An economic model of long-term use of celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Previous evaluations of the cost-effectiveness of the cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitor celecoxib (Celebrex, Pfizer Inc, USA) have produced conflicting results. The recent controversy over the cardiovascular (CV) risks of rofecoxib and other coxibs has renewed interest in the economic profile of celecoxib, the only coxib now available in the United States. The objective of our study was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of celecoxib compared with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (nsNSAIDs) in a population of 60-year-old osteoarthritis (OA) patients with average risks of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) complications who require chronic daily NSAID therapy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used decision analysis based on data from the literature to evaluate cost-effectiveness from a modified societal perspective over patients' lifetimes, with outcomes expressed as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity tests were performed to evaluate the impacts of advancing age, CV thromboembolic event risk, different analytic horizons and alternate treatment strategies after UGI adverse events.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Our main findings were: 1) the base model incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for celecoxib versus nsNSAIDs was $31,097 per QALY; 2) the ICER per QALY was$19,309 for a model in which UGI ulcer and ulcer complication event risks increased with advancing age; 3) the ICER per QALY was $17,120 in sensitivity analyses combining serious CV thromboembolic event (myocardial infarction, stroke, CV death) risks with base model assumptions.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our model suggests that chronic celecoxib is cost-effective versus nsNSAIDs in a population of 60-year-old OA patients with average risks of UGI events.</p

Impact of a bleeding care pathway in the management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Objectives: Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding carries high morbidity and mortality. The use of a bleeding care pathway (BCP) may improve outcomes, but the results are inconsistent in various studies. Methods: A BCP for Patients with UGI bleed with admission in a bleeding care unit (BCU) has been in use at our hospital since 2005. Prior to this, a high dependency unit was used for management of all emergencies including UGI bleeding. We compared the length of stay in the bleeding care/high dependency unit, total hospital stay, time to UGI endoscopy after admission, and survival between pre-2005 and post-2005 Patients. Results: Five hundred and fifty-one Patients were admitted with acute UGI bleed in the last 5 years, 121 belonged to pre-BCP (2004) period and 430 after implementation of the pathway (2005-2008). The mean (SD) time to UGI endoscopy improved from 21.3 (7.4) hours in the pre-BCU era to 9.4 (9.9) hours in BCU, p \u3c 0.001. BCU stay was shorter from 2.41 (1.4) days pre-BCP to 1.93 (1.32) days post-BCP, (p \u3c 0.001). The total hospital stay in pre-BCU (4.0 [2.08] days) as compared to BCU (4.13 [2.62] days, p = 0.58) was similar, there was no impact of BCU on survival. Conclusion: A BCU implementation showed improvement in time to UGI endoscopy, and did not reduce BCU stay or impact survival