Cost-effectiveness of apixaban and warfarin in the prevention of thromboembolic complications among atrial fibrillation patients.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the risk of thromboembolic complications, clinical guidelines recommend anticoagulation treatment for almost all atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Although warfarin has long been the primary treatment alternative, now newer alternatives such as apixaban have proven effective in prevention of the thromboembolic complications of non-valvular AF. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of apixaban when compared with warfarin in the prevention of AF-associated thromboembolic complications in Finland. METHODS: The assessment was performed with a lifetime Markov-model with the following health states: non-valvular AF, ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, other intracranial bleed, other major bleed, clinically relevant non-major bleed, myocardial infarction, and systemic embolism. The treatment efficacies were obtained from the ARISTOTLE trial. Representative Finnish input data were used for the model states, including background mortality, resource use, costs (in 2014 values), and EQ-5D-3L-based quality of life. The results (with 3 % annual discounting) are presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICER, cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained], the expected value of perfect information (EVPI), and the probability of apixaban being cost-effective at various willingness-to-pay levels. RESULTS: Apixaban increased life-expectancy by 0.17 years and quality-adjusted life-expectancy by 0.14 QALYs when compared with warfarin. Additional QALY was gained with apixaban at a cost of 1824 euros based on the deterministic analysis. The maximum EVPI was 649 euros/patient at 1282 euros per QALY gained in the probabilistic analysis. The probability of apixaban being cost-effective reached 80 % when the willingness-to-pay per QALY gained was 14,857 euros. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, ICERs varied from dominance of apixaban to additional QALY being gained at a cost of 12,312 euros. CONCLUSIONS: The ICERs obtained were well below the WHO-CHOICE threshold values for cost-effective interventions, suggesting that apixaban is a very cost-effective treatment alternative for warfarin in Finnish patients with AF.

Cost-utility of first-line actinic keratosis treatments in Finland.

INTRODUCTION: Cost-utility assessment of first-line actinic keratosis (AK) treatments for max 25 cm2 AK field. METHODS: A probabilistic, 2-year decision tree model was used to assess costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), cost-effectiveness efficiency frontier, cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), and expected value of perfect information (EVPI) of AK treatments from the Finnish health care payer perspective with 3% discounting per annum. In the model, the first-line AK treatment resulted in complete clearance (CC) or non-CC with or without local skin responses (LSR), or AK recurrence. Non-CC AK was treated with methyl aminolevulinate+photodynamic therapy (MAL+PDT), and AK recurrence was retreated with the previous effective treatment. Costs included primary and secondary health care, outpatient drugs, and LSR management. QALYs were assessed with the EuroQol (EQ-5D-3L). Result robustness was assessed with sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The mean simulated per patient QALYs (costs) were 1.526 (€982) for MAL+PDT, 1.524 (€794) for ingenol mebutate gel (IngMeb) 0.015% (3 days), 1.522 (€869) for IngMeb 0.05% (2 days), 1.520 (€1062) for diclofenac 3% (12 weeks), 1.518 (€885) for imiquimod 3.75% (6 weeks), 1.517 (€781) for imiquimod 5% (4/8 weeks), and 1.514 (€1114) for cryosurgery when treating AK affecting any body part. IngMeb 0.015% was less costly and more effective (dominating) than other AK treatments indicated for face and scalp area with the exception of imiquimod 5% for which the ICER was estimated at €1933/QALY gained and MAL+PDT, which had an ICER of €82,607/QALY gained against IngMeb 0.015%. With willingness-to-pay €2526-18,809/QALY gained, IngMeb 0.015% had >50% probability for cost-effectiveness on the CEAF. IngMeb 0.05% dominated AK treatments indicated for trunk and extremities. EVPIs for face and scalp (trunk and extremities) analyses were €26 (€0), €86 (€58), and €250 (€169) per patient with the willingness-to-pay of €0, €15,000, and €30,000 per QALY gained, respectively. CONCLUSION: IngMebs were cost-effective AK treatments in Finland. FUNDING: LEO Pharma.

