Cost-utility analysis of once-daily versus twice-daily inhaled corticosteroid dosing for maintenance treatment of asthma in pediatric patients

The Use of Bacterial Lysate for the Prevention of Wheezing Episodes in Preschool Children: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although increasing recent evidence has shown the efficacy of bacterial lysate therapy for the prevention of wheezing episodes and asthma exacerbations in pediatric patients, evidence of its cost-effectiveness in preschool patients is scarce.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-utility of bacterial lysate therapy as an add-on to standard care of preschool children with recurrent wheezing.

METHODS

To achieve the objectives of the study, we used a Markov simulation model with 3 mutually exclusive nonabsorbent states (regular Markov chain). Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a recent systematic review of the literature with meta-analyses (5 randomized controlled trials, 433 children). Cost data were obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national health care system in Colombia. The main outcome of the model was quality-adjusted life-years. To assess the robustness of the model's results, we performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with standard care, bacterial lysate add-on therapy to standard care was associated with lower overall treatment costs (US $694.03 vs $830.71 average cost per patient) and the greatest gain in QALYs (0.9211 vs 0.9154 QALYs on average per patient), thus showing dominance.

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia, compared with standard care, bacterial lysate add-on therapy to standard care for treating preschool children with recurrent wheezing is a dominant strategy because it showed a greater gain in QALYs at lower total treatment costs.

[Therapeutic adherence among asthma patients: Variations according to age groups. How can it be improved? The potential contributions of new technologies]

While asthma patients' treatment adherence (TA) generally leaves to be desired, few data exist on TA evolution from age group to another. During the meeting of a working group of pneumo-pediatricians and adult pulmonologists, we reviewed the literature on adherence according to age group, examined explanations for poor adherence, and explored ways of improving adherence via new technologies. Asthma is a chronic disease for which TA is particularly low, especially during adolescence, but also among adults. Inhaled medications are the least effectively taken. Several explanations have been put forward: cost and complexity of treatments, difficulties using inhalation devices, poor understanding of their benefits, erroneous beliefs and underestimation of the severity of a fluctuating disease, fear of side effects, neglect, and denial (especially among teenagers). Poor TA is associated with risks of needless treatment escalation, aggravated asthma with frequent exacerbations, increased school absenteeism, degraded quality of life, and excessive mortality. Better compliance is based on satisfactory relationships between caregivers and asthmatics, improved caregiver training, and more efficient transmission to patients of relevant information. The recent evolution of innovative digital technologies opens the way for enhanced communication, via networks and dedicated applications, and thanks to connected inhalation devices, forgetfulness can be limited. Clinical research will also help to ameliorate TA. Lastly, it bears mentioning that analysis of the existing literature is hampered by differences in terms of working definitions and means of TA measurement.

Cost-utility of omalizumab for the treatment of uncontrolled moderate-to-severe persistent pediatric allergic asthma in a middle-income country

OBJECTIVES

Although several randomized clinical trials performed in children 6 years and older with Omalizumab as add-on therapy have reported improvements in diverse clinical outcomes, the evidence regarding its cost effectiveness is not sufficient, especially in less-affluent countries, where the clinical and economic burden of the disease is the greatest. The aim of the present study was to perform a cost-utility analysis of adding omalizumab to standard treatment for treating pediatric patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma in Colombia, a middle-income country (MIC).

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 5-year period. The effectiveness data and transition probabilities were obtained from various sources, including systematic reviews with meta-analysis. Cost data were obtained from official databases provided by the Colombian Ministry of Health. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia. The main outcome was the variable ''quality-adjusted life-years'' (QALYs).

RESULTS

For the base-case analysis, the cost-utility analysis showed that compared with the standard treatment strategy, the omalizumab strategy involved higher costs (US$72,142.3 vs. $20,243.4 average cost per patient) and greater gain in QALYs (0.8718 vs. 0.8222 QALYs on average per patient). The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of omalizumab compared with standard treatment was US$82,748.1 per QALY CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that in Colombia, an MIC, compared with standard treatment, omalizumab is not a cost-effective strategy for treating pediatric patients with uncontrolled severe allergic asthma.

Are we overcoming our inability to have pediatric patients properly use inhaled corticosteroids by inappropriately escalating their therapy?

