Oral antiviral therapies are cost-effective vs. no treatment but indirect comparisons should be avoided

n/

Valutazione economica dello studio CARDS: un aggiornamento

Introduction: in the last decades, prevalence and incidence of type II diabetes mellitus have been rapidly growing worldwide. Most recent projections estimate that the number of people affected by diabetes is destined to double in 2030, producing a significant increase of the healthcare expenditure for the management of complications. Prevention of cardiovascular events in diabetes population represents a priority for decision makers, who have to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of therapeutic interventions. Objective: to provide an updated cost-effectiveness evaluation of treating type II diabetes patients with atorvastatin versus placebo, in the light of the imminent price reduction of atorvastatin due to loss of exclusivity and of other therapeutic and hospital costs. Material and Methods: we derived clinical information from the CARDS study, a randomized, multicenter clinical trial evaluating efficacy of atorvastatin versus placebo in preventing the occurrence of cardiovascular events in a cohort of type II diabetes patients without previous history of coronary events. A cost-effectiveness analysis in the perspective of the National Healthcare System (SSN) has been performed, under the hypothesis of the imminent price reduction of atorvastatin, due to the loss of exclusivity. Results: after a median follow up of 3.9 years, the number of patients with at least a major cardiovascular event requiring hospitalization was lower in the atorvastatin arm (5.8%) compared to the placebo arm (9.0%; p=0.001). Based on a cohort of 1,000 patients, treatment with atorvastatin permitted to gain 29.28 life years. The incremental cost of adding atorvastatin to the standard therapy amounted to €305,682, and was partially balanced by a cost reduction due to fewer hospitalizations, compared to the placebo arm (€ 168,313). Total direct costs were of €602.186 in the atorvastatin group and of € 464,818 in the placebo group, resulting into an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of € 4,692 for Life Year Gained (LYG). Conclusion: the present study is an update of a previous economic analysis of the CARDS trial. Under the assumed new cost scenario, the cost-effectiveness profile of treating diabetic patients with atorvastatin becomes highly favourable, and leads to a significant reduction of the cost for Life Year Gained compared to the previous findings

Valutazione economica dello studio CARDS

Introduction: cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are the major component of premature mortality, generate disability and are a relevant source of cost. The growing incidence of CVD is associated with lifestyle and other modifiable risk factors. Prevention and preclinical detection of CVD reduce morbidity and mortality. Type 2 diabetes is associated with a substantially increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Objective: the aim of the study was to evaluate the health economic consequence of medical therapy with atorvastatin for primary prevention of major cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in Italy. Materials and method: in order to reach our objective we drew clinical information from the CARDS study. This economic evaluation was carried out conducting a cost/effectiveness analysis from the perspective of National Health Service (NHS). The analysis was applied to a time horizon in conformity with the observational period adopted in the CARDS study (3.9 years). An incremental cost/effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated and is expressed as cost per life years gained (LYG). In order to test the robustness of the results, a one-way sensitivity analysis was performed. Results: the total cost of atorvastatin therapy over 3.9 years amounts to around 1.5 million of euros per 1,000 patients. The total cost of adding atorvastatin to standard care in people treated for primary prevention of major cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes as those involved in the CARDS study would entail an additional cost of about 1,2 million of euros per 1,000 patients treated per 3.9 years, with an incremental cost/effectiveness ratio (ICER) equivalent to 36,566 euros per patient per LYG. Discussion: the current study is the first economic evaluation of CARDS study to the Italian situation. The results of the current study show that hypolipemic therapy with atorvastatin 10 mg in diabetic individuals is to be considered cost effective

The burden of renal cell cancer : A retrospective longitudinal study on occurrence, outcomes and cost using an administrative claims database

Abstract Objective To assess the burden of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in epidemiologic and economic terms. Methods Retrospective, naturalistic longitudinal study on the occurrence, outcomes and cost of RCC using an administrative database. We selected residents of Friuli-Venezia-Giulia (FVG), a North-eastern Region of Italy, who had a RCC first hospital admission during the period 2000–2004, and we followed them up until: 30th June 2005, death or transfers. Direct medical costs were quantified in the perspective of FVG Regional Health Service. Results We enrolled 1358 patients (63% male), the 18.8% presenting a metastatic-stage, leading to a crude incidence of 23/100.000 person-years. During the follow-up, 76% of the metastatic patients and 21% of the non-metastatic patients died. Total health care costs per-patient over the maximum of follow-up were 16,090€ for the localised stage group and 17,656€ in the metastatic-stage group. Discussion RCC imposes a significant epidemiologic and economic burden to the healthcare-system and the society

Spinal Fusion Surgery: Epidemiologic and Economic Burden Attributable to First Intervention

IntroductionLow back pain (LBP) is the single most common cause for disability in individuals aged 50 years or younger with a high socioeconomic impact. In USA, LBP costs are estimated to exceed $1..

Costi ed effetti di Risperidone Long Acting (RLA) rispetto ad antipsicotici atipici nel trattamento dei soggetti schizofrenici in Italia

Objective: to estimate the costs and effects of long-acting risperidone (LAR) in the treatment of schizophrenic patients in Italy, as compared to conventional and oral atypical antipsychotics. Methods: a discrete event model was used. The model simulates patients. history for every single therapeutic alternative and selects incident events, on the basis of pre-defined probability distribution-powered, randomized repetitions. The model operates on two types of parameters: patient characteristics and time-dependent variables. Patient characteristics (age, sex, illness profile and severity, probability of incurring in an adverse event and potential dangerousness) remain fixed during the 5 simulated years. Time-dependent variables are subject to changes and include outpatient visits, severity of psychotic episodes, symptom-scores, compliance, incidence of adverse effects, site of treatment and dangerousness. Three treatments have been selected: scenario 1 begins with LAR, switches to olanzapine and then to clozapine; scenario 2 starts with olanzapine, switches to oral risperidone and ends with clozapine. Direct medical costs have been computed on the basis of psychiatric visits, drug costs and costs of the institution in which the patient is treated (hospital, rehabilitation clinic, etc.) Outcome measures were number of psychotic episodes in 5 years, total time spent during these episodes and cumulative score of positive and negative symptoms at 5 years. Information on alternatives, transition probabilities, model structure and health resources utilization were derived from the literature and from a panel of experts. Results: it has been estimated that LAR is economically dominant (more effective at lower cost) respect to oral atypical antipsychotics, being able to prevent 0.87 psychotic episodes per patient, with a net cost saving of 4,773 euro per patient. Sub-group analysis indicate that LAR is always more effective than the considered alternatives and, in general, also less costly than oral atypical antipsychotics. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model to several variations of key parameters. Conclusions: LAR therapy dominates oral atypical antipsychotics