ObjectiveTo analyze the efficacy, hospitalization cost and cost-effect of different treatments for multiple myeloma, so as to provide references for the treatment and development medical insurance payment policy of multiple myeloma.MethodsA total of 60 cases of multiple myeloma patients who were treated in the General Hospital of Shenyang Military Command from January 1st, 2013 to December 31st, 2017 were included. According to the treatment method, they were categorized into the traditional treatment group (n=37) and novel drug treatment group (n=23). The total response rate and hospitalisation expenses for patients with medical insurance of the two groups were calculated and compared, and cost-effectiveness analysis was then performed.ResultsThe overall response rate in patients in traditional treatment group was 56.76% (21/37), and in novel drug treatment group was 82.61% (19/23) (χ2=4.366, P=0.039). The annual average drug fee, annual average novel drug fee, secondary average drug fee, secondary average novel drug fee, annual average total cost, and secondary average total cost of the medical insurance patients in the novel drug treatment group were significantly higher than those in the traditional treatment group (P<0.05). The annual average cost of personal and coordinated payment for the medical insurance patients in the novel drug treatment group were 172 229.53 yuan and 48 237.51 yuan, respectively, which were significantly higher than the traditional treatment group (P<0.01). The cost-effectiveness ratio of the traditional treatment group was 884.44 yuan/%, the novel drug treatment group was 2 821.80 yuan/%, the cost-effective incremental ratio was 7 075.75 yuan/%, the incremental cost-effective ratio was 7 075.75 yuan/%, and the sensitivity analysis was consistent with the results.ConclusionsThe total response rate of novel drug treatment is significantly higher than traditional treatment. However, novel drug treatment costs higher, and patient's economic burden is also higher. The traditional treatment is superior to novel drug treatment in cost-effectiveness analysis.
Health economics analysis has become increasingly important in recent years. It is essential to master the use of relevant software to conduct research in health economics. TreeAge Pro software is widely used in the healthcare decision analysis. It can carry out decision analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and Monte Carlo simulation. With powerful functionlity and outstanding visualization, it can build Markov disease transition models to analyze Markov processes according to disease models and accomplish decision analysis with decision trees and influence diagrams. This paper introduces cost-effectiveness analysis based on Markov model with examples and explains the main graphs.
ObjectivesTo compare the efficacy and economy of febuxostat and allopurinol in the treatment of chronic gout, and to provide reference for clinical rational drug use.MethodsThe Markov model was established to conduct cost-effectiveness analysis for febuxostat and allopurinol serving as the front-line treated medicines. In view of the uncertainty of model parameters, single factor, probability sensitivity analysis and other methods were used to analyze the stability of the results.ResultsThe cost of the therapeutic schedule of allopurinol 300 mg was lower than febuxostat 40 mg, and it saved RMB 4 339.6 Yuan for each patients on average, while obtained 0.067 more QALY. Uncertainty analysis revealed that only those utility value which could not reach the standard influenced the final results in all included variable elements. When the aspiration payment value was zero, the percentage of therapeutic schedule for allopurinol 300 mg was 100. With the increase of aspiration payment value, the probability for febuxostat scheme becoming the superior one showed a very gradual growth. When the aspiration payment value reached 150 000, the probability still remained under 10%.ConclusionsAllopurinol is more economical than finasteride as the first choice in the treatment of chronic gout. Therefore, it is recommended that allopurinol should be used as the first-line drug for economical considerations.
Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of three LTBI screening strategies: the tuberculin skin test (TST), the T-SPOT.TB and the combination of TST and T-SPOT (TST+T.SPOT), to provide economic evidence for T.SPOT application in China. Methods A decision analysis model evaluated three strategies among a cohort of 1000 tuberculosis (TB) close contacts, using incremental cost-effectiveness of prevention a active TB patient (1 year post contact). Meta analyses were conducted to calculate the key parameters of T.SPOT and TST. The official data or literature was searched and the unaccessible data was to specify other parameters, such as cost, LTBI prevalence, etc. The one-way sensitivity analysis was performed, varying key parameters over a wide range of reasonable values to evaluate the impact of data uncertainties and to determine the robustness of our overall conclusion. Results a) As for the total cost, the TST+T.SPOT strategy (?212 213.81 per 1 000 contacts) cost the least, while the single T.SPOT strategy cost the most; b) Subsequently, the TST+T.SPOT strategy required less contacts to be treated to prevent an active case of TB (8.31) than the single TST strategy (25.67); c) the TST+T.SPOT strategy shared the most cost-effectiveness (?3 063.50 per active TB case prevented) than the single TST or T.SPOT strategy; and d) The results of one-way sensitivity analyses showed that cost-effectiveness values were sensitive to changes in LTBI prevalence (gt;60%), Sen and Spn of TST test (gt;70%), with the single TST being superior to the single T.SPOT. Conclusion The Single T.SPOT strategy enjoys the most cases prevented from active TB, while the TST+S.SPOT strategy is the most cost-effective. The conclusion is sensitive to a few parameters, such as LTBI prevalence, but the TST+T.SPOT strategy is always the best.
ObjectivesThis study aimed to study the economic effect of five kinds of detection systems for nucleic acid, which were based on five kinds of working electrodes: gold electrode, glassy carbon electrode, carbon paste electrode, screen printing electrode, and indium-tin-oxide (ITO) glass electrode.MethodsThe cost of completing a single test was taken as the cost of economic analysis. The Youden index was used to represent the effect of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). Meanwhile, the cost-utility analysis (CUA) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were used for the economic analysis of the corresponding system.ResultsThe cost of five detection systems based on gold electrode, glass carbon electrode, carbon paste electrode, screen printing electrode, and ITO glass electrode was 3.70 yuan/unit, 4.20 yuan/unit, 5.25 yuan/unit, 33.98 yuan/unit and 5.01 yuan/unit, respectively. The Youden indexes of all five systems were 1. The cost effectiveness (C/E) were 3.70, 4.20, 5.25, 33.98, and 5.01, respectively. The cost utility (C/U) were 6.61, 6.89, 9.91, 62.93, and 9.45, respectively. The C'/E and C'/U of the gold electrode detection system were the minimum (2.96 and 5.29). Compared with the system applying the gold electrode, the system using the glassy carbon electrode had ΔC >0 and ∆E0 >0; When carbon paste electrode, screen printing electrode, and ITO glass electrode system were used, ∆C was >0 and ∆E0 was <0.ConclusionsFrom the perspective of CEA and CUA, the system using the gold electrode has the best economic effect. The sensitivity analysis proved the reliability of CEA and CUA results. According to the ICER, gold electrode or glassy carbon electrode can be used in clinical practice with the choice depending on the user.
Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy in children with newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma at low-, intermediate-, and high-risk. Methods From the perspective of health system, a decision-tree model was designed for cost-effectiveness analysis. The chemotherapy regimens of low-risk group included OEPA (vincristine, etoposide, prednisone, doxorubicin), AV-PC (doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, cyclophosphamide), and ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vincristine, dacarbazine); intermediate-risk group included OEPA, ABVE-PC (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vincristine, etoposide, prednisone, cyclophosphamide) and ABVD; high-risk group included OEPA, ABVE-PC, ABVD and BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone). The effectiveness and cost parameters were derived from the event-free survival rate reported in the literature, the drug linked reference price in Sichuan province, and treatment price of medical institutions. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to explore the impact of uncertainty. Results In the low-risk group, compared with AV-PC, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of OEPA and ABVD were 80 700 yuan and 108 799 yuan, respectively. In the intermediate-risk group, compared with OEPA, the ICER of ABVE-PC and ABVD were −17 737 yuan and −4 701 yuan respectively. In the high-risk group, compared with ABVE-PC, the ICER of OEPA, ABVD and BEACOPP were 149 262, 472 090 and 64 652 yuan, respectively. Univariate sensitivity analysis showed that in low-risk group, the most influential factors were cost of OEPA and cost of ABVD; in moderate-risk group were cost of ABVE-PC and cost of OEPA; in the high-risk group were cost of OEPA, cost of ABVD, and cost of BEACOPP, respectively. The results of probabilistic sensitivity analysis are basically consistent with those of the main analysis. Conclusion If China's per capita gross domestic product in 2023 (89 358 yuan) was used as the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold, OEPA in the low-risk group, OEPA in the intermediate-risk group and BEACOPP in the high-risk group are cost-effective.