OBJECTIVE

To perform a narrative review to describe and discuss potential methods and strategies for effectively assessing and dealing with poor adherence and/or misuse of inhalers in difficult-to-treat pediatric asthmatic patients.

DATA SOURCES

Articles available in electronic databases, published from inception to April 2021.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Relevant articles in the literature that discuss and analyze potential methods and strategies for effectively assessing and dealing with poor adherence and/or misuse of inhalers in difficult-to-treat pediatric asthmatic patients.

RESULTS

Validated self-reported questionnaires, weighing inhaler canisters, and pharmacy records might be the most suitable methods for assessing adherence to inhaled controller therapy in clinical practice. Additionally, validated instruments could be used as an objective measurement of the adequacy of inhaler technique. Finally, empathy and a true and strong physician-parent/patient partnership have a more powerful influence on adherence than almost any other factor, and they are probably the most cost-effective methods not only for detecting poor adherence to controller therapy but also for dealing with and improving it.

CONCLUSIONS

Failure to detect or effectively handle nonadherence and/or inhaler misuse in a patient with uncontrolled asthma can mislead clinicians into thinking that the patient is nonresponsive to the original less-intensive therapy, resulting in unneeded dosage increases and/or escalation of controller therapy to more costly medications, in some cases reaching the level of biologic therapy.

A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of medicationadherence-enhancing intervention for asthma

Objective: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of medication adherence-improving interventions in patients with asthma.Data source: Search engines including PubMed, Scopus and EBSCOhost were used to locate relevant studies from the inception of the databases to 19 October 2018. Drummond's checklist was used to appraise the quality of the economic evaluation.Study selection: Economic studies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of medication adherence enhancing interventions for asthmatic patients were selected. Relevant information including study characteristics, quality assessment, health outcomes and costs of intervention were narratively summarized. The primary outcome of interest was cost-effectiveness (CE) values and the secondary outcomes were costs, medication adherence and clinical consequences.Results: Twenty studies including 11 randomized controlled trials, 6 comparative studies and 3 modeled studies using Markov models were included in the review. Among these, 15 studies evaluated an educational intervention with 13 showing cost-effectiveness in improving health outcomes. The CE of an internet-based intervention showed similar results between groups, while 3 studies of simplified drug regimens and adding a technology-based training program achieved the desirable cost-effectiveness outcome.Conclusion: Overall, our results would support that all of the identified medication adherence-enhancing interventions were cost-effective considering the increased adherence rate, improved clinical effectiveness and the reduced costs of asthma care. However, it was not possible to identify the most cost-effective intervention. More economic studies with sound methodological conduct will be needed to provide stronger evidence in deciding the best approach to improve medication adherence.

Cost-utility analysis of an integrated care program for children with asthma in a medium-income country

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-utility of an integrated care program (ASMAIRE Infantil Program [PAI]) for children with asthma compared with standard of care.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was used to compare an integrated care program compared to the standard of care in children with asthma in Bogota, Colombia. Baseline characteristics of the patients were established according to the distribution of patients in the PAI database. Other inputs were obtained from published meta-analysis, local registries, medical bills, general mortality data, and expert opinion. Costs were presented in 2017 Colombian pesos. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs and outcomes were discounted by 5% per year. Incremental cost-utility ratios were presented for PAI compared with standard of care. Univariate and multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess model robustness to parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

The model predicted that patients that are part of the PAI would accrue more QALYs than patients on standard of care. The incremental results suggest that the PAI is a cost-effective treatment (incremental cost-utility ratio of Colombian pesos $33 753 817/QALY) compared with standard of care. Sensitivity analyses suggest that results are most sensitive to cost of care (with and without PAI) and costs of severe exacerbation. However, the PAI is cost-effective irrespective of variation in any of the input parameters.

CONCLUSION

Our model predicted that an integrated intervention for the management of asthma in pediatric patients improves QALYs, reduces number of disease related exacerbations compared to standard therapy and is cost-effective for the long-term control of the disease in Colombia.

