Cost-effectiveness analysis of ceftazidime/avibactam compared to imipenem as empirical treatment for complicated urinary tract infections

Ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) is a novel, fixed-dose combination antibiotic that has been approved in Europe and the United States for patients with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) based on results of a Phase III, randomized, comparative study (RECAPTURE study). The present analysis evaluated cost-effectiveness of CAZ-AVI as an empirical treatment for hospitalized patients with cUTIs from the Italian publicly funded healthcare (third-party payer) perspective. A sequential, patient-level simulation model was developed that followed the clinical course of cUTI and generated 5000 pairs of identical patients (CAZ-AVI or imipenem as empirical treatment). The model included additional impact of resistant pathogens; patients who did not respond to empirical treatment were switched to second-line treatment of colistin+high dose carbapenem in both groups. The time horizon of the model was five years, with an annual discount rate of 3% applied to both costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The analysis demonstrated that an intervention sequence (CAZ-AVI followed by colistin+high dose carbapenem) compared with a comparator sequence (imipenem followed by colistin+high dose carbapenem) was associated with a net incremental cost of €1015 per patient but provided better health outcomes in terms of clinical cure (97.65% vs. 91.08%; ∆ = 6.57%), shorter hospital stays (10.65 vs. 12.55 days; ∆ = 1.90 days), and QALYs gained per patient (4.190 vs. 4.063; ∆ = 0.126). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €8039/QALY, which is well below the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30 000/QALY in Italy. The results showed that CAZ-AVI is expected to be a cost-effective treatment compared with imipenem for cUTI in Italy

Economic implications of using bendamustine, alemtuzumab, or chlorambucil as a first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia in the US: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Thitima Kongnakorn,1 James A Sterchele,2 Christopher G Salvador,3 Denis Getsios,4 Mkaya Mwamburi51Evidera, Bangkok, Thailand; 2formerly of Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc, Frazer, PA, 3Oncology Market Research, Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc, Frazer, PA, 4Evidera, Lexington, MA, 5Tufts University School of Medicine, Public Health and Community Medicine, Boston, MA, USABackground: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using bendamustine versus alemtuzumab or bendamustine versus chlorambucil as a first-line therapy in patients with Binet stage B or C chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the US.Methods: A discrete event simulation of the disease course of CLL was developed to evaluate the economic implications of single-agent treatment with bendamustine, alemtuzumab, or chlorambucil, which are indicated for a treatment-naïve patient population with Binet stage B or C CLL. Data from clinical trials were used to create a simulated patient population, risk equations for progression-free survival and survival post disease progression, response rates, and rates of adverse events. Costs from a US health care payer perspective in 2012 US dollars, survival (life years), and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated over a patient's lifetime; all were discounted at 3% per year.Results: Compared with alemtuzumab, bendamustine was considered to be a dominant treatment providing greater benefit (6.10 versus 5.37 life years and 4.02 versus 3.45 QALYs) at lower cost ($78,776 versus$121,441). Compared with chlorambucil, bendamustine was associated with higher costs ($78,776 versus$42,337) but with improved health outcomes (6.10 versus 5.21 life years and 4.02 versus 3.30 QALYs), resulting in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $40,971 per life year gained and$50,619 per QALY gained.Conclusion: Bendamustine is expected to provide cost savings and greater health benefit than alemtuzumab in treatment-naïve patients with CLL. Furthermore, it can be considered as a cost-effective treatment providing health benefits at an acceptable cost versus chlorambucil in the US.Keywords: bendamustine, chlorambucil, alemtuzumab, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, cost-effectiveness, discrete event simulation mode