Objective To evaluate the cost effectiveness of four different mechanisms clinical commonly used antidepressants, namely, amitriptyline, escitalopram, mirtazapine and venlafaxine in the treatment of moderate-severe depressive disorder in China and to provide clinicians with some advice. Methods We carried out the cost-effectiveness analysis of four antidepressants by establishing a decision tree model. The parameters uncertainty in the model was estimated through one-way sensitivity analysis. Results In terms of average cost-effectiveness ratio (CER), amitriptyline’s was 45.24 RMB, which was the lowest. And the CERs of mirtazapine, escitalopram and venlafaxine were 273.71 RMB, 332.00 RMB and 716.58 RMB, respectively. While in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), venlafaxine was excluded as the dominated strategy. When the threshold value of willingness to pay (WTP) was less than 3 420.92 RMB, amitriptyline was the most cost-effective; when the threshold value ranges between 3 420.92 RMB and 4 200 RMB, mirtazapine was the most cost-effective; and when the threshold value was over 4 200 RMB, escitalopram was the most cost-effective. In the one-way sensitivity analysis, when we changed the four kinds of drugs costs within a certain range, the results was not changed with the change of venlafaxine’s cost but changed with the other three drugs costs. Conclusion Clinicians may choose the most cost-effective therapy according to patients’ different WTP values. We suggests that health care institutions should encourage the use of escitalopram clinically and provide subsidies for patients so as to increase the overall society benefit.
ObjectiveTo compare the cost-effectiveness of warfarin and enoxaparin overlapping treatment for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) or pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with nephrotic syndrome (NS). MethodsA decision tree model was constructed. The efficacy data applied in our decision tree were from clinical data, and the cost data was based on the hospitalization cost of 103 patients with nephrotic syndrome in Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital from 2013 to 2014, State Development and Reform Commission pricing and literature report. The one-way sensitivity analyses was conducted to analyze the stability of test. ResultsIn base case, the cost and cost-effective ratio of warfarin and enoxaparin overlapped treatment for 3 days were 10305.49 yuan and 31607.15, respectively. While those overlapped treatment for 4 days were 8849.36 yuan and 20896.46, overlapped treatment for 5 days and above were 9494.29 yuan and 21659.95, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 4 days versus 5 days and above was 5600.96. The cost-effective ratio of 4 days was lower but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of it was higher. The sensitivity analysis showed the test result was stable. ConclusionCost-effectiveness analysis shows that warfarin and enoxaparin overlapping treatment for 4 days in patients with nephrotic syndrome has cost-effective advantage. Due to the limited sample size of our study, the above conclusion should be proved by more large-scale high-quality clinical studies.
ObjectiveTo compare the cost-effectiveness of etanercept combined with methotrexate to methotrexate plus placebo in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and to provide references for clinical practice.MethodsDecision tree model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness from the perspective of the health care system by TreeAge Pro 2016 software. The cost-effectiveness of the two treatments were compared by incremental analysis, and the robustness of the results were analyzed by sensitivity analysis.ResultsThe cost of etanercept combined methotrexate group in one year duration was ¥212 692, the effective rate (ACR50) was 66.4%; the cost of methotrexate combined with placebo group in one year duration was ¥572, the effective rate (ACR50) was 40.6%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of two groups was ¥818 000/person, and the sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust.ConclusionEtanercept combined methotrexate is significant more effective than methotrexat. But the cost of etanercept combined methotrexate is too high to afford and is not economical compared to methotrexate.