Economic impact of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in Finnish adults ≥50 years with underlying chronic medical conditions.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Invasive pneumococcal diseases (IPD) are associated with substantial burden in adults (≥50 years). Moreover, adults with vascular, metabolic or respiratory diseases have been shown to have a 3-6 times higher risk of IPD when compared with their healthy controls. These persons at higher risk are likely to benefit most from pneumococcal vaccinations. The 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) was recently introduced to prevent the 13 most prevalent serotypes causing invasive pneumococcal disease in adults. The objective of this study was to estimate the expected 5-year economic impact of targeted PCV13 vaccination compared with no vaccination in Finnish adults (≥50 years) at moderate or high risk for IPD. METHODS: A budget impact model was developed to predict the impact of PCV13 vaccination in terms of the costs and IPD events avoided for years 2012-2016. RESULTS: Approximately 35% of the 2.2 million Finns over 50 years of age can be considered to be at moderate or high risk for IPD because of underlying chronic medical conditions. Vaccination of these people with PCV13 could provide an estimated net budget savings of about €218 million compared with the current no-vaccination situation over the next 5 years. Among the risk groups considered, the largest absolute net savings (€66.2 million) could be expected to be obtained by vaccinating people with heart disease, due to its high prevalence in the target population. CONCLUSION: In Finland, the immunization with PCV13 vaccine, of adults (≥50 years) at moderate and high risk of IPD, is estimated to lead to substantial cost savings in the 5 years after vaccination.

Warfarin treatment among Finnish patients with atrial fibrillation: retrospective registry study based on primary healthcare data.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency of warfarin use, the achieved international normalised ratio (INR) balance among warfarin users and the primary healthcare outpatient costs of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). DESIGN: Retrospective, non-interventional registry study. SETTING: Primary healthcare. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with AF (n=2746) treated in one Finnish health centre between October 2010 and March 2012. METHODS: Data on healthcare resource use, warfarin use, individually defined target INR range and INR test results were collected from the primary healthcare database for patients with AF diagnosis. The analysed dataset consisted of a 1-year follow-up. Warfarin treatment balance was estimated with the proportion of time spent in the therapeutic INR range (TTR). The cost of used healthcare resources was valued separately with national and service provider unit costs to estimate the total outpatient treatment costs. The factors potentially impacting the treatment costs were assessed with a generalised linear regression model. RESULTS: Approximately 50% of the patients with AF with CHADS-VASc ≥1 used warfarin. The average TTR was 65.2% but increased to 74.5% among patients using warfarin continuously (ie, without gaps exceeding 56 days between successive INR tests) during follow-up. One-third of the patients had a TTR of below 60%. The average outpatient costs in the patient cohort were €314.44 with the national unit costs and €560.26 with the service provider unit costs. The costs among warfarin users were, on average, €524.11 or €939.54 higher compared with the costs among non-users, depending on the used unit costs. A higher TTR was associated with lower outpatient costs. CONCLUSIONS: The patients in the study centre using warfarin were, on average, well controlled on warfarin, yet one-third of patients had a TTR of below 60%.

Administration costs of intravenous biologic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness studies explicitly reporting infusion times, drug-specific administration costs for infusions or real-payer intravenous drug cost are few in number. Yet, administration costs for infusions are needed in the health economic evaluations assessing intravenously-administered drugs. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the drug-specific administration and total cost of biologic intravenous rheumatoid arthritis (RA) drugs in the adult population and to compare the obtained costs with published cost estimates. METHODS: Cost price data for the infusions and drugs were systematically collected from the 2011 Finnish price lists. All Finnish hospitals with available price lists were included. Drug administration and total costs (administration cost + drug price) per infusion were analysed separately from the public health care payer's perspective. Further adjustments for drug brand, dose, and hospital type were done using regression methods in order to improve the comparability between drugs. Annual expected drug administration and total costs were estimated. A literature search not limited to RA was performed to obtain the per infusion administration cost estimates used in publications. The published costs were converted to Finnish values using base-year purchasing power parities and indexing to the year 2011. RESULTS: Information from 19 (95%) health districts was obtained (107 analysable prices out of 176 observations). The average drug administration cost for infliximab, rituximab, abatacept, and tocilizumab infusion in RA were €355.91; €561.21; €334.00; and €293.96, respectively. The regression-adjusted (dose, hospital type; using semi-log ordinary least squares) mean administration costs for infliximab and rituximab infusions in RA were €289.12 (95% CI €222.61-375.48) and €542.28 (95% CI €307.23-957.09). The respective expected annual drug administration costs were €2312.96 for infliximab during the first year, €1879.28 for infliximab during the forthcoming years, and €1843.75 for rituximab. The obtained average administration costs per infusion were higher (1.8-3.3 times depending on the drug) than the previously published purchasing power adjusted and indexed average administration costs for infusions in RA. CONCLUSIONS: The administration costs of RA infusions vary between drugs, and more effort should be made to find realistic drug-specific estimates for cost-effectiveness evaluations. The frequent assumption of intravenous drug administration costs equalling outpatient visit cost can underestimate the costs.

