Economic evaluation of alternative assisted reproduction techniques in management of infertility in Greece

Determining the cost-effectiveness of follitropin alfa biosimilar compared to follitropin alfa originator in women undergoing fertility treatment in France

Objective

The study assessed cost-effectiveness of follitropin alfa biosimilar versus the originator in terms of cost per cumulative live-birth (CLB) for the French healthcare system based on real-world evidence. Follitropin alfa biosimilars have been shown to have comparable clinical outcomes to the originator, in both clinical studies and real-world settings, in terms of oocyte retrieval and cumulative live-birth rate (CLBR). Previous health economic studies comparing the cost-effectiveness of follitropin alfa biosimilars against the originator utilised clinical trial data, leaving ambiguity over cost-effectiveness in real-world settings. Additionally, previous cost-effectiveness analysis has been performed for live-births following only fresh embryo transfers, whereas, fresh and frozen transfers are common in clinical practice. This study investigates the cost per CLB, which more closely models clinical practice.

Study design

A decision-tree cost-effectiveness model was developed based on the total costs and CLBR per ovarian stimulation (OS) for a follitropin alfa biosimilar (Bemfola®, Gedeon Richter Plc, Budapest, Hungary) and the originator (Gonal-f®, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). A time horizon of one year from oocyte retrieval to embryo transfer was used but costs from resulting transfers were also included. Clinical inputs were taken from the REOLA real-world study or clinician insights, while acquisition costs were taken from French public databases. The output was cost per CLB following one OS. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the largest model drivers.

Results

Cost per CLB was €18,147 with follitropin alfa biosimilar and €18,834 with the originator, saving €687 per CLB following OS with the biosimilar. When wastage estimates were considered the biosimilar cost saving is estimated to be between €796 and €1155 per CLB further increasing cost savings. Irrespective of wastage, if used ubiquitously throughout France for ART, the biosimilar could save the French health system €13,994,190 or lead to 771 more births when compared to its higher-cost originator. Sensitivity analysis showed that the originator's relative CLBR had the greatest impact on the model.

Conclusion

This analysis demonstrates that the follitropin alfa biosimilar, Bemfola®, is a more cost-effective option for OS compared with the originator from a French healthcare payer perspective, in terms of cost per CLB.

Economic evaluations of assisted reproductive technologies in high-income countries: a systematic review

STUDY QUESTION

Which assited reproductive technology (ART) interventions in high-income countries are cost-effective and which are not?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Among all ART interventions assessed in economic evaluations, most high-cost interventions, including preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) for a general population and ICSI for unexplained infertility, are unlikely to be cost-effective owing to minimal or no increase in effectiveness.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Approaches to reduce costs in order to increase access have been identified as a research priority for future infertility research. There has been an increasing number of ART interventions implemented in routine clinical practice globally, before robust assessments of evidence on economic evaluations. The extent of clinical effectiveness of some studied comparisons has been evaluated in high-quality research, allowing more informative decision making around cost-effectiveness.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We performed a systematic review and searched seven databases (MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE, COCHRANE, ECONLIT, SCOPUS, and CINAHL) for studies examining ART interventions for infertility together with an economic evaluation component (cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, cost-utility, or cost-minimization assessment), in high-income countries, published since January 2011. The last search was 22 June 2022.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Two independent reviewers assessed publications and included those fulfilling the eligibility criteria. Studies were examined to assess the cost-effectiveness of the studied intervention, as well as the reporting quality of the study. The chosen outcome measure and payer perspective were also noted. Completeness of reporting was assessed against the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standard. Results are presented and summarized based on the intervention studied.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The review included 40 studies which were conducted in 11 high-income countries. Most studies (n = 34) included a cost-effectiveness analysis. ART interventions included medication or strategies for controlled ovarian stimulation (n = 15), IVF (n = 9), PGT-A (n = 7), single embryo transfer (n = 5), ICSI (n = 3), and freeze-all embryo transfer (n = 1). Live birth was the mostly commonly reported primary outcome (n = 27), and quality-adjusted life years was reported in three studies. The health funder perspective was used in 85% (n = 34) of studies. None of the included studies measured patient preference for treatment. It remains uncertain whether PGT-A improves pregnancy rates compared to IVF cycles managed without PGT-A, and therefore cost-effectiveness could not be demonstrated for this intervention. Similarly, ICSI in non-male factor infertility appears not to be clinically effective compared to standard fertilization in an IVF cycle and is therefore not cost-effective. Interventions such as use of biosimilars or HMG for ovarian stimulation are cheaper but compromise clinical effectiveness.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Lack of both preference-based and standardized outcomes limits the comparability of results across studies. The selection of efficacy evidence offered for some interventions for economic evaluations is not always based on high-quality randomized trials and systematic reviews. In addition, there is insufficient knowledge of the willingness to pay thresholds of individuals and state funders for treatment of infertility. There is variable quality of reporting scores, which might increase uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness results.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Investment in strategies to help infertile people who utilize ART is justifiable at both personal and population levels. This systematic review may assist ART funders decide how to best invest to maximize the likelihood of delivery of a healthy child.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

There was no funding for this study. E.C. and R.W. receive salary support from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) through their fellowship scheme (EC GNT1159536, RW 2021/GNT2009767). M.D.-T. reports consulting fees from King Fahad Medical School. All other authors have no competing interests to declare.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

Prospero CRD42021261537.

