»ΡŽΡ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅. ΠŸΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½Π½Ρ‹ΠΉ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Ρ‹Π²Π°Π΅Ρ‚, Ρ‡Ρ‚ΠΎ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΎΠΌΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° Ρƒ ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с тяТСлой Π±Ρ€ΠΎΠ½Ρ…ΠΈΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ астмой, Π½Π΅ ΠΊΠΎΠ½Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡ€ΡƒΠ΅ΠΌΠΎΠΉ Π½Π° срСдних ΠΈ высоких Π΄ΠΎΠ·Π°Ρ… ингаляционных кортикостСроидов, ΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Ρ‹Π²Π°Π΅Ρ‚ Π½Π°ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½ΡŒΡˆΡƒΡŽ Π½Π°Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ·ΠΊΡƒ Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ систСмы здравоохранСния ΠΈ являСтся Π½Π°ΠΈΠ±ΠΎΠ»Π΅Π΅ фармакоэкономичСски эффСктивным Π² сравнСнии с ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΈ рСслизумаба

    Prototype ATLAS IBL Modules using the FE-I4A Front-End Readout Chip

    Get PDF
    The ATLAS Collaboration will upgrade its semiconductor pixel tracking detector with a new Insertable B-layer (IBL) between the existing pixel detector and the vacuum pipe of the Large Hadron Collider. The extreme operating conditions at this location have necessitated the development of new radiation hard pixel sensor technologies and a new front-end readout chip, called the FE-I4. Planar pixel sensors and 3D pixel sensors have been investigated to equip this new pixel layer, and prototype modules using the FE-I4A have been fabricated and characterized using 120 GeV pions at the CERN SPS and 4 GeV positrons at DESY, before and after module irradiation. Beam test results are presented, including charge collection efficiency, tracking efficiency and charge sharing.Comment: 45 pages, 30 figures, submitted to JINS

    Π Π•ΠΠšΠ’ΠžΠ ΠΠ«Π• И ΠŸΠžΠ‘Π›Π•Π Π•ΠΠšΠ’ΠžΠ ΠΠ«Π• ИБПЫВАНИЯ И Π˜Π‘Π‘Π›Π•Π”ΠžΠ’ΠΠΠ˜Π― НА Π‘Π«Π‘Π’Π Π«Π₯ ΠšΠ Π˜Π’Π˜Π§Π•Π‘ΠšΠ˜Π₯ Π‘Π‘ΠžΠ ΠšΠΠ₯ Π’Π«Π‘ΠžΠšΠžΠŸΠ›ΠžΠ’ΠΠžΠ“Πž ΠΠ˜Π—ΠšΠžΠžΠ‘ΠžΠ“ΠΠ©Π•ΠΠΠžΠ“Πž УРАН-Π¦Π˜Π ΠšΠžΠΠ˜Π•Π’ΠžΠ“Πž ΠšΠΠ Π‘ΠžΠΠ˜Π’Π Π˜Π”ΠΠžΠ“Πž Π’ΠžΠŸΠ›Π˜Π’Π