Bayesian predictors of very poor health related quality of life and mortality in patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with increased mortality and poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL) compared with the general population. The objective of this study was to identify clinical characteristics which predict mortality and very poor HRQoL among the COPD population and to develop a Bayesian prediction model. METHODS: The data consisted of 738 patients with COPD who had visited the Pulmonary Clinic of the Helsinki and Turku University Hospitals during 1995-2006. The data set contained 49 potential predictor variables and two outcome variables: survival (dead/alive) and HRQoL measured with a 15D instrument (very poor HRQoL < 0.70 vs. typical HRQoL ≥ 0.70).In the first phase of model validation we randomly divided the material into a training set (n = 538), and a test set (n = 200). This procedure was repeated ten times in random fashion to obtain independently created training sets and corresponding test sets. Modeling was performed by using the training set, and each model was tested by using the corresponding test set, repeated in each training set. In the second phase the final model was created by using the total material and eighteen most predictive variables. The performance of six logistic regressions approaches were shown for comparison purposes. RESULTS: In the final model, the following variables were associated with mortality or very poor HRQoL: age at onset, cerebrovascular disease, diabetes, alcohol abuse, cancer, psychiatric disease, body mass index, Forced Expiratory Volume (FEV1) % of predicted, atrial fibrillation, and prolonged QT time in ECG. The prediction accuracy of the model was 77%, sensitivity 0.30, specificity 0.95, positive predictive value 0.68, negative predictive value 0.78, and area under the ROC curve 0.69. While the sensitivity of the model reminded limited, good specificity, moderate accuracy, comparable or better performance in classification and better performance in variable selection and data usage in comparison to the logistic regression approaches, and positive and negative predictive values indicate that the model has potential in predicting mortality and very poor HRQoL in COPD patients. CONCLUSION: We developed a Bayesian prediction model which is potentially useful in predicting mortality and very poor HRQoL in patients with COPD.

Differential use of extended and immediate release quetiapine: a retrospective registry study of Finnish inpatients with schizophrenia spectrum and bipolar disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Extended release (XR) and immediate release (IR) quetiapine have differing dosing, titration and plasma concentration profiles. The authors assessed whether the use of quetiapine XR and IR in schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SCZ) and bipolar disorder (BD) differ. DESIGN: Retrospective non-interventional registry study. SETTING: Secondary healthcare. PARTICIPANTS: All SCZ and BD (ICD-10 codes F20-F29, F30-F31) patients discharged between June 2008 and June 2010 from a Finnish psychiatric hospital with any use of quetiapine during their inpatient stay. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Differences in patient characteristics between quetiapine XR and IR users were tested. To assess the profile of XR versus IR patients, logistic regressions were performed. RESULTS: 43 patients used quetiapine XR, 58 used quetiapine IR and 55 used both formulations (n=156). 102 patients were diagnosed with SCZ and 54 with BD, with no significant differences between the quetiapine formulations. The mean daily dose of quetiapine XR was significantly higher than that of quetiapine IR (542 mg vs 328 mg; p<0.001). This was also true for the SCZ subgroup (XR: 593 mg vs IR: 338 mg; p<0.001) and the BD subgroup (XR: 466 mg vs IR: 308 mg; p=0.009). 48% of all quetiapine IR patients used a mean dose of ≤200 mg compared with 2% of XR patients. Injectable antipsychotics were combined with quetiapine IR but not with quetiapine XR (12% vs 0%; p=0.019). At discharge, quetiapine XR was used as monotherapy to a greater extent than IR (79% vs 44%; p=0.003). The odds for quetiapine XR use in hospital were lower with advancing age, substance abuse diagnosis and prior IR use. CONCLUSIONS: Among SCZ and BD inpatients, quetiapine XR was more often used as monotherapy and in significantly higher doses than quetiapine IR. Differential use of the quetiapine formulations appears to depend, at least in part, on patient characteristics.

