Journal of Medical Economics最新文献

Aims: This study assessed the budget impact of resmetirom as a treatment for adults with non-cirrhotic non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) with moderate-to-advanced liver fibrosis and estimated total costs for a hypothetical private payer in the United States.

Materials and methods: A three-year budget impact analysis based on an open cohort state transition model was developed for a hypothetical one-million-member private health plan. The comparator was Standard of Care (SOC), defined as routine care for non-cirrhotic NASH patients with moderate-to-advanced liver fibrosis. Each year, the number of resmetirom treatment-eligible patients was estimated through prevalent, incident, and diagnostic rate estimates. Costs included resources incurred by the medical and pharmacy benefits of private payers, including resmetirom drug acquisition costs, diagnosis and monitoring, other medical and other prescription costs stratified by disease progression status (i.e. non-cirrhotic vs. cirrhotic/advanced liver diseases). Resmetirom adverse event management costs were included in sensitivity analysis. Drug costs were estimated based on the average wholesale acquisition cost as of March 2024. Other costs were based on published sources and inflated to 2023 US dollars. Budget impact outcomes were presented in aggregate, net, and on a per-member per-month (PMPM) basis.

Results: Compared with a scenario without resmetirom, the introduction of resmetirom yielded results ranging from 50 to 238 treated patients, net budget impact of $2.2 to $9.5 million, and PMPM from $0.19 to $0.80 over years one and three. Net costs excluding resmetirom declined over time. In sensitivity analyses, results were most sensitive to diagnostic and epidemiologic inputs.

Limitations: Market shares are based on internal forecasts, a short time horizon, average treatment effects, and other limitations common to BIMs.

Conclusion: The adoption of resmetirom on the formulary for the treatment of non-cirrhotic NASH with moderate-to-advanced liver fibrosis resulted in a moderate increase in budget impact with declining costs related to NASH progression.

Aims: The Nagasaki Acute Myocardial Infarction Secondary Prevention Clinical Pathway (NASP), a guideline-based regional clinical pathway, was developed to manage low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the Nagasaki prefecture in Japan. This study aimed to summarize the perceived best practices and barriers for the dissemination and operation of the NASP.

Methods: This exploratory sequential mixed methods study was developed around the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework. Focus group interviews were conducted with 24 physicians with experience treating AMI in alignment with the NASP at foundation hospitals. The identified themes and insights were integrated into the development of the questionnaire. The web-based, self-administered questionnaire with a cross-sectional study design was given to 62 physicians in the Nagasaki prefecture. Mixed-method data integration of the results from both study phases was conducted through meta-inferences made from the qualitative and quantitative data.

Results: The best practices included the development of multi-disciplinary operation teams at medical facilities in preparation for the implementation of the NASP, the simplification of the document preparation process, and the establishment of an additional medical fees policy for the utilization of the NASP instead of patient referral documents. Practices tailored to the type of medical institute such as instructing patients on the NASP regimen during index hospitalization for acute-care hospitals, and the development of NASP instructions and manuals for primary care hospitals/outpatient clinics were also recommended. In addition, barriers to the implementation of the NASP such as missed eligible AMI patients for the NASP and the inconsistent implementation to eligible AMI patients were identified.

Conclusions: This study identified the perceived best practices and barriers for the NASP. This knowledge should be considered when expanding the NASP to other institutions across Japan.

Aim: Evaluate the cost utility of menopausal hormone therapy for women in China.

Materials and methods: A bespoke Markov cost utility model was developed to evaluate a cohort of symptomatic perimenopausal women (>45 years) with intact uterus in China in accordance with China's Pharmacoeconomic guideline. Short (5-year) and long (10-year) treatment durations were evaluated over a lifetime model time horizon with 12-month cycle duration. Societal and healthcare payer perspectives were evaluated in the context of a primary care provider/prescriber, outpatient setting with inpatient care for patients with chronic conditions. Disease risk and mortality parameters were derived from focused literature searches, and China Diagnosis-related Group cost data was included. Comprehensive scenario, univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were undertaken along with independent validation. This is the first model to include MHT-related disease risks.

Results: According to base case results, the total cost for MHT was 22,516$ (150,106¥) and total quality adjusted life years 12.32 versus total cost of no MHT 30,824$ (205,495¥) and total quality adjusted life years 11.16 resulting in a dominant incremental cost effectiveness ratio of -7,184$ (-47,898¥) per QALY. Results hold true over a range of univariate deterministic sensitivity and scenario analyses. Probabilistic analysis showed a 91% probability of being cost effective at a willingness to pay threshold of three times Gross Domestic Product per capita in China.

Conclusion: Contingent on the structure and assumptions of the model, combination of estradiol plus dydrogesterone MHT is potentially cost saving in symptomatic women over the age of 45 years in China.

Aims: This economic model was developed to assess the budget impact of a novel radiotracer, Flurpiridaz (F¹⁸-PET-MPI), compared to SPECT-MPI from a US payer perspective.