Does a Standard Cost-Effectiveness Threshold Exist? The Case of Greece

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review the use of cost-effectiveness (CE) threshold for evaluating pharmacological interventions in Greece.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed and ScienceDirect was conducted between January 2009 and June 2022. The data of selected studies were extracted using a relevant form and consequently were synthesized. Qualitative variables were presented with relative frequencies (%) and quantitative variables with median and interquartile range (IQR).

RESULTS

From the 302 identified studies, 83 satisfied the inclusion criteria. Studies were categorized to oncology (26.5%) and a nononcology related (73.5%) based on drug treatment. The most frequently reported outcome associated with CE threshold was the "per quality-adjusted life-year gained." A total of 32.5% of the studies with a reported threshold did not specify the origin of the threshold. From the rest of studies, the vast majority (92.8%) adopted thresholds equal to 1 to 3 times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, whereas the rest similar to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. The median CE threshold was differentiated between oncology (€51 000 [IQR €50 000-€60 000]) and nononcology studies (€34 000 [IQR €30 000-€36 000]; P < .001). In both type of studies, the median CE thresholds were not statistically significantly different among GDP, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and not specified approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Aligned with other countries where there is no standard CE threshold to promote efficient use of healthcare resources, the most prominent practice in Greece was found to be that of 1 to 3 times the GDP per capita irrespective of type of treatment or outcome studied.

Economic Evaluation of Three Frequently Used Gonadotrophins in Assisted Reproduction Techniques in the Management of Infertility in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Subfertility represents a multidimensional problem associated with significant distress and impaired social well-being. In the Netherlands, an estimated 50,000 couples visit their general practitioner and 30,000 couples seek medical specialist care for subfertility. We conducted an economic evaluation comparing recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (follitropin alfa, r-hFSH, Gonal-F^®) with two classes of urinary gonadotrophins-highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin (hp-HMG, Menopur^®) and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (uFSH, Fostimon^®)-for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment in the Netherlands.

METHODS

A pharmacoeconomic model was developed, simulating each step in the IVF protocol from the start of therapy until either a live birth, a new IVF treatment cycle or cessation of IVF, following a long down-regulation protocol. A decision tree combined with a Markov model details progress through each health state, including ovum pickup, fresh embryo transfer, up to two subsequent cryo-preserved embryo transfers, and (ongoing) pregnancy or miscarriage. A health insurer perspective was chosen, and the time horizon was set at a maximum of three consecutive treatment cycles, in accordance with Dutch reimbursement policy. Transition probabilities and costing data were derived from a real-world observational outcomes database (from Germany) and official tariff lists (from the Netherlands). Adverse events were considered equal among the comparators and were therefore excluded from the economic analysis. A Monte Carlo simulation of 5000 iterations was undertaken for each strategy to explore uncertainty and to construct uncertainty intervals (UIs). All cost data were valued in 2013 Euros. The model's structure, parameters and assumptions were assessed and confirmed by an external clinician with experience in health economics modelling, to inform on the appropriateness of the outcomes and the applicability of the model in the chosen setting.

RESULTS

The mean total treatment costs were estimated as €5664 for follitropin alfa (95 % UI €5167-6151), €5990 for hp-HMG (95 % UI €5498-6488) and €5760 for uFSH (95 % UI €5256-6246). The probability of a live birth was estimated at 36.1 % (95 % UI 27.4-44.3 %), 33.9 % (95 % UI 26.2-41.5 %) and 34.1 % (95 % UI 25.9-41.8 %) for follitropin alfa, hp-HMG and uFSH, respectively. The costs per live birth estimates were €15,674 for follitropin alfa, €17,636 for hp-HMG and €16,878 for uFSH. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a probability of 72.5 % that follitropin alfa is cost effective at a willingness to pay of €20,000 per live birth. The probabilistic results remained constant under several analyses.

CONCLUSION

The present analysis shows that follitropin alfa may represent a cost-effective option in comparison with uFSH and hp-HMG for IVF treatment in the Netherlands healthcare system.

