Cost-benefits of incorporating levosimendan into cardiac surgery practice: German base case.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-benefit of using levosimendan compared with dobutamine, in the perioperative treatment of patients undergoing cardiac surgery who require inotropic support. METHODS: A two-part Markov model was designed to simulate health-state transitions of patients undergoing cardiac surgery, and estimate the short- and long-term health benefits of treatment. Hospital length of stay (LOS), mortality, medication, and adverse events were key clinical- and cost-inputs. Cost-benefits were evaluated in terms of costs and bed stays within the German healthcare system. Drug prices were calculated from the German Drug Directory (€/2014) and published literature, with a 3% annual discount rate applied. The base case analysis was for a 1-year time horizon. RESULTS: The use of levosimendan vs dobutamine was associated with cost savings of €4787 per patient from the German hospital perspective due to reduced adverse events and shorter hospital LOS, leading to increased bed capacity and hospital revenue. LIMITATIONS: A pharmacoeconomic calculation for the specific situation of the German healthcare system that is based on international clinical trial carries a substantial risk of disregarding potentially relevant but unknown confounding factors (i.e., ICU-staffing, co-medications, standard-ICU care vs fast-tracking, etc.) that may either attenuate or increase the outcome pharmacoeconomic effects of a drug; however, since these conditions would also apply for patients treated with comparators, their net effects may not necessarily influence the conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: The use of levosimendan in patients undergoing cardiac surgery who require inotropic support appears to be cost-saving. The results of the analysis provide a strong rationale to run local clinical studies with pharmacoeconomic end-points which would allow a much more precise computation of the benefits of levosimendan.

Dexmedetomidine versus standard care sedation with propofol or midazolam in intensive care: an economic evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Dexmedetomidine was shown in two European randomized double-blind double-dummy trials (PRODEX and MIDEX) to be non-inferior to propofol and midazolam in maintaining target sedation levels in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Additionally, dexmedetomidine shortened the time to extubation versus both standard sedatives, suggesting that it may reduce ICU resource needs and thus lower ICU costs. Considering resource utilization data from these two trials, we performed a secondary, cost-minimization analysis assessing the economics of dexmedetomidine versus standard care sedation. METHODS: The total ICU costs associated with each study sedative were calculated on the basis of total study sedative consumption and the number of days patients remained intubated, required non-invasive ventilation, or required ICU care without mechanical ventilation. The daily unit costs for these three consecutive ICU periods were set to decline toward discharge, reflecting the observed reduction in mean daily Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS) points between the periods. A number of additional sensitivity analyses were performed, including one in which the total ICU costs were based on the cumulative sum of daily TISS points over the ICU period, and two further scenarios, with declining direct variable daily costs only. RESULTS: Based on pooled data from both trials, sedation with dexmedetomidine resulted in lower total ICU costs than using the standard sedatives, with a difference of €2,656 in the median (interquartile range) total ICU costs-€11,864 (€7,070 to €23,457) versus €14,520 (€7,871 to €26,254)-and €1,649 in the mean total ICU costs. The median (mean) total ICU costs with dexmedetomidine compared with those of propofol or midazolam were €1,292 (€747) and €3,573 (€2,536) lower, respectively. The result was robust, indicating lower costs with dexmedetomidine in all sensitivity analyses, including those in which only direct variable ICU costs were considered. The likelihood of dexmedetomidine resulting in lower total ICU costs compared with pooled standard care was 91.0% (72.4% versus propofol and 98.0% versus midazolam). CONCLUSIONS: From an economic point of view, dexmedetomidine appears to be a preferable option compared with standard sedatives for providing light to moderate ICU sedation exceeding 24 hours. The savings potential results primarily from shorter time to extubation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00479661 (PRODEX), NCT00481312 (MIDEX).

Economic evaluation of levosimendan versus dobutamine for the treatment of acute heart failure in Italy.

INTRODUCTION: Inodilators are the first-choice class of drugs for the treatment of acute heart failure (AHF). Levosimendan is a relatively recent inodilatory agent, presenting superior outcomes in comparison with traditional inotropes. METHODS: An economic evaluation of levosimendan for the treatment of AHF in Italy was performed. In a retrospective study conducted on patients with AHF admitted to a teaching hospital in Rome, two groups were derived from an observational registry: 147 patients treated with levosimendan and 145 treated with dobutamine. Follow-up was at 1 year after treatment. In the reference study looked at in this paper, treatment with levosimendan reduced mean length of stay (LOS) by 1.5 days (P<0.05). Reduction in the rehospitalization rate was 6.7% (P<0.05). Mortality rate at 1 month was reduced by 4.8% (P<0.05). RESULTS: Based on the reference study, a cost analysis from the hospital perspective was carried out. The incremental cost of treatment with levosimendan (€697) was equivalent to the incremental savings (€694), the latter being obtained from the reduction in LOS (€508) and rehospitalization rate (€186). CONCLUSION: Despite the limitations of this study, and even neglecting all nonmonetary health gains as additional outcomes, levosimendan appears to be a competitive alternative compared with dobutamine for the treatment of AHF in the Italian hospital setting.

Long-term effects of growth hormone therapy on patients with Prader-Willi syndrome.

AIM: To assess the effects of recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) treatment in children with Prader-Willi syndrome. DESIGN: A 1-year study and an observational follow-up visit 10 years later. METHODS: In 20 patients with Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS): clinical assessment, laboratory tests, body composition analysis by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, sleep polygraphy, health-related quality of life assessed by 16D. RESULTS: Only two patients had normal growth hormone secretion at baseline. All patients were significantly shorter than their expected heights, but experienced catch-up growth during growth hormone treatment. At follow-up, 13 patients had reached adult heights and were markedly taller than historical controls. The cumulative dose of rhGH over 10 years correlated inversely with the total body fat percentage (p = 0.033). However, patients remained severely obese at 10 years. Sleep polygraphy was abnormal in more than half of the patients. Health-related quality of life of the patients remained substantially below that of normal population. CONCLUSION: Growth hormone markedly improved adult height in subjects with PWS when compared to historical data. The cumulative dose of growth hormone correlated with reduction in body fat; nevertheless, patients remained severely obese.