    Get PDF
    UZrCN fuel is a high-density, high-temperature fuel that has potential for application in different type reactors. In the past, reactor tests using UZrCN HEU (96% U-235) fuel have been performed to low burnup. However, reactor-testing data are still needed at high burnup to confirm the optimal performance of this-type fuel. The SM-3 research reactor, which is a high-flux reactor located at the State Scientific Center – Research Institute of Atomic Reactors, Dimitrovgrad, Russia, will be used to test a UZrCN LEU (19.73% U-235) fuel to ~40% of burnup. The fuel will then be examined to determine its performance during irradiation.On the β€œGiacint” and β€œKristal” critical facilities located at the Joint Institute for Power and Nuclear Research – SOSNY of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Minsk, Belarus, criticality experiments on multiplying systems modeling physical features of cores with UZrCN LEU (19.75% U-235) fuel have been prepared for use in works on fast reactors with gaseous and liquid-metal coolants. Critical assemblies represent uniform hexagonal lattices of fuel assemblies, each of which consists of 7 fuel rods and has no clad. The active fuel length is 500 mm. Clad material is stainless steel or Nb. Three types of fuel assemblies with different matrix material (air, aluminum and lead) are investigated. These are side radial, top and bottom reflectors – beryllium (internal layer) and stainless steel (external layer).This article desribes the design of the experiment that will be performed in the SM-3 reactor and discusses the results of different calculations that have been performed to show that the experiment design will meet all objectives. The description of construction and composition of critical assemblies with UZrCN fuel and the calculation results are also presented.Β Π’ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²ΠΎ UZrCN прСдставляСт собой высокоплотноС высокотСмпСратурноС Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²ΠΎ, ΠΊΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ΅ ΠΌΠΎΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½ΡΡ‚ΡŒΡΡ Π² Ρ€Π΅Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π°Ρ… Ρ€Π°Π·Π»ΠΈΡ‡Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Ρ‚ΠΈΠΏΠΎΠ². Π’ ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΡˆΠ»ΠΎΠΌ Ρ€Π΅Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π½Ρ‹Π΅ испытания Π’ΠžΠ£ (96% U-235) UzrCN-Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²Π° Π±Ρ‹Π»ΠΈ Π²Ρ‹ΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½Π΅Π½Ρ‹ Ρ‚ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠΊΠΎ с Π½ΠΈΠ·ΠΊΠΈΠΌ Π²Ρ‹Π³ΠΎΡ€Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ. ВмСстС с Ρ‚Π΅ΠΌ Π΄Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹Π΅ Ρ€Π΅Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π½Ρ‹Ρ… испытаний Π½Π΅ΠΎΠ±Ρ…ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠΌΡ‹ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ высоком Π²Ρ‹Π³ΠΎΡ€Π°Π½ΠΈΠΈ для подтвСрТдСния ΠΎΠΏΡ‚ΠΈΠΌΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… характСристик этого Ρ‚ΠΈΠΏΠ° Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²Π°. Высокопоточный ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π»ΡŒΡΠΊΠΈΠΉ Ρ€Π΅Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΎΡ€ БМ-3, располоТСнный Π² ГосударствСнном Π½Π°ΡƒΡ‡Π½ΠΎΠΌ Ρ†Π΅Π½Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅ – Научно-ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π»ΡŒΡΠΊΠΈΠΉ институт Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠΌΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… Ρ€Π΅Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ² (Π³. Π”ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡ‚Ρ€ΠΎΠ²Π³Ρ€Π°Π΄, Россия), Π±ΡƒΠ΄Π΅Ρ‚ ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Ρ‚ΡŒΡΡ для испытания НОУ (19,73% U-235) UzrCN-Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²Π° Π΄ΠΎ ~40 % выгорания. Π—Π°Ρ‚Π΅ΠΌ Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²ΠΎ Π±ΡƒΠ΄Π΅Ρ‚ ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Ρ‚ΡŒΡΡ для опрСдСлСния Π΅Π³ΠΎ характСристик послС облучСния.