Economic evaluation of sequential treatments for follicular non-hodgkin lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: The cost-effectiveness analyses of follicular lymphoma (FL) treatments have focused on the second-line rituximab maintenance in patients with relapsed FL. The assessment of full FL treatment chain has been lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of FL treatment sequences. METHODS: Transitions between progression-free first-line treatment (PF1), progression-free second-line treatment (PF2), progression, and death health states were simulated with a probabilistic Markov model with half-cycle correction. At first, patients were assumed to be receiving rituximab with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (RCHOP) induction. The first-line RCHOP induction responders continued without (RCHOP) or with (RCHOPR) the first-line rituximab-maintenance treatment. In the case of PF1 failure, patients received RCOPR/bendamustine or RCOPR/COP according to the European Society for Medical Oncology guidance. In the case of PF2 failure, patients were expected to receive the best supportive care (BSC). The survivals and adverse events were estimated with direct and indirect comparisons. Health outcomes and Finnish payer (drug, drug administration, monitoring, test, progression, serious adverse event) costs valued in 2010 euros were discounted with 3% per annum. RESULTS: The mean discounted lifetime overall survival with FL was 9.6 to 11.5 years, quality-adjusted survival was 7.2 to 8.8 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), progression-free time was 7.7 to 10.2 years, and costs were €153,425 to €168,549, depending on the treatment sequence. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for RCHOPR→RCOPR/bendamustine→BSC, RCHOPR→RCOPR/COP→BSC, and RCHOP→RCOPR/bendamustine→BSC were €9575/€8014/€5900, €9881/€8310/€6013, and €8812/€7194/€5808, respectively, per QALY/life-year/progression-free year gained in comparison with RCHOP→RCOPR/COP→BSC. According to the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier, the treatment of 61.8% to 72.7% patients with RCHOPR→RCOPR/bendamustine→BSC was cost effective at €20,000 to €30,000/QALY gained (expected value of perfect information [EVPI], €1287 to €1976/patient). The relative results were found to be robust in sensitivity analyses, and, in the direct comparison that included only head-to-head data, the first-line rituximab maintenance had 93.1% cost-effectiveness probability at €20,000/QALY gained (EVPI, €282/patient). CONCLUSION: Sequences that included first-line rituximab maintenance is and second-line bendamustine are potentially cost effective in the treatment of FL. LIMITATIONS: Because of data available, health outcomes of the first-line rituximab induction were excluded, the second-line patients on COP were assumed to incur the cost of COP, and the efficacy and adverse events of CHOP and the efficacy and adverse events of bendamustine were estimated indirectly according to a comparison of rituximab+bendamustine and RCHOP, and treatment benefits were truncated.

