Don't forget about the future: The impact of including future costs on the cost-effectiveness of adult pneumococcal conjugate vaccination with PCV13 in the Netherlands

The Impact of Unrelated Future Medical Costs on Economic Evaluation Outcomes for Different Models of Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

This study leveraged data from 11 independent international diabetes models to evaluate the impact of unrelated future medical costs on the outcomes of health economic evaluations in diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Eleven models simulated the progression of diabetes and occurrence of its complications in hypothetical cohorts of individuals with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 (T2D) diabetes over the remaining lifetime of the patients to evaluate the cost effectiveness of three hypothetical glucose improvement interventions versus a hypothetical control intervention. All models used the same set of costs associated with diabetes complications and interventions, using a United Kingdom healthcare system perspective. Standard utility/disutility values associated with diabetes-related complications were used. Unrelated future medical costs were assumed equal for all interventions and control arms. The statistical significance of changes on the total lifetime costs, incremental costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) before and after adding the unrelated future medical costs were analysed using t-test and summarized in incremental cost-effectiveness diagrams by type of diabetes.

RESULTS

The inclusion of unrelated costs increased mean total lifetime costs substantially. However, there were no significant differences between the mean incremental costs and ICERs before and after adding unrelated future medical costs. Unrelated future medical cost inclusion did not alter the original conclusions of the diabetes modelling evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS

For diabetes, with many costly noncommunicable diseases already explicitly modelled as complications, and with many interventions having predominantly an effect on the improvement of quality of life, unrelated future medical costs have a small impact on the outcomes of health economic evaluations.

Recent changes to adult national immunization programs for pneumococcal vaccination in Europe and how they impact coverage: A systematic review of published and grey literature

Despite widespread use of pneumococcal vaccines throughout Europe, the burden of pneumococcal disease (PD) in adults is considerable. To mitigate this burden, National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies assess the value of different vaccine schedules for protecting against PD. The aim of this review was to assess the evidence and rationales used by NITAGs/HTA agencies, when considering recent changes to National Immunization Programs (NIPs) for adults, and how identified changes affected vaccine coverage rates (VCRs). A systematic review was conducted of published literature from PubMed® and Embase®, and gray literature from HTA/NITAG websites from the last 5 y, covering 31 European countries. Evidence related to NIP recommendations, epidemiology (invasive PD, pneumonia), health economic assessments and VCRs were collected and synthesized. Eighty-four records providing data for 26 countries were identified. Of these, eight described explicit changes to NIPs for adults in seven countries. Despite data gaps, some trends were observed; first, there appears to be a convergence of NIP recommendations in many countries toward sequential vaccination, with a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV), followed by pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine 23. Second, reducing economic or healthcare burden were common rationales for implementing changes. Third, most health economic analyses assessing higher-valency PCVs for adults found its inclusion in NIPs cost-effective. Finally, higher coverage rates were seen in most cases where countries had expanded their NIPs to cover at-risk populations. The findings can encourage agencies to improve surveillance systems and work to reach the NIP's target populations more effectively.

Accounting for Nonhealth and Future Costs in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Distributional Impacts of a US Cancer Prevention Strategy

OBJECTIVE

To provide up-to-date and comprehensive US data tables to estimate future net resource use, including nonlabor market production, and examine distributional impacts of including nonhealth and future costs in cost-effectiveness results.

METHODS

Using a published US cancer prevention simulation model, the paper evaluated the lifetime cost effectiveness of implementing a 10% excise tax on processed meats across age- and sex-specific population subgroups. The model examined multiple scenarios accounting for cancer-related healthcare expenditure (HCE) only, cancer-related and unrelated background HCE, adding productivity benefits (i.e., patient time, cancer-related productivity loss, and background labor and nonlabor market production), and with nonhealth consumption costs, adjusted for household economies of scale. Additional analyses include using population-average versus age-sex-specific estimates for quantifying production and consumption value, as well as comparing direct model estimation versus postcorrections with Meltzer's approximation for incorporating future resource use.

RESULTS

Accounting for nonhealth and future costs impacted cost-effectiveness results across population subgroups, often leading to changes in "cost-saving" determination. Including nonlabor market production had a noticeable impact on estimating future resource use and reduced the bias toward undervaluing productivity among females and older populations. The use of age-sex-specific estimates resulted in less favorable cost-effectiveness results compared with population-average estimates. Meltzer's approximation provided reasonable corrections among the middle-aged population for re-engineering cost-effectiveness ratios from a healthcare sector to a societal perspective.

CONCLUSION

With updated US data tables, this paper can help researchers conduct a comprehensive value assessment to reflect net resource use (health and nonhealth resource use minus production value) from a societal perspective.