На критичСских стСндах Β«Π“ΠΈΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ½Ρ‚Β» ΠΈ Β«ΠšΡ€ΠΈΡΡ‚Π°Π»Β» Π² ОбъСдинСнном институтС энСргСтичСских ΠΈ ядСрных исслСдований – Босны ΠΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π°ΠΊΠ°Π΄Π΅ΠΌΠΈΠΈ Π½Π°ΡƒΠΊ БСларуси (Π³. Минск, Π‘Π΅Π»Π°Ρ€ΡƒΡΡŒ) осущСствляСтся ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Π³ΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΠ²ΠΊΠ° ΠΊ экспСримСнтам ΠΏΠΎ критичности Π½Π° Ρ€Π°Π·ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΆΠ°ΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΡ… систСмах, ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈΡ€ΡƒΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΡ… физичСскиС особСнности Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Π·ΠΎΠ½ с НОУ (19,75% U-235) UzrCN-Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²ΠΎΠΌ для использования Π² Ρ€Π°Π±ΠΎΡ‚Π°Ρ… ΠΏΠΎ Π½ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΌΡƒ поколСнию быстрых Ρ€Π΅Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ² с Π³Π°Π·ΠΎΠΎΠ±Ρ€Π°Π·Π½Ρ‹ΠΌΠΈ ΠΈ ТидкомСталличСскими тСплоноситСлями. ΠšΡ€ΠΈΡ‚ΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ сборки ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄ΡΡ‚Π°Π²Π»ΡΡŽΡ‚ собой ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠ΄Π½Ρ‹Π΅ Π³Π΅ΠΊΡΠ°Π³ΠΎΠ½Π°Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Π΅ Ρ€Π΅ΡˆΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΊΠΈ Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Ρ… сборок, каТдая ΠΈΠ· ΠΊΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹Ρ… состоит ΠΈΠ· сСми Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Ρ… стСрТнСй ΠΈ Π½Π΅ ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π΅Ρ‚ ΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΡ‡ΠΊΠΈ. Π”Π»ΠΈΠ½Π° Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΠΉ части Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ стСрТня составляСт 500 ΠΌΠΌ. ΠœΠ°Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΠ°Π» ΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΡ‡ΠΊΠΈ – Π½Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ°Π²Π΅ΡŽΡ‰Π°Ρ ΡΡ‚Π°Π»ΡŒ ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½ΠΈΠΎΠ±ΠΈΠΉ. Π‘ΡƒΠ΄ΡƒΡ‚ исслСдованы Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΈ Ρ‚ΠΈΠΏΠ° Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²Π½Ρ‹Ρ… сборок с Ρ€Π°Π·Π»ΠΈΡ‡Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ ΠΌΠ°Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΠ°Π»ΠΎΠΌ ΠΌΠ°Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΈΡ†Ρ‹ Π² Π½ΠΈΡ… (Π²ΠΎΠ·Π΄ΡƒΡ…, алюминий ΠΈ свинСц). Π‘ΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΉ Ρ€Π°Π΄ΠΈΠ°Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹ΠΉ, Π²Π΅Ρ€Ρ…Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΈ Π½ΠΈΠΆΠ½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΎΡ‚Ρ€Π°ΠΆΠ°Ρ‚Π΅Π»ΠΈ – Π±Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΠ»Π»ΠΈΠΉ (Π²Π½ΡƒΡ‚Ρ€Π΅Π½Π½ΠΈΠΉ слой) ΠΈ Π½Π΅Ρ€ΠΆΠ°Π²Π΅ΡŽΡ‰Π°Ρ ΡΡ‚Π°Π»ΡŒ (внСшний слой).Π’ настоящСй ΡΡ‚Π°Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ ΠΎΠΏΠΈΡΡ‹Π²Π°ΡŽΡ‚ΡΡ ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ΅ΠΊΡ‚Π½Ρ‹Π΅ Π΄Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹Π΅ экспСримСнта, ΠΊΠΎΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹ΠΉ Π±ΡƒΠ΄Π΅Ρ‚ осущСствлСн Π½Π° Ρ€Π΅Π°ΠΊΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π΅ БМ-3, ΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΡΡƒΠΆΠ΄Π°ΡŽΡ‚ΡΡ Ρ€Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ расчСтов, ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠ·Π²Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹Π΅ ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Ρ‚ΡŒ, Ρ‡Ρ‚ΠΎ экспСримСнт Π±ΡƒΠ΄Π΅Ρ‚ ΠΎΡ‚Π²Π΅Ρ‡Π°Ρ‚ΡŒ всСм поставлСнным цСлям. Π’Π°ΠΊΠΆΠ΅ прСдставлСны описания конструкции ΠΈ состава критичСских сборок с Ρ‚ΠΎΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ²ΠΎΠΌ UZrCN ΠΈ Ρ€Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ ΠΈΡ… расчСтов.