The cost-effectiveness of as-needed budesonide/formoterol versus low-dose inhaled corticosteroid maintenance therapy in patients with mild asthma in the UK

BACKGROUND

As-needed budesonide/formoterol is effective in patients with mild asthma for whom low-dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) maintenance therapy is appropriate. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of this regimen versus maintenance low-dose ICS plus as-needed short-acting β2-agonist (SABA).

METHODS

A probabilistic Markov cohort model was developed that simulated time within/outside severe asthma exacerbations, conducted from a UK NHS perspective with a 70-year time horizon. Clinical efficacy inputs were derived from the SYGMA 2 trial. Patients with mild asthma eligible for low-dose maintenance ICS therapy received as-needed budesonide/formoterol 200/6 μg or twice-daily budesonide 200 μg maintenance therapy plus as-needed terbutaline 0.5 mg. A severe exacerbation was defined as worsening asthma requiring systemic corticosteroid use alone/in combination with an emergency department visit, or hospitalisation for acute asthma. Utility values were derived from SYGMA 2 EQ-5D-5L data, and all-cause- and asthma-related mortality, reduction in utility of an exacerbation, and costs were based on published data. The base-case analysis discount rate was 3.5%. Model robustness was evaluated with one-way sensitivity, probabilistic sensitivity, and two scenario analyses.

RESULTS

On average, as-needed budesonide/formoterol was associated with a £292.99 cost saving and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains of 0.001 versus ICS + SABA. At a willingness-to-pay of £20,000/QALY, as-needed budesonide/formoterol had >85% probability of being cost-effective versus ICS + SABA. Key drivers were budesonide/formoterol and budesonide maintenance annual exacerbation rates, mean daily budesonide/formoterol inhalations, and costs and outcomes discount rates.

CONCLUSIONS

From a UK healthcare payer perspective, as-needed budesonide/formoterol is a cost-effective option for the treatment of mild asthma versus regular ICS.

Economic evaluation of interventions for the treatment of asthma in children: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to identify and critique full economic evaluations (EEs) of childhood asthma treatments with the intention to guide researchers and commissioners of pediatric asthma services toward potentially cost-effective strategies.

METHODS

"MEDLINE," "Embase," "EconLit," "NHS EED," and "CEA" databases were searched to identify relevant EEs published between 2005 and May 2017. Quality of included studies was assessed with a published checklist.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were identified and comprised one cost-benefit analysis, 11 cost-effectiveness analyses, one cost-minimization analysis, and six cost-utility analyses. Treatments included pharmaceutical (n = 11) and non-pharmaceutical (n = 7) interventions. Fourteen studies identified cost-effective strategies. The quality of the studies varied and there were uncertainties due to the methods and relevance of data used.

CONCLUSION

Good-quality economic evaluation studies of pediatric asthma treatments are lacking. EE of new technologies adapted to local settings is recommended and can result in cost savings.

A Systematic Review of Decision-Analytic Models for Evaluating Cost-Effectiveness of Asthma Interventions

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate the landscape of model-based economic studies in asthma and highlight where there is room for improvement in the design and reporting of studies.

DESIGN

A systematic review of the methodologies of model-based, cost-effectiveness analyses of asthma-related interventions was conducted. Models were evaluated for adherence to best-practice modeling and reporting guidelines and assumptions about the natural history of asthma.

METHODS

A systematic search of English articles was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and citations within reviewed articles. Studies were summarized and evaluated based on their adherence to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). We also studied the underlying assumptions about disease progression, heterogeneity in disease course, comorbidity, and treatment effects.

RESULTS

Forty-five models of asthma were included (33 Markov models, 10 decision trees, 2 closed-form equations). Novel biological treatments were evaluated in 12 studies. Some of the CHEERS' reporting recommendations were not satisfied, especially for models published in clinical journals. This was particularly the case for the choice of the modeling framework and reporting on heterogeneity. Only 13 studies considered any subgroups, and 2 explicitly considered the impact of comorbidities. Adherence to CHEERS requirements and the quality of models generally improved over time.

CONCLUSION

It would be difficult to replicate the findings of contemporary model-based evaluations of asthma-related interventions given that only a minority of studies reported the essential parameters of their studies. Current asthma models generally lack consideration of disease heterogeneity and do not seem to be ready for evaluation of precision medicine technologies.