Economic analysis of pharmacogenomic-guided clopidogrel treatment in Serbian patients with myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention

INTRODUCTION

Clopidogrel, which is activated by the CYP2C19 enzyme, is among the drugs for which all major regulatory agencies recommend genetic testing to be performed to identify a patient's CYP2C19 genotype in order to determine the optimal antiplatelet therapeutic scheme. The CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*3 variants are loss-of-function alleles, leading to abolished CYP2C19 function and thus have the risk of thrombotic events for carriers of these alleles on standard dosages, while the CYP2C19*17 allele results in CYP2C19 hyperactivity.

AIMS

Here, we report our findings from a retrospective study to assess whether genotyping for the CYP2C19*2 allele was cost effective for myocardial infarction patients receiving clopidogrel treatment in the Serbian population compared with the nongenotype-guided treatment.

RESULTS

We found that 59.3% of the CYP2C19*1/*1 patients had a minor or major bleeding event versus 42.85% of the CYP2C19*1/*2 and *2/*2, while a reinfarction event occurred only in 2.3% of the CYP21C9*1/*1 patients, compared with 11.2% of the CYP2C19*1/*2 and CYP2C19*2/*2 patients. There were subtle differences between the two patient groups, as far as the duration of hospitalization and rehabilitation is concerned, in favor of the CYP2C19*1/*1 group. The mean cost for the CYP2C19*1/*1 patients was estimated at €2547 versus €2799 in the CYP2C19*1/*2 and CYP2C19*2/*2 patients. Furthermore, based on the overall CYP2C19*1/*2 genotype frequencies in the Serbian population, a break-even point analysis indicated that performing the genetic test prior to drug prescription represents a cost-saving option, saving €13 per person on average.

CONCLUSION

Overall, our data demonstrate that pharmacogenomics-guided clopidogrel treatment may represent a cost-saving approach for the management of myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in Serbia.

Economic evaluation of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin versus recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone in fresh and frozen in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm-injection cycles in Sweden

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone-analog type, fertilization method, and number of embryos available for cryopreservation should be incorporated into economic evaluations of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (HP-hMG) and recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH), as they may affect treatment costs. We searched for randomized trials and meta-analyses comparing HP-hMG and r-hFSH. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in live births (odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66–1.01), but a greater number of oocytes with r-hFSH (mean difference [MD] 1.96, 95% CI 1.02–2.90). Using a cost-minimization model for Sweden, accounting for embryo availability, survival following thawing, and patient dropout, we simulated patients individually for up to three cycles. R-hFSH was found to be cost-saving, at 2,767 kr (95% CI 1,580–4,057) per patient (€315 or $411); baseline savings were 6.43% of the total HP-hMG cost. In fresh cycles only, the savings for r-hFSH were 1,752 kr (95% CI 48–3,658) per patient (€200 or $260). In univariate sensitivity analyses, savings were obtained until the price of r-hFSH increased by 30% or the dosage of HP-hMG decreased by 38%–62% of baseline value. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, r-hFSH was cost-saving in 100% of the simulated cohort per patient and in 85% per live birth; the respective percentages for fresh cycles only were 97.3% and 73.1%. In conclusion, a greater number of oocytes with r-hFSH allows for more frozen embryo transfers, thereby reducing overall treatment cost.

Estimating the long-term effects of in vitro fertilization in Greece: an analysis based on a lifetime-investment model

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the economic effects of a child conceived by in vitro fertilization (IVF) in terms of net tax revenue from the state's perspective in Greece.

METHODS

Based on previous international experience, a mathematical model was developed to assess the lifetime productivity of a single individual and his/her lifetime transactions with governmental agencies. The model distinguished among three periods in the economic life cycle of an individual: (1) early life, when the government primarily contributes resources through child tax credits, health care, and educational expenses; (2) employment, when individuals begin returning resources through taxes; and (3) retirement, when the government expends additional resources on pensions and health care. The cost of a live birth with IVF was based on the modification of a previously published model developed by the authors. All outcomes were discounted at a 3% discount rate. The data inputs - namely, the economic or demographic variables - were derived from the National Statistical Secretariat of Greece and other relevant sources. To deal with uncertainty, bias-corrected uncertainty intervals (UIs) were calculated based on 5000 Monte Carlo simulations. In addition, to examine the robustness of our results, other one-way sensitivity analyses were also employed.

RESULTS

The cost of IVF per birth was estimated at €17,015 (95% UI: €13,932-€20,200). The average projected income generated by an individual throughout his/her productive life was €258,070 (95% UI: €185,376-€339,831). In addition, his/her life tax contribution was estimated at €133,947 (95% UI: €100,126-€177,375), while the discounted governmental expenses for elderly and underage individuals were €67,624 (95% UI: €55,211-€83,930). Hence, the net present value of IVF was €60,435 (95% UI: €33,651-€94,330), representing a 182% net return on investment. Results remained constant under various assumptions for the main model parameters.

CONCLUSION

State-funded IVF may represent good value for money in the Greek setting, since it has positive tax benefits for the government, notwithstanding its beneficial psychological effect on infertile couples.