Materials and methods: The model was developed comparing F¹⁸-PET-MPI and SPECT-MPI, with F¹⁸-PET-MPI modality share increasing from 0.5% to 2.5% of the total MPI modality share, over a 5-year time horizon. The model estimates the impact of diagnostic performance on downstream healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) including invasive coronary angiography (ICA), revascularization, pharmacological treatment, and cardiac outcomes (CO) such as cardiac mortality (CM) and myocardial infarction (MI). Four suspected CAD populations, including general and difficult-to-image subgroups, were analyzed. Clinical inputs used to support the parameterization of the model were sourced from a systematic literature search and included claims-based real-world evidence, observational, and multicenter registry studies to inform the rates of HCRU and CO, and head-to-head comparative clinical trial data advised diagnostic performance inputs. Reimbursement codes informed MPI modality costs. Results are reported as per-member per-month (PMPM) based on a hypothetical health plan.

Results: In all suspected CAD populations analyzed, there was a nominal cost increase in the world with F¹⁸-PET-MPI. The 5-year average PMPM incremental budget impact ranged from $0.02 to $0.05 across all suspected CAD subgroups. Cost-savings were associated with decreased downstream CO such as CM, MI, and ICA.

Limitations and conclusion: The available literature to source all parameters in the model was limited; therefore, assumptions and additional calculations were made based on published evidence to inform the model. A one-way sensitivity analysis was performed to confirm and address uncertainty in key parameters. This comprehensive analysis illustrates that the superior diagnostic performance of F¹⁸-PET-MPI may result in reduced adverse CO events and associated costs, increased appropriate identification and treatment of CAD, and a minimal increase in overall costs among general and difficult-to-image patient subgroups.

Objective: In the absence of head-to-head clinical trials, matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was used to compare two Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis) approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). This analysis compares the efficacy and safety of acalabrutinib versus ibrutinib using a more mature dataset than a previously published MAIC.

Methods: Individual patient data from 122 patients treated with acalabrutinib in a phase 2 study were weighted to match aggregate baseline characteristics of patients pooled from three separate trials of ibrutinib. Patients were matched on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, simplified Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index, lactate dehydrogenase, prior lines of therapy, tumor burden, and blastoid histology. Outcomes assessed included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events.

Results: After matching, differences in PFS between acalabrutinib (median = 17.8 months) and ibrutinib (median = 12.8 months) were not statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74-1.15; p = 0.48). Similarly, after matching, OS differences between acalabrutinib (median = 36.5 months) and ibrutinib (median = 27.9 months) did not reach statistical significance (HR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.64-1.17; p = 0.35). Acalabrutinib was associated with an improved safety profile compared with ibrutinib, with statistically significantly lower rates of grade ≥3 atrial fibrillation and thrombocytopenia.

Conclusions: This comparison of two BTKis used in the treatment of R/R MCL showed that PFS and OS risk was not statistically different between the treatments; however, acalabrutinib had an improved safety profile compared with ibrutinib.

Aims: To evaluate the healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs of patients who initiated cariprazine as their first versus subsequent atypical antipsychotic (AA) following a bipolar I disorder (BP-I) diagnosis.

Methods: Adults with a BP-I diagnosis (first claim = index), commercial, Medicare Supplemental, or Medicaid insurance, and ≥1 outpatient cariprazine dispensing were identified from Merative MarketScan database. Cohorts included patients who initiated cariprazine as either their first or subsequent AA after initial BP-I diagnosis. Characteristics were balanced between cohorts using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Outcomes evaluated post-index included all-cause and mental health (MH)-related HRU (hospitalizations, emergency department [ED] visits, outpatient visits), total healthcare costs (medical + pharmacy), and treatment patterns. HRU and healthcare costs were reported per patient-year (PPY) and compared between cohorts using rate ratios and 95% CIs estimated using nonparametric bootstrap procedures. Treatment patterns were analyzed descriptively, with standardized differences ≥10% considered important.

Results: After IPTW, cohorts included 1,409 patients who initiated cariprazine first and 1,621 patients who initiated cariprazine subsequently; the average (standard deviation, SD) observation period was 678 (373) and 758 (389) days for first and subsequent initiators, respectively. Patients who initiated cariprazine first had 23% fewer all-cause hospitalizations and 28% fewer MH-related hospitalizations PPY (each comparison, p < 0.001). Rates of all-cause and MH-related outpatient visits were significantly lower in patients who initiated cariprazine first versus subsequently (each comparison, p < 0.001), while rates of ED visits were similar. Relative to subsequent initiators, first initiators incurred $2,587 and $2,130 lower all-cause and MH-related total healthcare costs PPY, respectively (each comparison, p < 0.05). Before starting cariprazine, first initiators used fewer BP-I-related medications on average than subsequent initiators (2.6 vs 3.9; standardized difference = 23.9%).

Limitations: Potential coding inaccuracies and residual confounding.

