Additional file 1 of Public preferences regarding the priority setting criteria of health interventions for budget allocation: results of a survey of Iranian adults

Additional file 1: Table S1. Preferences of Study Participants regarding Allocation Criteria in “all else being equal” Scenario (All Participants). Table S2. Participants’ Preferences for Allocation Criteria (Separating cohorts 1 and 2)

Additional file 2 of Public preferences regarding the priority setting criteria of health interventions for budget allocation: results of a survey of Iranian adults

Additional file 2: Supplementary Materials. Questionnaire for Cohort 1. Supplementary Materials. Questionnaire for Cohort 2

Cost-utility analysis of Pembrolizumab compared to other alternative immunotherapy and chemotherapy treatments for patients with advanced melanoma in Iran

Immunotherapy drugs like Pembrolizumab have shown significant improvements in treatment outcomes of advanced melanoma. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of Pembrolizumab compared to other immunotherapy and chemotherapy drugs in the first-line treatment of advanced melanoma in Iran. A partitioned-survival model, based on data from a recent randomized phase 3 study (KEYNOTE-006) and recent meta-analysis, was used to divide Overall survival (OS) time into Progression-free survival (PFS) and post-progression survival for Pembrolizumab, Nivolumab, Ipilimumab, Dacarbazine, Temozolomide, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel combination. Quality Life Years (QALY) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) were considered as the final outcome. The ICER of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, Nivolumab & Ipilimumab, and Pembrolizumab compared to Temozolomide was calculated as $40,365.53,$19,591.13, $24,578, and$47,324.2 per QALY, respectively. Scenario analysis demonstrated if the price of one vial of Nivolumab 100 is $90.51, each vial of Pembrolizumab is$119.20, and each vial of Ipilimumab is $101.54, they will be cost-effective in Iran. None of the immunotherapy drugs studied were found to be cost-effective when considering the cost-effectiveness threshold of$3,532. Therefore, a cost reduction of more than 90% in the prices of immunotherapy drugs would be necessary for them to be considered cost-effective in Iran.</p

Incidence, mortality, cost, effectiveness, ICER, and undiscounted ICER of 11 strategies compared with no screening strategy.

<p>Incidence, mortality, cost, effectiveness, ICER, and undiscounted ICER of 11 strategies compared with no screening strategy.</p

Cost-effectiveness of 11 different strategies for cervical screening.

<p>Strategies standing on the curve are dominant strategies, indicating that they cost less and had more effect. Strategies located out of the curve are dominated strategies, i.e. their costs were much higher than their effects.</p

The most cost-effective strategies (CES) based on different calculation methods.

<p>The cost-effectiveness of 11 strategies were estimated with different methods. Effectiveness was measured with QALY, LYG, and undiscounted QALY.</p

Subnational distribution of COVID-19 in provinces of Iran.

A) crude number of cases, B) number of cases per 100 000 insured population, C) case fatality rates, D) general hospitalization length of stay, E) ICU hospitalization length of stay.</p

Subnational distribution of number of defined cases in provinces bases on crude number of cases, and number of cases pers 100 000 insured population.

Subnational distribution of number of defined cases in provinces bases on crude number of cases, and number of cases pers 100 000 insured population.</p

Case fatality and recovery rates based on different stratifications among included cases.

Case fatality and recovery rates based on different stratifications among included cases.</p

Associations between median hospitalization period and various demographic and hospitalization-associated factors.

Associations between median hospitalization period and various demographic and hospitalization-associated factors.</p