Uncertainty Analysis in Intervention Impact on Health Inequality for Resource Allocation Decisions

Estimating and Rewarding the Value of Healthcare Interventions Beyond the Healthcare Sector: A Conceptual Framework

BACKGROUND

Evaluating healthcare interventions for their impacts beyond health outcomes may result in recognition of changes in human capital, income level, tax revenue, and government spending, which could affect economic growth and population health. In this paper, we document instances where current health technology assessment (HTA) practices fail to account for the impacts of healthcare interventions on broader society beyond the healthcare sector.

METHODS

We propose a novel conceptual framework, highlighting its three components (distributional cost-effectiveness analysis [DCEA], input-output model, and voting scheme) and their contributions to capturing the economic and societal ripple effects of healthcare interventions. This manuscript also outlines a case study in which the framework is applied to the reassessment of a previously evaluated digital health therapeutic for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD) compared with standard of care, demonstrating its practical application.

RESULTS

The DCEA health value metric indicates that digital therapeutic is more equitable, favoring socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, while standard of care exacerbates health inequality by benefiting the already advantaged. Additionally, digital therapeutic shows potential for boosting productivity, raising income, and creating jobs, supporting its consideration by employer-sponsored health plans to optimize resource allocation for treating OUD.

CONCLUSION

The conceptual framework provides insights for enhancing HTAs to incorporate the broader economic and societal impacts of healthcare interventions. By integrating DCEA, extended HTA analysis with input-output modeling, and a voting scheme, decision makers can make informed choices aligned with societal priorities, although further research and validation are necessary for practical implementation across diverse healthcare contexts.

Trastuzumab deruxtecan versus chemotherapy treated in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis based on the DESTINY-Breast02 trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of trastuzumab deruxtecan versus chemotherapy for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

METHODS

A three-state partitioned survival model was constructed to simulate the treatment. The analysis yielded information on the costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity analyses have been carried out to scrutinize the model's uncertainties.

RESULTS

The total cost for the trastuzumab deruxtecan group was found to be $228601.57, while the chemotherapy group incurred a total cost of $84901.38. It was found that the trastuzumab deruxtecan group exhibited an incremental gain of 2.95 QALYs in comparison to the chemotherapy group. However, this additional benefit came at an additional cost of $143700.19 for the trastuzumab deruxtecan treatment, calculated in the ICER at $48711.93/QALY, which surpasses the willingness-to-pay threshold of $37304.34/QALY in China. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were robust to variations in key parameters and assumptions.

CONCLUSION

Trastuzumab deruxtecan was not a cost-effective treatment option for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer in China. However, the use of trastuzumab deruxtecan may offer a cost-effective treatment alternative provided that its price is diminished.

Modelled Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Childhood Obesity Interventions: A Demonstration

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate how distributional cost-effectiveness analyses of childhood obesity interventions could be conducted and presented for decision makers.

METHODS

We conducted modelled distributional cost-effectiveness analyses of three obesity interventions in children: an infant sleep intervention (POI-Sleep), a combined infant sleep, food, activity and breastfeeding intervention (POI-Combo) and a clinician-led treatment for primary school-aged children with overweight and obesity (High Five for Kids). For each intervention, costs and socioeconomic position (SEP)-specific effect sizes were applied to an Australian child cohort (n = 4898). Using a purpose-built microsimulation model we simulated SEP-specific body mass index (BMI) trajectories, healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from age 4 to 17 years for control and intervention cohorts. We examined the distribution of each health outcome across SEP and determined the net health benefit and equity impact accounting for opportunity costs and uncertainty due to individual-level heterogeneity. Finally, we conducted scenario analyses to test the effect of assumptions about health system marginal productivity, the distribution of opportunity costs and SEP-specific effect sizes. The results of the primary analyses, uncertainty analyses and scenario analyses were presented on an efficiency-equity impact plane.

RESULTS

Accounting for uncertainty, POI-Sleep and High Five for Kids were found to be 'win-win' interventions, with a 67% and 100% probability, respectively, of generating a net health benefit and positive equity impact compared with control. POI-Combo was found to be a 'lose-lose' intervention, with a 91% probability of producing a net health loss and a negative equity impact compared with control. Scenario analyses indicated that SEP-specific effect sizes were highly influential on equity impact estimates for POI-Combo and High Five for Kids, while health system marginal productivity and opportunity cost distribution assumptions primarily influenced the net health benefit and equity impact of POI-Combo.

CONCLUSIONS

These analyses demonstrated that distributional cost-effectiveness analyses using a fit-for-purpose model are appropriate for differentiating and communicating the efficiency and equity impacts of childhood obesity interventions.