Cost-utility of azithromycin in patients with severe asthma

Fluticasone furoate plus vilanterol in patients with moderate persistent asthma: a cost-utility analysis

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the combination of fluticasone furoate and vilanterol (FF/VI) has emerged as an alternative therapy, since it is administered every 24 h, in contrast to other ICS/LABAs such as fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol (FP/Salm), which requires administration every 12 h. Concerns have arisen over whether the benefit generated by FF/VI justifies the additional costs it involves over FP/Salm. This study aimed at assessing the health and economic consequences of FF/VI in patients with moderate-severe persistent asthma.

METHODS

A probabilistic Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with persistent asthma. Total costs and QALYs for FF/VI and FP/Salm were calculated over a lifetime horizon. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of $19,000.

RESULTS

We estimated a gain of 16.8 and 10.7 QALYs per patient per year on FF/VI and FP/Salm, respectively. At the same time, we observed a difference of US$216 in total discounted cost per person-year on FF/VI with respect to FP/Salm. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of FF/VI was USD $70 per QALY with respect to FP/Salm. In the deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, our base-case results were robust to variations in all assumptions and parameters.

CONCLUSION

FF/VI is more cost-effective than FP/Salm. The evidence supports using FF/VI therapy in Colombia, and the study should be replicated in other middle-income countries.

Cost-Utility of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure for Respiratory Distress in Preterm Infants in a Middle-Income Country

OBJECTIVES

Despite the increased popularity of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for preterm infants with respiratory distress, there is still uncertainty about whether the additional costs of this device justify the clinical benefits provided. This study aims to evaluate the cost-utility of CPAP in spontaneously breathing preterm infants with respiratory distress.

METHODS

Using a decision tree model, we estimated the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with CPAP and supplemental oxygen alone by headbox or low-flow nasal cannula (SO). The model was analyzed probabilistically, and a value of information analysis was conducted to inform the value of conducting further research to reduce current uncertainties in the evidence base. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of US$5180.

RESULTS

The mean incremental cost of CPAP versus SO was US$600. The mean incremental benefit of CPAP versus SO was 0.04 QALY. The expected incremental cost per QALY was estimated at US$13 172. The mean incremental net monetary benefit was US$-324 with a 95% credible interval of US$-536 to US$-201. The overall expected value of perfect information per person affected by the decision was estimated to be US$2346.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with SO, the use of CPAP in spontaneously breathing preterm infants with respiratory distress is not cost-effective in Colombia. Evidence should continue to be generated with real-life effectiveness data and economic evaluations in other countries to confirm our findings.

Systematic review and cost-utility of high flow nasal cannula versus continuous positive airway pressure in children with acute severe or moderate bronchiolitis in Colombia

BACKGROUND

Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) and High-Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) have emerged as alternatives to orotracheal intubation and conventional invasive ventilation in patients with moderate to severe bronchiolitis. This study aims to evaluate the evidence and the cost-utility of HFNC compared to CPAP in infants with moderate-severe bronchiolitis in Colombia.

METHODS

The search includes electronic databases such as Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and Embase. Through inclusion and exclusion criteria, screen randomized controlled trials. A decision tree model was used to estimate the cost-utility of CPAP compared with HFNC in infants with moderate-severe bronchiolitis. Sensitivity analysis of transition probabilities, utilities, and cost was carried out.

RESULTS

Incorporate five studies that meet the criteria. The risk of intubation rate in the patients with CPAP is lower than HFNC (relative risk 0.62; 95% confidence interval 0.46-0.84; I2  = 0%) The base-case analysis showed that compared with HFNC, CPAP was associated with lower costs and higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The expected annual cost per patient with CPAP was US$17,574 and with HFNC was US$29,421. The QALYs per person estimated with CPAP were 0.92 and with HFNC was 0.91. This position of absolute dominance of CPAP (CPAP has lower costs and higher QALYs than HFNI) makes it unnecessary to estimate the incremental cost-utility ratio.

CONCLUSIONS

CPAP is cost-effective, over the HFNC, in infants with severe-moderate bronchiolitis in Colombia. Our study provides evidence that should be used by decision-makers to improve clinical practice guidelines and should be replicated to validate their results in other countries.

Dupilumab in children with moderate-to-severe asthma: A cost utility analysis

INTRODUCTION

Dupilumab is an effective and safe medicine for the management of severe asthma. Due to its high cost, concerns are generated regarding its cost-effectiveness. This study aimed to estimate the cost-utility of dupilumab plus standard of care (SoC) versus SoC alone in children between 6 and 11 years old with severe asthma and eosinophilic phenotype.

METHODS

A Markov-type model was developed to estimate costs and health outcomes of a simulated cohort of pediatric patients with persistent asthma treated over a 6-year period. To determine the robustness of the model deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient estimated were 0.85 with dupilumab and 0.84 with SoC. The total mean of discounted costs per patient per cycle were US$ 379 for dupilumab and US$ 19 for SoC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimated was $24 660 US$ per QALY CONCLUSION: Dupilumab is not cost-effective in Colombia in children between 6 and 11 years old with severe asthma and eosinophilic phenotype. Our evidence should motivate regulatory agencies to improve negotiations for new drugs with better information and evidence.

Cost utility of Vitamin D supplementation in adults with mild to moderate asthma

IntroductionUncontrolled asthma significantly impairs health-related quality of life and work productivity. Some add-on therapies, such as vitamin D supplements, safely reduce the rate of asthma exacerbation. The purpose of this study was to assess the cost-utility of vitamin D supplementation in adults with mild to moderate persistent asthma in Colombia.MethodsA Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with severe asthma in Colombia. Total costs and QALYs of two therapy strategies, vitamin D supplementation plus ICS versus ICS alone, were calculated over a one-year time horizon. Deterministic and probability sensitivity analyses were conducted, and cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of $5,180 per QALY gained.ResultsThe base-case analysis showed that compared with no supplementation, vitamin D supplementation was associated with higher costs and higher QALYs. The expected annual cost per patient with vitamin D supplementation was US$1338 and without this supplementation it was US$1095. The QALYs per person estimated with vitamin D supplementation was 0,80, and without this supplementation it was 0,63. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was US$1583 per QALY.ConclusionAdd-on vitamin D supplement was cost-effective when added to the usual care in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Our study provides evidence that should be used by decision-makers to improve clinical practice guidelines.

Cost-utility of as-needed ICS-formoterol versus to maintenance ICS in mild to moderate persistent asthma

Background

Recent asthma guidelines, such as the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA), recommend in adult patients as-needed inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)-formoterol as an alternative to maintenance ICS in mild to moderate persistent asthma. The introduction of these recommendations concerns whether using as-needed budesonide-formoterol would be more cost-effective than to maintenance ICS. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of as-needed combination low-dose budesonide-formoterol compared to short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) reliever therapy in patients with mild asthma.

Methods

A probabilistic Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with mild asthma in Colombia. Total costs and QALYs of low-dose budesonide-formoterol compared to short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) were calculated over a lifetime horizon. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of $19,000.

Results

The model suggests a potential gain of 0.37 QALYs and per patient per year on as-needed ICS-formoterol and a reduction in the discounted cost per person-year, of as-needed ICS-formoterol to maintenance ICS, of US$40. This position of dominance of as-needed ICS-formoterol negates the need to calculate an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. In the deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, our base‐case results were robust to variations in all assumptions and parameters.

Conclusion

Low-dose budesonide-formoterol as a reliever was cost-effective when added to usual care in patients with mild asthma. Our study provides evidence that should be used by decision-makers to improve clinical practice guidelines and should be replicated to validate their results in other middle-income countries.