    The Nuclear-Weapons Complex and Denuclearization of North Korea

    No full text
    The result of the implementation of the DPRK’s nuclear weapons program was the creation and successful testingΒ  ofΒ  aΒ  thermonuclearΒ  explosive device. Over a fifty-year period, the nuclear industry was established in the country, including all the necessary enterprises, from uranium ore mining, enrichment, the production of uranium metal and uranium hexafluoride, and the production of special materials such as ultra-pure graphite, lithium-6 and lithium deuteride. The nuclear complex in Yongbyon played a central role in the implementation of the program, a reactor was built for the production of weapons-grade plutoniumΒ  and tritium,Β  production of fuel for this reactor was created, chemical reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel with separation of plutoniumΒ  was created, and uranium enrichment production plant was put in operation.The task of the complete controlled and irreversible denuclearization of the DPRK, put on the agenda, will require complete informationΒ  about the North Korean nuclear weaponsΒ  programΒ  andΒ  theΒ  nuclear weapons complex thatΒ  was developed. However, the presented review shows that information about the state of the nuclear programs of the DPRK, due to the extreme closeness of the country, is very scarce and contradictory. InΒ  thisΒ  regard, theΒ  implementation of denuclearization will require extraordinary effort, time, and a step-by-step approach

    ЀармакоэкономичСская ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒ примСнСния ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± Π² сравнСнии с Π΄Ρ€ΡƒΠ³ΠΈΠΌΠΈ ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π°ΠΌΠΈ PD-1 Ρƒ ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с распространСнным Π½Π΅ΠΌΠ΅Π»ΠΊΠΎΠΊΠ»Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΡ‡Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ Ρ€Π°ΠΊΠΎΠΌ Π»Π΅Π³ΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ послС ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄ΡˆΠ΅ΡΡ‚Π²ΡƒΡŽΡ‰Π΅ΠΉ Ρ…ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΎΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ

    No full text
    Aim: to evaluate the pharmacoeconomic efficacy of the application of the atesolizumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) preparation compared with other control point inhibitors (PD-1 inhibitors) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after chemothe rapy.Materials and methods. Study design included a retrospective analysis of literature data and modeling. Based on the calculations conducted in a Microsoft Excel model, we analyzed the effect of minimizing costs on using comparable drugs with comparable efficacy; we evaluated how the provision of all patients with NSCLC will impact the health system budget taking into consideration the fact that all these patients are currently provided with PD-1 inhibitors in the second and third lines and with the atezolizumab preparation. For calculations, we used the prices stated in the state register of maximum selling prices; the weighted average maximum wholesale premium was calculated according to the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS). Results. In the analysis of cost minimization, atesolizumab proved itself to be highly clinically and economically effective. It allowed reducing the costs by 28.6% over 3 years compared with the use of nivolumab, and by 31.3% compared with the use of pembrolizumab in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimen. Analysis of the impact on the budget showed that if all 848 patients currently receiving PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimens had been initially provided with atesolizumab, this would have reduced the pressure on budget by 21.90% or 664.25 million rubles for 3 years.Conclusion. The use of the atesolizumab preparation is pharmacoeconomically reasonable and appropriate in comparison with the use of nivolumab and pembrolizumab. It will allow reducing the cost of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimens.ЦСль - ΠΎΡ†Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ Ρ„Π°Ρ€ΠΌΠ°ΠΊΠΎΡΠΊΠΎΠ½ΠΎΠΌΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΡƒΡŽ ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒ примСнСния ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± (ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€ PD-L1) Π² сравнСнии с Π΄Ρ€ΡƒΠ³ΠΈΠΌΠΈ ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π°ΠΌΠΈ ΠΊΠΎΠ½Ρ‚Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… Ρ‚ΠΎΡ‡Π΅ΠΊ (ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹ PD-1) Ρƒ ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с распространСнным Π½Π΅ΠΌΠ΅Π»ΠΊΠΎΠΊΠ»Π΅Ρ‚ΠΎΡ‡Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ Ρ€Π°ΠΊΠΎΠΌ Π»Π΅Π³ΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ (ΠΠœΠ Π›) послС ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄ΡˆΠ΅ΡΡ‚Π²ΡƒΡŽΡ‰Π΅ΠΉ Ρ…ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΎΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ.ΠœΠ°Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€ΠΈΠ°Π»Ρ‹ ΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅Ρ‚ΠΎΠ΄Ρ‹. Π”ΠΈΠ·Π°ΠΉΠ½ исслСдования - рСтроспСктивный Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· Π»ΠΈΡ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΡƒΡ€Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Π΄Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹Ρ… ΠΈ ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅. На основании расчСтов, ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½Π½Ρ‹Ρ… Π² ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈ, построСнной Π½Π° Π±Π°Π·Π΅ ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ³Ρ€Π°ΠΌΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ обСспСчСния Microsoft Excel, ΠΏΡ€ΠΎΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ· ΠΌΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠ·Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠΈ Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ Π½Π° ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ сравниваСмых ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠ², ΠΎΠ±Π»Π°Π΄Π°ΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΡ… сопоставимой ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒΡŽ, ΠΎΡ†Π΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΎ влияниС Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ систСмы здравоохранСния ΠΏΡ€ΠΈ обСспСчСнии всСх ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ² с ΠΠœΠ Π›, Π² настоящСС врСмя обСспСчиваСмых ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Π°ΠΌΠΈ PD-1 Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈ Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ΠΉ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΈ, ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ΠΎΠΌ Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±. Для расчСтов использовали зарСгистрированныС Ρ†Π΅Π½Ρ‹ согласно государствСнному рССстру ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½Ρ‹Ρ… отпускных Ρ†Π΅Π½, ΡΡ€Π΅Π΄Π½Π΅Π²Π·Π²Π΅ΡˆΠ΅Π½Π½Π°Ρ ΠΏΡ€Π΅Π΄Π΅Π»ΡŒΠ½Π°Ρ оптовая Π½Π°Π΄Π±Π°Π²ΠΊΠ° - ΠΏΠΎ Π΄Π°Π½Π½Ρ‹ΠΌ Π€Π΅Π΄Π΅Ρ€Π°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π°Π½Ρ‚ΠΈΠΌΠΎΠ½ΠΎΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎΠΉ слуТбы (ЀАБ).Π Π΅Π·ΡƒΠ»ΡŒΡ‚Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹. Π’ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Π΅ ΠΌΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠ·Π°Ρ†ΠΈΠΈ Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚ Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Ρ‹Π²Π°Π΅Ρ‚ Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡŒΡˆΡƒΡŽ ΠΊΠ»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠΎ-ΡΠΊΠΎΠ½ΠΎΠΌΠΈΡ‡Π΅ΡΠΊΡƒΡŽ ΡΡ„Ρ„Π΅ΠΊΡ‚ΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡ‚ΡŒ - Π΅Π³ΠΎ ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ позволяСт ΡΠ½ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ Π·Π°Ρ‚Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Ρ‹ Π½Π° 28,6% Π·Π° 3 Π³ΠΎΠ΄Π° Π² сравнСнии с ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ Π½ΠΈΠ²ΠΎΠ»ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π°, ΠΈ Π½Π° 31,3% Π² сравнСнии с ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ ΠΏΠ΅ΠΌΠ±Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈ Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ΠΉ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΈ Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ ΠΠœΠ Π›. Анализ влияния Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π», Ρ‡Ρ‚ΠΎ Ссли Π±Ρ‹ всС 848 ΠΏΠ°Ρ†ΠΈΠ΅Π½Ρ‚ΠΎΠ², Π² настоящСС врСмя ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡƒΡ‡Π°ΡŽΡ‰ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹ PD-1/PD-L1 Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈ Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ΠΉ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΈ Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ ΠΠœΠ Π›, ΠΈΠ·Π½Π°Ρ‡Π°Π»ΡŒΠ½ΠΎ Π±Ρ‹Π»ΠΈ обСспСчСны Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±ΠΎΠΌ, это ΠΏΠΎΠ·Π²ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ»ΠΎ Π±Ρ‹ ΡΠ½ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ Π½Π°Π³Ρ€ΡƒΠ·ΠΊΡƒ Π½Π° Π±ΡŽΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Ρ‚ Π·Π° 3 Π³ΠΎΠ΄Π° Π½Π° 21,90%, ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π° 664,25 ΠΌΠ»Π½ Ρ€ΡƒΠ±.Π—Π°ΠΊΠ»ΡŽΡ‡Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅. ΠŸΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΡ€Π΅ΠΏΠ°Ρ€Π°Ρ‚Π° Π°Ρ‚Π΅Π·ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π± являСтся фармакоэкономичСски обоснованным ΠΈ цСлСсообразным ΠΏΠΎ ΡΡ€Π°Π²Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΡŽ с ΠΏΡ€ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ Π½ΠΈΠ²ΠΎΠ»ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΈ ΠΏΠ΅ΠΌΠ±Ρ€ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·ΡƒΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ·Π²ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡ‚ ΡΠ½ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡ‚ΡŒ расходы Π½Π° ΠΈΠ½Π³ΠΈΠ±ΠΈΡ‚ΠΎΡ€Ρ‹ PD-1/PD-L1 Π²ΠΎ Π²Ρ‚ΠΎΡ€ΠΎΠΉ ΠΈ Ρ‚Ρ€Π΅Ρ‚ΡŒΠ΅ΠΉ Π»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΠΈ Ρ‚Π΅Ρ€Π°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ ΠΠœΠ Π›