Cost-effectiveness of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone (Stalevo) compared to standard care in UK Parkinson's disease patients with wearing-off.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: A Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of levodopa/carbidopa/entacapone (LCE;Stalevo), in the treatment of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and end-of-dose motor fluctuations (wearing-off). LCE, with or without other antiparkinsonian medications, was compared to UK standard care, comprising traditional levodopa/ dopa-decarboxylase inhibitor (DDCI) with other antiparkinsonian medications (e.g. selegiline or dopamine agonists) added as needed. The costs and outcomes of both treatments were projected over a period of 10 years from the perspective (a) of society as a whole and (b) of the UK National Health Service (NHS). Sensitivity analyses, including second-order Monte Carlo simulations, were performed to assess the confidence level of the primary results. RESULTS: Treatment with LCE produced an average gain of +1.04 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patient (2.57 vs. 1.53) in the base-case analysis (discount rate 3.5%). This gain was accompanied by a reduction in the total 10-year direct cost of care to society of 10198 pounds per patient ( approximately E14800). From the societal perspective, therefore, LCE was dominant, producing better clinical outcomes with lower costs. This dominance was reiterated in all sensitivity analyses of society-focused analysis, including a shortening of the time-frame to 5 years. Although treatment with LCE resulted in an increase in direct costs per patient of 3239 pounds (25756 pounds versus 22517 pounds) to the NHS over the 10-year period analysed, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of LCE was only 3105 pounds per QALY gained (approximately E4500). All ICERs to the NHS remained below 3800 pounds per QALY gained in univariate sensitivity analyses applying different discount rates. When a shorter, 5-year, time-horizon was analysed, the NHS-related ICER for LCE was 6526 pounds per QALY gained. All these ICERs are within the range usually considered to indicate acceptable or highly acceptable cost effectiveness (defined as < 30000 pounds per QALY gained). The results of the Monte Carlo simulations indicated that the likelihood of LCE being either 'dominant' or more effective at an 'acceptable cost' from either the societal or the NHS perspective was high, exceeding 96% in the base-case sensitivity analysis, and was 93% even when all the uncertainties associated with the model were taken into consideration simultaneously. In particular, compared to standard care, the probability that LCE would provide better outcomes at a lower cost to society as a whole was 77% in the base-case sensitivity analysis and 72% in the scenario involving the highest degree of uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: In the UK the use of LCE to treat PD patients with wearing-off is beneficial to individual patients and likely to offer money savings to society as a whole, compared with UK standard therapy. The added cost of the medication itself is exceeded by the savings made in other direct costs of PD, mainly those relating to social care or PD-related private expenditures.

Psychosocial adjustment and quality of life after renal transplantation in early childhood.

Psychosocial adjustment and quality of life has been reported good in children after a successful renal transplantation (Tx). There are, however, few reports of using standardized methods in evaluating these issues, particularly in small children. We investigated the psychosocial adjustment in 32 children at school age (mean 9.6 +/- 1.6), who had received a renal Tx under the age of 5 yr, using the Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist with data collected from both parents (CBCL) and teachers (CBCL-TRF). Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was assessed by interviewing the children using a 17-dimensional (17D) health-related measure and compared to HRQOL of 244 normal school children. The effect of additional diseases and comorbidity on psychosocial adjustment and HRQOL was assessed. The total scores on the CBCL did not differ from normative samples of healthy children. However, somatic complaints and social problems were reported more frequently in boys, and attention problems in both boys and girls. Patients with pathological scores had significantly more comorbidity (p = 0.03) and were more often attending a special school (p = 0.007) than patients with normal scores. The global 17D HRQOL index was significantly lower than measured in healthy controls (94 +/- 5 for controls and 85 +/- 7 for patients, p < 0.0001). It is of crucial importance to further minimize the risk factors leading to comorbidity in children after Tx. HRQOL assessment by the children themselves can be used to direct interventions and support the children's psychosocial adjustment.

Measuring health-related quality of life in women on hormone replacement therapy.

Hormone replacement therapy has been shown to effectively relieve postmenopausal symptoms. However, its impact on health-related quality of life is not well documented. There is no gold standard instrument available for measuring the effects of hormone replacement therapy on health-related quality of life of postmenopausal women. Furthermore, no systematic comparison of health-related quality of life measures has been undertaken within the field. An overview of the health-related quality of life measures and scales used in publications on hormone replacement therapy are reviewed. In addition, an analysis to compare the performance of two generic health-related quality of life measures, the Nottingham Health Profile and the 15D are conducted. Both measures performed well in postmenopausal women. However, only preference-based measures, such as 15D, can be used in cost-utility analyses.

Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for evaluating cost-utility of entacapone for Parkinson's disease.

The objective was to assess uncertainty in a cost-utility analysis of adjunct entacapone treatment with levodopa among Parkinson's disease patients by probabilistic sensitivity analysis using second-order simulation methods. The cost-effectiveness of two treatment alternatives of Parkinson's disease - levodopa with or without entacapone - was compared in a cost-utility analysis employing a Markov model. Monte Carlo simulation was used to quantify the uncertainty due to sampling variation. The results strengthened confidence in the conclusions that entacapone as an adjunctive treatment to levodopa is both cost-saving and increases the quality of life of Parkinson's disease patients.