Risk factors for persistent frequent use of the primary health care services among frequent attenders: a Bayesian approach.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine risk factors that predict persistent healthcare frequent attendance among a frequent attender (FA) population. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study without intervention. SETTING: Primary healthcare centre in Tampere, Finland. SUBJECTS: A total of 85 primary healthcare working-age patients participated in the study. All participants were FAs in the first study year. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We identified two groups of patients: temporary FAs and persistent FAs. A patient was considered as a persistent FA if he or she visited the health centre at least eight times a year for at least three out of four follow-up years. Some 59 different variables were examined as potential risk factors for persistent FA. P-course, a web-based Naïve Bayesian classification tool, was used for the modelling of the data. RESULTS: In our model, the most influential predictive risk factors for persistent frequent attendance in an FA population were female gender, body mass index above 30, former frequent attendance, fear of death, alcohol abstinence, low patient satisfaction, and irritable bowel syndrome. New observations were high body mass index, alcohol abstinence, irritable bowel syndrome, low patient satisfaction, and fear of death. CONCLUSIONS: In FA analyses, distinction between temporary and persistent frequent attendance should be made. Our Bayesian model could be used for identifying persistent FAs in uncertain situations. The model can quite easily be further developed as a practical decision support tool for general practitioners. However, before its use in practice, the external validity of the model will need to be defined.

Cost-utility of different treatment strategies after the failure of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor in rheumatoid arthritis in the Finnish setting.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-utility of different treatment strategies in severe RA after TNF-inhibitor failure. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies was compared in a group of hypothetical Finnish RA patients. Initially, the patients received either best supportive care (BSC) or one of the following treatments before BSC: adalimumab (ADAL), abatacept (ABAT), etanercept (ETAN), infliximab (INFL) or rituximab (RTX). Further treatments were added to the most cost-effective strategy in a stepwise manner. The analysis was performed on an Excel-based Markov state transition model using the probabilistic approach. The clinical outcomes related to treatments were estimated from published clinical trials. The gained quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated based on Health Utilities Index (HUI-3) and disease severity scores (HAQ). The resource use and costs were obtained from the Finnish treatment practice, one published study, the Finnish Unit Cost list and Finnish Medicine Tariffs. RESULTS: Treatment with RTX was more effective and less costly than treatment with ADAL, ABAT or ETAN after TNF-inhibitor failure. An additional QALY gained with RTX costs 30,248 euros compared with BSC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are 50,941, 50,372, 36,121 and 67,003 euros per QALY gained for adding ADAL, ETAN, INFL and ABAT to the RTX strategy, respectively. According to the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), only BSC or treatments with RTX or RTX followed by INFL should be considered after TNF-inhibitor failure, if willingness to pay is between 0 and 50,000 euros per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with RTX is a cost-effective treatment strategy in RA patients in Finland.

Population-based health-economic evaluation of the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in Finland.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of generic atorvastatin 20 mg (A20), branded rosuvastatin 10 mg (R10), generic simvastatin 40 mg (S40) and the combination of generic S40 + branded ezetimibe 10 mg (S40 + EZ10) for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) in Finnish patients not meeting the target goal of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) with S40. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A probabilistic Markov model was employed to evaluate the costs and health outcomes of the different therapies based on the cardiovascular events avoided. The model included Framingham risk equations, Finnish population characteristics, event rates, quality of life estimates, resource use and unit costs. The LDL-C lowering efficacies were gathered from a systematic literature review, based on a search of Medline carried out in June 2008 (no time limit). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and incremental cost per life year gained (LYG). RESULTS: The efficacy (LDL-C decrease) gained from switching S40 to S40 + EZ10 was consistent in the literature review, whereas the LDL-C decrease gained from switching S40 to A20/R10 was uncertain. The incremental cost per QALY gained from switching generic S40 was lowest for S40 + EZ10 (22,841 euros [24,017 euros] and 26,595 euros [46,686 euros] for diabetic and non-diabetic men [women], respectively). The respective incremental cost per QALY gained for S40 + EZ10 vs. A20 were 19,738 euros (21,405 euros) and 23,596 euros (40,087 euros). A20 dominated R10. Based on the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier with a willingness-to-pay value of 30,000 euros per QALY gained, the probability of cost-effectiveness for switching generic S40 to S40 + EZ10 was 100% for men and diabetic women. Sensitivity analyses showed that results were robust. CONCLUSIONS: In the Finnish secondary prevention population that is not at goal on S40, switching generic S40 to S40 + EZ10 is more cost-effective than switching S40 to generic A20 or R10.

