Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Hypoallergenic Milk Formulas for the Management of Cow's Milk Protein Allergy in the United Kingdom

Symptoms and management of cow's milk allergy: perception and evidence

Introduction

The diagnosis and management of cow's milk allergy (CMA) is a topic of debate and controversy. Our aim was to compare the opinions of expert groups from the Middle East (n = 14) and the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) (n = 13).

Methods

These Expert groups voted on statements that were developed by the ESPGHAN group and published in a recent position paper. The voting outcome was compared.

Results

Overall, there was consensus amongst both groups of experts. Experts agreed that symptoms of crying, irritability and colic, as single manifestation, are not suggestive of CMA. They agreed that amino-acid based formula (AAF) should be reserved for severe cases (e.g., malnutrition and anaphylaxis) and that there is insufficient evidence to recommend a step-down approach. There was no unanimous consensus on the statement that a cow's milk based extensively hydrolysed formula (eHF) should be the first choice as a diagnostic elimination diet in mild/moderate cases. Although the statements regarding the role for hydrolysed rice formula as a diagnostic and therapeutic elimination diet were accepted, 3/27 disagreed. The votes regarding soy formula highlight the differences in opinion in the role of soy protein in CMA dietary treatment. Generally, soy-based formula is seldom available in the Middle-East region. All ESPGHAN experts agreed that there is insufficient evidence that the addition of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics increase the efficacy of elimination diets regarding CMA symptoms (despite other benefits such as decrease of infections and antibiotic intake), whereas 3/14 of the Middle East group thought there was sufficient evidence.

Discussion

Differences in voting are related to geographical, cultural and other conditions, such as cost and availability. This emphasizes the need to develop region-specific guidelines considering social and cultural conditions, and to perform further research in this area.

Cost-effectiveness of therapeutic infant formulas for cow's milk protein allergy management

Cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) is children's most common food allergy. Therapeutic infant formulas for CMPA lead to symptom-free and potentially benefit early tolerance induction and reducing the allergic march in non-breastfed babies. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of CMPA management with different therapeutic infant formulas in Thailand, which may reflect situations in developing countries throughout Asia. An analytic decision model was developed to simulate the occurrence of eczema, urticaria, asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, or being symptom-free in infants with CMPA over 36 months. Extensively hydrolyzed casein formula with added probiotic Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus (previously Lactobacillus rhamnosus) strain GG (EHCF+LGG), extensively hydrolyzed whey formula (EHWF), soy protein-based formula (SPF), and amino acid formula (AAF) were compared from the healthcare payer perspective. The results from a prospective cohort study were used for comparative effectiveness measures, while local experts were interviewed to estimate the healthcare resource used in the management of CMPA. The costs of healthcare resources were obtained from standard, publicly available sources. The direct medical cost of CMPA management was lowest for EHCF+LGG (USD 1,720), followed by SPF (USD 2,090), EHWF (USD 2,791), and AAF (USD 7,881). Compared with other formulas, EHCF+LGG was expected to save USD 370 (SPF), USD 1,071 (EHWF), and USD 6,161 (AAF) in the total cost of CMPA management over 36 months. In conclusion, EHCF+LGG was the most cost-effective strategy for managing non-breastfed infants with CMPA. This strategy was associated with more children developing immune tolerance to cow's milk and being symptom-free, contributing to overall cost-saving potential.