Conclusions: In this real-world database analysis, patients with BP-I who initiated cariprazine as their first AA had lower rates of HRU and incurred lower costs than patients who initiated cariprazine as a subsequent AA.

Aims: Two randomized clinical trials, REDUCE and RESPECT, demonstrated that patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure in combination with antithrombotic therapy was more effective for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke compared with antithrombotic therapy alone. The aim of this study was to determine the relative efficacy and safety of the PFO closure devices used in REDUCE (HELEX and CARDIOFORM Septal Occluders) compared with the device used in RESPECT (Amplatzer PFO Occluder).

Methods: An unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of the PFO closure arms of the REDUCE and RESPECT trials was performed using patient-level data from REDUCE weighted to match baseline characteristics from RESPECT. Comparisons of the following outcomes were made between the devices assessed in the trials: risk of recurrent ischemic stroke; recurrent ischemic stroke one year after randomization; any serious adverse event (SAE) related to the procedure or device; and atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter as an SAE related to the procedure or device.

Results: After conducting the MAIC, baseline characteristics were well-matched between the two trials. Compared to RESPECT, PFO closure using the devices from REDUCE resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-1.43; p = 0.17) for the risk of recurrent stroke. For the recurrence of stroke after one year, SAE related to the procedure or device, and atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter as SAE related to the procedure or device, the MAIC resulted in a rate difference of -0.68 (95%CI -2.06 to 0.70; p = .34), -1.29 (95%CI -3.82 to 1.25; p = .32), and -0.19 (95%CI -1.16 to 0.78; p = .71), respectively. These findings were consistent across scenario analyses.

Conclusions: This MAIC analysis found no statistically significant differences in efficacy and safety outcomes between PFO closure with the HELEX and CARDIOFORM Septal Occluders versus the Amplatzer PFO Occluder, as used in the REDUCE and RESPECT trials.

Background and objectives: This study presents a budget impact analysis (BIA) conducted in Saudi Arabia, evaluating the cost implications of adopting semaglutide, tirzepatide, or dulaglutide in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. The analysis aims to assess the individual budgetary impact of these treatment options on healthcare budgets and provide insights for decision-makers.

Methods: A prevalence-based BIA was developed using real-world and clinical trials data. The model considered disease epidemiology, medication prices, diabetes management expenses, cardiovascular (CV) complications costs, and weight reduction savings over a 5-year time horizon. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (OWSA, PSA) were performed to assess the robustness of the results.

Results: Over a 5-year period, the cumulative budget impact for semaglutide, tirzepatide, and dulaglutide were 85,923,089 USD, 169,790,195 USD, and 94,558,356 USD, respectively. Hypothetical scenarios considering price parity between semaglutide and tirzepatide are associated with financial impacts of 85,923,091 USD and 86,475,335 USD, respectively. In the public sector, semaglutide showed the lowest incidence of 3-point major adverse CV events (3P-MACE), with tirzepatide leading in weight loss and HbA1c reduction, and dulaglutide presenting the highest 3P-MACE rates and least improvements in HbA1c and weight. A breakeven analysis suggested that tirzepatide's list price would need to be $199.91 lower than its current list price to achieve budget impact parity with semaglutide based on currently available evidence. Results from the OWSA suggested that risk reductions for CV events were key drivers of budget impact. PSA results were confirmatory of base-case analyses.

Conclusions: CV cost-offsets and drug acquisition considerations may make semaglutide a favorable use of resources for Saudi budget planners and decision-makers. These results were robust to assumptions regarding the list price of tirzepatide.

Introduction: Our cost-of-illness (COI) model adopted the perspective of both payer and society over a time horizon of 5 years to measure the economic burden of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in Malaysia.

Methodology: Our COI model utilized a prevalence-based model to estimate the costs and economic consequences of SLE in Malaysia. The clinical parameters were obtained from published literature and validated using the Delphi panel. Direct and indirect medical costs were measured, including disease management, transient events, and indirect costs. One-way sensitivity analysis was also performed.

Results: The number of target Malaysian patients with SLE in the COI model was 18,121. At diagnosis, the numbers of SLE patients with mild, moderate, and severe phenotypes were 2,582, 13,897, and 1,642, respectively. The total SLE cost in Malaysia over 5 years from both payer and society perspectives was estimated at MYR 678 million and 2 billion, respectively. The results showed a considerable cost burden due to productivity losses resulting from SLE-related morbidity and mortality. Over a 5-year time horizon, the costs per patient per year from the payer and society perspectives were MYR 7,484 ($4766) and 24,281($15,465), respectively.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrated the substantial economic burden of SLE in Malaysia over a time horizon of 5 years. It affects adults of working age, in addition to the costs of SLE management and its consequences, such as flares, infection, and organ damage. Our COI model indicated that disease management costs among patients with higher disease severity were higher than those among patients with a mild phenotype. Hence, more attetion should be paid to limiting the progression of SLE and the occurrence of flares, with the need for further economic evaluation of novel treatments that could lead to better outcomes.