| 1. |
- Geale, Kirk, et al.
(författare)
-
Budget impact analysis of demineralized bone matrix in combination with autograft in lumbar spinal fusion procedures for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease in Spain
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Medical Economics. - : Taylor & Francis. - 1369-6998 .- 1941-837X. ; 21:10, s. 977-982
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To estimate the budget impact (BI) of introducing local autograft (LA) combined with demineralized bone matrix (LA + DBM) in lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) procedures to treat lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) in Spain.Methods: A decision tree model was developed to evaluate the 4-year BI associated with introducing LA + DBM putty to replace currently available grafting methods, including iliac crest bone graft (ICBG), LA alone, and LA combined with beta-tricalcium phosphate (LA + ceramics), with 30%, 40%, and 30% market shares, respectively. The analysis was conducted for a hypothetical cohort of 100 patients with LDDD receiving LSF, assuming LA + DBM would replace 100% of the standard of care mix. The fusion rates extracted from the literature were validated by an expert panel. Costs ((sic)2017) were obtained from different Spanish sources. Budget impact and incremental cost per successful fusion were calculated from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System (NHS).Results: Over 4 years, replacing currently available options with LA + DBM for 100 patients resulted in an additional cost of (sic)12,330 ((sic)123/patient), and an additional 14 successful fusions, implying a cost of (sic)881 per additional successful fusion. When costs of productivity loss were included, the introduction of LA + DBM resulted in cost savings of (sic)70,294 ((sic)703/patient).Limitations: The lack of high-quality, homogeneous, head-to-head research studying the efficacy of grafting procedures available to patients undergoing LSF, in addition to a lack of long-term follow-up in existing studies. Therefore, the number of fusions occurring within the model's time horizon may be underestimated.Conclusions: Acquisition costs of DBM were partially offset by costs of failed fusions, adverse events and reoperation when switching 100 hypothetical LDDD patients undergoing LSF procedures from standard of care grafting methods to LA + DBM from the perspective of the Spanish NHS. DBM cost was entirely offset when costs of lost productivity were considered.
|
|
| 2. |
- Polyzoi, Maria, et al.
(författare)
-
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Adjuvant Olaparib Versus Watch and Wait in the Treatment of Germline BRCA1/2-Mutated, High-Risk, HER2-Negative Early Breast Cancer in Sweden
- 2024
-
Ingår i: PHARMACOECONOMICS-OPEN. - 2509-4262 .- 2509-4254. ; 8:2, s. 277-289
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of adjuvant olaparib versus watch and wait (WaW) in patients with germline breast cancer susceptibility gene 1/2 (gBRCA1/2)-mutated, high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative early breast cancer (eBC), previously treated with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, from a Swedish healthcare perspective.Methods A five-state (invasive disease-free survival [IDFS], non-metastatic breast cancer [non-mBC], early-onset mBC, late-onset mBC, death) semi-Markov state transition model with a lifetime horizon was developed. Transition probabilities were informed by data from the Phase III OlympiA trial, supplemented with data from additional studies in BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative mBC. Health state utilities were derived via mapping of OlympiA data and supplemented by literature estimates. Treatment, adverse events and other medical costs were extracted from publicly available Swedish sources. Incremental cost per life-year (LY) and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained were estimated. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% annually. One-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted.Results Over a lifetime horizon, adjuvant olaparib was associated with an additional 1.50 LYs and 1.22 QALYs, and incremental cost of 471,156 Swedish krona (SEK) versus WaW (discounted). The resulting ICER was 385,183SEK per QALY gained for olaparib versus WaW. ICERs remained below 1,000,000SEK across a range of scenarios, and were consistent across subgroups (hormone receptor [HR]-positive/HER2-negative and triple-negative breast cancer [TNBC]). In PSA, the probability of olaparib being cost effective at 1,000,000SEK per QALY was 99.8%.Conclusions At list price, adjuvant olaparib is a cost-effective alternative to WaW in patients with gBRCA1/2-mutated, high-risk, HER2-negative eBC in Sweden.
|
|