Incorporating adherence in cost-effectiveness analyses of asthma: a systematic review

Aims: Non-adherence is associated with poor clinical outcomes among patients with asthma. While cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is increasingly used to inform value assessment of the interventions, most do not take into account adherence in the analyses. This study aims to: (1) Understand the extent of studies considering adherence as part of the economic analyses, and (2) summarize the methods of incorporating adherence in the economic models. Materials and methods: A literature search was performed from the inception to February 2018 using four databases: PubMed, EMBASE, NHS EED, and the Tufts CEA registry. Decision model-based CEA of asthma were identified. Outcomes of interest were the number of studies incorporating adherence in the economic models, and the incorporating methods. All data were extracted using a standardized data collection form. Results: From 1,587 articles, 23 studies were decision model-based CEA of asthma, of which four CEA (17.4%) incorporated adherence in the analyses. Only the method of incorporating adherence by adjusting treatment effectiveness according to adherence levels was demonstrated in this review. Two approaches were used to derive the associations between adherence and effectiveness. The first approach was to apply a mathematical formula, developed by an expert panel, and the second was to extrapolate the associations from previous published studies. The adherence-adjusted effectiveness was then incorporated in the economic models. Conclusions: A very low number of CEA of asthma incorporated adherence in the analyses. All the CEA adjusted treatment effectiveness according to adherence levels, applied to the economic models.

Severe asthma and quality of life

Severe asthma has a great impact on the quality of life (QOL) of patients and their families. The magnitude of this morbidity is affected by several personal factors including age. Appropriate asthma control and modifications of social roles and activities are expected to improve QOL. Biologics, primarily monoclonal antibodies, have been developed to target specific pathways and molecules important in the pathogenesis of asthma. The use of biologics has shown some promising effects on the QOL of patients with severe recalcitrant asthma. Other potential measures involve targeting risk factors and comorbidities and improving the levels of adherence to therapy. This article briefly reviews the impact of severe asthma on QOL and the potential methods to combat this morbidity including the available therapeutic biologics.

A cost-effectiveness threshold analysis of a multidisciplinary structured educational intervention in pediatric asthma

OBJECTIVE

Asthma educational interventions have been shown to improve several clinically and economically important outcomes. However, these interventions are costly in themselves and could lead to even higher disease costs. A cost-effectiveness threshold analysis would be helpful in determining the threshold value of the cost of educational interventions, leading to these interventions being cost-effective. The aim of the present study was to perform a cost-effectiveness threshold analysis to determine the level at which the cost of a pediatric asthma educational intervention would be cost-effective and cost-saving.

METHODS

A Markov-type model was developed in order to estimate costs and health outcomes of a simulated cohort of pediatric patients with persistent asthma treated over a 12-month period. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a single uncontrolled before-and-after study performed with Colombian asthmatic children. Cost data were obtained from official databases provided by the Colombian Ministry of Health. The main outcome was the variable "quality-adjusted life-years" (QALYs).

RESULTS

A deterministic threshold sensitivity analysis showed that the asthma educational intervention will be cost-saving to the health system if its cost is under US$513.20. Additionally, the analysis showed that the cost of the intervention would have to be below US$967.40 in order to be cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified the level at which the cost of a pediatric asthma educational intervention will be cost-effective and cost-saving for the health system in Colombia. Our findings could be a useful aid for decision makers in efficiently allocating limited resources when planning asthma educational interventions for pediatric patients.

The use of inhaled corticosteroids in pediatric asthma: update

Despite the availability of several formulations of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and delivery devices for treatment of childhood asthma and despite the development of evidence-based guidelines, childhood asthma control remains suboptimal. Improving uptake of asthma management plans, both by families and practitioners, is needed. Adherence to daily ICS therapy is a key determinant of asthma control and this mandates that asthma education follow a repetitive pattern and involve literal explanation and physical demonstration of the optimal use of inhaler devices. The potential adverse effects of ICS need to be weighed against the benefit of these drugs to control persistent asthma especially that its safety profile is markedly better than oral glucocorticoids. This article reviews the key mechanisms of inhaled corticosteroid action; recommendations on dosage and therapeutic regimens; potential optimization of effectiveness by addressing inhaler technique and adherence to therapy; and updated knowledge on the real magnitude of adverse events.