The use of amino acid formulas in pediatric patients with allergy to cow's milk proteins: Recommendations from a group of experts

One of the most common food allergies in children is cow's milk allergy (CMA). In breast-fed infants with CMA, the mother is encouraged to avoid dairy products. If this is not possible, or in formula fed infants, use of hypoallergenic replacement formulas such as extensively hydrolyzed formulas (EHF) is recommended. However, in ∼5% of patients EHFs are not tolerated and/or allergy symptoms can persist. When EHFs are ineffective and in severe forms of CMA, amino acid-based formulas (AAF) should be considered. Six pediatric gastroenterologists with extensive experience in food allergy management reviewed scientific publications and international clinical practice guidelines to provide practical recommendations on AAF. The guidelines reviewed had discrepancies and ambiguities around the specific indications for using formulas as a milk substitute. The panel recommends AAFs as the first therapeutic option in anaphylaxis due to CMA, in acute and chronic severe food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome, in CMA associated with multiple food allergy, and in cases of eosinophilic esophagitis not responding to an extended exclusion diet or not eating solids. The main benefit of AAF is its absence of residual allergenicity, making it a safe treatment option in severe CMA patients who do not tolerate or respond to an EHF.

Cost-effectiveness of infant hypoallergenic formulas to manage cow's milk protein allergy in France

BACKGROUND

Clinician's choice of hypoallergenic formulas in the first-line management of cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) should be informed by evidence on clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

We compare the cost-effectiveness of amino acid-based formula (AAF), extensively hydrolyzed casein formula with Lactobacillus rhamnosus Gorbach Goldin (EHCF+LGG), extensively hydrolyzed whey formula (EHWF), and rice hydrolyzed formula (RHF) in non-breastfed children in France.

METHODS

Immunotolerance and atopic manifestations' prevalence were based on a prospective non-randomized study with a 36-month follow-up. Resource utilization was sourced from a survey of French clinicians, and unit costs were based on national data. Costs and health consequences were discounted at 2.5% annually. Results were reported using the Collective and French National Health Insurance perspectives.

RESULTS

Children receiving EHCF+LGG were predicted to require less healthcare resources, given their reduced prevalence of CMPA symptoms at 3 years. In the base case, EHCF+LGG led to savings of at least €674 per child compared to AAF, EHWF, and RHF at 3 years, from both perspectives. Nutrition had the highest economic burden in CMPA, driven by hypoallergenic formulas and dietetic replacements costs. Results were robust to one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

EHCF+LGG was associated with more symptom-free time, higher immune tolerance, and lower costs.

Managing Cow's Milk Protein Allergy in Indonesia: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Hypoallergenic Milk Formulas from the Private Payers' Perspective

Background: Cow's milk protein allergy is very common in early childhood. Extensively hydrolyzed formulas are recommended in the first-line management of cow's milk protein allergy in non-breastfed children. Choice of formulas should be informed by efficacy and cost data. Objectives: This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of extensively hydrolyzed casein formula with Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus Gorbach Goldin (EHCF+LGG), extensively hydrolyzed whey formula (EHWF), amino acid formula, and soy formula in the first-line management of cow's milk protein allergy in non-breastfed children in Indonesia. Methods: A trial-based decision analytic cohort model was adapted to simulate the occurrence of cow's milk protein allergy symptoms or being symptom free. The model was based on a prospective nonrandomized study that followed up children for 36 months. Costs and health consequences were discounted at 3% annually. Resources required to manage cow's milk protein allergy and unit costs for clinical appointments and exams were based on a panel of 15 clinicians, from a private payers' perspective. Other unit costs were based on publicly available national data. Results were reported as cost per additional child free from allergic manifestations or per additional immunotolerant child at 3 years, and per life-years under the same conditions. Uncertainty was assessed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: Children receiving EHCF+LGG were associated with more symptom-free time, a higher probability of cow's milk tolerance at 3 years, and lower healthcare resources and transportation use when compared with children receiving other formulas (with 38%-49% lower costs). Formula costs were lower for soy, but EHCF+LGG was predicted to save 9% and 54% of overall costs compared with extensively hydrolyzed whey formula and amino acid formula, respectively. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Use of EHCF+LGG resulted in more symptom-free time and the highest 3-year probability of cow's milk tolerance. It also led to healthcare resource and transportation savings when compared with other hypoallergenic milk formulas. Soy formula remained an alternative if formula price represents a major constraint.