Costs and quality of life effects of the first year of renal replacement therapy in one Finnish treatment centre.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective of the study was to assess the cost and quality of life (QoL) effects of elective dialysis patients during the first year of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) treatment in one Finnish treatment centre. METHODS: A prospective case-series study was performed involving all elective dialysis patients (n=29) in a Finnish dialysis unit during 2003-2004. Direct costs of ESRD treatment were obtained from the hospital database and the Social Insurance Institution. The QoL effects were measured at the initiation of treatment, at 6 and at 12 months using 15D, a generic QoL instrument. RESULTS: The average cost of ESRD treatment was 69,085 euro. The improvement in the patients' QoL score was statistically and clinically significant during the first treatment year. The most significant changes were seen in the dimensions of breathing and vitality. The condition of patients commencing haemodialysis (HD) was more severe than that of patients commencing peritoneal dialysis (PD) as indicated by worse residual kidney function and poorer quality of life at the initiation. CONCLUSIONS: In this small patient population, treatment of ESRD during the first year seemed to improve or maintain the QoL of the patients.

Lifestyle intervention with weight reduction: first-line treatment in mild obstructive sleep apnea.

RATIONALE: Obesity is the most important risk factor for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). However, although included in clinical guidelines, no randomized controlled studies have been performed on the effects of weight reduction on mild OSA. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this prospective, randomized controlled parallel-group 1-year follow-up study was to determine whether a very low calorie diet (VLCD) with supervised lifestyle counseling could be an effective treatment for adults with mild OSA. METHODS: Seventy-two consecutive overweight patients (body mass index, 28-40) with mild OSA were recruited. The intervention group (n = 35) completed the VLCD program with supervised lifestyle modification, and the control group (n = 37) received routine lifestyle counseling. The apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) was the main objectively measured outcome variable. Change in symptoms and the 15D-Quality of Life tool were used as subjective measurements. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The lifestyle intervention was found to effectively reduce body weight (-10.7 +/- 6.5 kg; body mass index, -3.5 +/- 2.1 [mean +/- SD]). There was a statistically significant difference in the mean change in AHI between the study groups (P = 0.017). The adjusted odds ratio for having mild OSA was markedly lowered (odds ratio, 0.24 [95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.72]; P = 0.011) in the intervention group. All common symptoms related to OSA, and some features of 15D-Quality of Life improved after the lifestyle intervention. Changes in AHI were strongly associated with changes in weight and waist circumference. CONCLUSIONS: VLCD combined with active lifestyle counseling resulting in marked weight reduction is a feasible and effective treatment for the majority of patients with mild OSA, and the achieved beneficial outcomes are maintained at 1-year follow-up.

Economic evaluation of sunitinib malate in second-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Finland.

BACKGROUND: Cytokine therapy is currently used as first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Until recently, treatments with proven efficacy after the failure of first-line cytokine therapy were not available. In recent clinical trials, sunitinib has been associated with good response rates in patients with mRCC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of sunitinib as second-line therapy for cytokine-refractory mRCC compared with current routine clinical practice in Finland (ie, best supportive care [BSC], including palliative biochemotherapy). METHODS: A probabilistic decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of sunitinib. Data were gathered from clinical trials, literature sources, and expert opinions, as well as from a local sample (n = 39) from 2 university hospitals in Finland. Clinical experts treating patients with mRCC in Finland provided the information on care practices of prescribing sunitinib. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the health care payer in Finland. RESULTS: According to estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), 1 progression-free month gained cost euro4802 (2005 Euros); 1 life-year gained cost euro30,831; and 1 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained cost euro43,698, compared with BSC, in the treatment of mRCC. The expected mean cost in BSC was euro5543. When parameter uncertainty was considered, the probability of sunitinib being the more cost-effective choice of treatment was ~70% at the willingness-to-pay level of euro45,000/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this cost-effectiveness analysis, sunitinib is potentially cost-effective as a second-line treatment of mRCC compared with the treatment currently practiced in Finnish hospitals. The ICER (euro/QALY gained) obtained in the present study was less than the value considered suitable for novel oncology treatments.