    Pharmacoeconomic efficacy of atesolizumab compared with other PD-1 inhibitors in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer after chemotherapy

    No full text
    Aim: to evaluate the pharmacoeconomic efficacy of the application of the atesolizumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) preparation compared with other control point inhibitors (PD-1 inhibitors) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after chemothe rapy.Materials and methods. Study design included a retrospective analysis of literature data and modeling. Based on the calculations conducted in a Microsoft Excel model, we analyzed the effect of minimizing costs on using comparable drugs with comparable efficacy; we evaluated how the provision of all patients with NSCLC will impact the health system budget taking into consideration the fact that all these patients are currently provided with PD-1 inhibitors in the second and third lines and with the atezolizumab preparation. For calculations, we used the prices stated in the state register of maximum selling prices; the weighted average maximum wholesale premium was calculated according to the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS). Results. In the analysis of cost minimization, atesolizumab proved itself to be highly clinically and economically effective. It allowed reducing the costs by 28.6% over 3 years compared with the use of nivolumab, and by 31.3% compared with the use of pembrolizumab in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimen. Analysis of the impact on the budget showed that if all 848 patients currently receiving PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimens had been initially provided with atesolizumab, this would have reduced the pressure on budget by 21.90% or 664.25 million rubles for 3 years.Conclusion. The use of the atesolizumab preparation is pharmacoeconomically reasonable and appropriate in comparison with the use of nivolumab and pembrolizumab. It will allow reducing the cost of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in the second- and third-line NSCLC treatment regimens

    Utilization of 1-chloromethylsilatrane by Rhodotorula mucilaginosa

    No full text
    The imperfect yeast, Rhodotorula mucilaginosa utilized nitrogen of 1-chloromethylsilatrane (CMS) as a sole nitrogen source when grown on glucose, glycerol, methanol, ethanol and succinate. Under such conditions and at concentrations from 0.45 to 4.5 mM, CMS was a growth-limiting factor. Atomic absorption spectrometry revealed the accumulation of silicon compounds in the cultural liquid which were chloroform-insoluble in contrast to CMS. The following pathway of the partial decomposition of CMS is propoposed: CMS β†’ chloromethylsilanethryol β†’ bis(chloromethyldisiloxane) tetraol. Β© 1987

    Pharmacoeconomic analysis of using biological agents for uncontrolled moderate-to-severe atopic asthma in the Russian Federation

    No full text
    Objective – to conduct a pharmacoeconomic analysis of using omalizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab in the treatment of patients with uncontrolled moderate and severe atopic asthma in the healthcare setting of the Russian Federation.Materials and Methods. A pharmacoeconomic model based on clinical data was created. The cost-effectiveness ratios for omalizumab, mepolizumab and reslizumab were calculated and compared. Budget impact analysis for the partial replacement of omalizumab with mepolizumab and/or reslizumab has been performed.Results. The use of omalizumab costs 13.3% less than that of reslizumab and 1.6% more than that of mepolizumab. The cost-effectiveness ratio for omalizumab is significantly lower vs the competitors. To prevent asthma exacerbations by omalizumab requires 463 805 rubles, which is 24.80% less than for reslizumab and by 382,640 or 20.89% less than for mepolizumab. The results are robust and resistant to 10% fluctuations in prices for the compared products. According to the budget impact analysis, by introducing reslizumab instead of omalizumab for a 3-year therapy in 210 patients with asthma and blood eosinophilia β‰₯400 cells/Β΅l, will increase the burden on the budget by 13.25% or by 83.2 million rubles. In a group of 594 patients with eosinophilia β‰₯150 cells/Β΅l, using mepolizumab instead of omalizumab will increase the budget burden by 1.58% or by 24.0 million rubles. In the total group of 759 patients receiving genetically-engineered products, switching to mepolizumab and reslizumab will increase the budget spending by 3.3% or 67.2 million rubles for 3 years.Conclusion. The analysis shows that using omalizumab in patients with severe asthma that is uncontrolled by medium and high doses of inhaled corticosteroids, has the lowest burden on the budget of the healthcare system and is more effective compared to mepolizumab and reslizumab
    corecore