Cost-effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Spain: results of the DECLARE-TIMI 58 study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to carry out a cost-effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin, as an add-on therapy to standard of care (SoC), for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Spain, based on the results of the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial. METHODS: A discrete event simulation model (Cardiff T2DM) based on the data observed in the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial was adapted to the Spanish setting to estimate the costs and health outcomes of treatment with dapagliflozin in patients with T2DM who had or were at risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Macrovascular events (hospitalization for heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and unstable angina), end-stage renal disease and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality were modeled according to the survival equations of the DECLARE-TIMI 58 study. Microvascular events (blindness and ulcers) were estimated based on the risk equations of the UK Prospective Diabetes Study. The analysis was conducted from the Spanish National Health System perspective and the time horizon was 30 years. The results were evaluated in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Only direct health costs were included, and a 3% discount rate was applied to costs and health outcomes. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were made to assess the robustness of the results. RESULTS: In the main analysis, dapagliflozin was a dominant therapeutic option compared with placebo, with greater effectiveness (0.08 QALYs) and lower associated total costs per patient (€ -2,921). The univariate sensitivity analysis and the PSA confirmed the robustness of the results. The PSA showed the probability that dapagliflozin was a dominant alternative compared with placebo was 84.2% and that it was cost-effective of 92.1%, under a willingness-to-pay of € 20,000/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of data from the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial shows that dapagliflozin would be a cost-effective option in Spain for the treatment of adult patients with T2DM, as an add-on therapy to SoC, compared with placebo.

Cost-utility analysis of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) in combination with gemcitabine in metastatic pancreatic cancer in Spain: results of the PANCOSTABRAX study.

The PANCOSTABRAX study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) in combination with gemcitabine (GEM) versus GEM alone in the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer in Spain. Efficacy data were obtained from the MPACT study and were modeled to a lifetime horizon using a Markov model. The analysis was performed from the payer's perspective. Use of resources and key assumptions of the analysis were validated by a panel of oncologists. The addition of nab-paclitaxel to GEM showed higher effectiveness results (0.156 additional quality adjusted life years) at a higher cost (€6,477), resulting in a cost per quality-adjusted life years gained of €41,519. The combination of nab-paclitaxel and GEM has been shown to be an effective and well-tolerated option for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer and, in addition to becoming the new standard of care, could also be considered a cost-effective option.

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of universal screening for thyroid disease in pregnant women in Spain]. / Análisis coste-efectividad del cribado universal de la enfermedad tiroidea en mujeres embarazadas en España

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of universal screening for thyroid disease in pregnant women in Spain as compared to high risk screening and no screening. METHODOLOGY: A decision-analytic model comparing the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of universal screening versus high risk screening and versus no screening. was used for the pregnancy and postpartum period. Probabilities from randomized controlled trials were considered for adverse obstetrical outcomes. A Markov model was used to assess the lifetime period after the first postpartum year and account for development of overt hypothyroidism. The main assumptions in the model and use of resources were assessed by local clinical experts. The analysis considered direct healthcare costs only. RESULTS: Universal screening gained .011 QALYs over high risk screening and .014 QALYS over no screening. Total direct costs per patient were €5,786 for universal screening, €5,791 for high risk screening, and €5,781 for no screening. Universal screening was dominant compared to risk-based screening and a very cost-effective alternative as compared to no screening. Use of universal screening instead of high risk screening would result in €2,653,854 annual savings for the Spanish National Health System. CONCLUSIONS: Universal screening for thyroid disease in pregnant women in the first trimester is dominant in Spain as compared to risk-based screening, and is cost-effective as compared to no screening (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €374 per QALY). Moreover, it allows diagnosing and treating cases of clinical and subclinical hypothyroidism that may not be detected when only high-risk women are screened.

Cost-utility analysis of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel versus paclitaxel in monotherapy in pretreated metastatic breast cancer in Spain.

AIM: The COSTABRAX study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) versus polyethylated castor oil-based standard paclitaxel (sb-paclitaxel) in the treatment of patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer in Spain. MATERIALS & METHODS: Efficacy data were obtained from the CA012 trial (nab-paclitaxel administered every 3 weeks [q3w] and sb-paclitaxel q3w) and indirect comparison (sb-paclitaxel administered weekly), and were modeled to a time horizon of 5 years using a Markov model. The analysis was performed from the National Health Service perspective. Use of resources and key assumptions of the model were validated by a panel of 22 local oncologists. RESULTS: Compared with sb-paclitaxel q3w, nab-paclitaxel q3w was cost effective, with a cost per life year gained of €11,088 and a cost per quality-adjusted life year of €17,808. Compared with sb-paclitaxel administered weekly, it showed savings of €711 per patient. CONCLUSION: The COSTABRAX study showed that nab-paclitaxel q3w is a cost-effective alternative compared with sb-paclitaxel q3w and a cost-saving alternative to sb-paclitaxel administered weekly in Spain.