Role of initial NSAID choice and patient risk factors in the prevention of NSAID gastropathy: a decision analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of initial nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) choice in the prevention of NSAID gastropathy, based on relative clinical and economic effects. METHODS: To mimic clinical practice, a symptom-driven decision analytic model was constructed to compare 2 treatment strategies for long-term users of NSAIDs over a 1-year period: Strategy 1-generic NSAID used initially, and safer, more expensive NSAID reserved for treatment failures due to symptomatic gastropathy; and Strategy 2-safer, more expensive NSAID used in all instances. The only distinction between the strategies was the choice of initial NSAID. NSAIDs differed in gastrointestinal safety profiles and acquisition costs. The use and impact of antisecretory medications were included in the model. Because published data on patients' ulcer risk and relative NSAID safety show considerable variability, sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the key clinical outcomes and costs. RESULT: For patients without risk factors for NSAID ulcers (average risk), the model estimated that the strategy restricting use of the safer NSAID resulted in more symptomatic ulcers (Strategy 1, 2.58; Strategy 2, 0.73) and ulcer-related complications (Strategy 1, 1.18; Strategy 2, 0.23) per 100 patient years. The restricted strategy led to a significantly lower cost per patient treated (Strategy 1, $239; Strategy 2, $831 per year). In the principal analysis, the incremental costs to prevent symptomatic and complicated ulcers were $31,900 and $56,700, respectively. The estimated incremental cost per ulcer avoided was sensitive to the relative protection provided by the safer NSAID and fell dramatically as the patients' ulcer risk was increased above average risk. CONCLUSION: Unrestricted use of NSAIDs that reduce the risk of symptomatic ulcers has the potential to produce important clinical benefits at incremental cost. The impressive impact of ulcer risk on the incremental cost per ulcer prevented warrants increased attention to risk factor identification when NSAIDs are prescribed.

Cost-effectiveness comparison of therapy for psoriasis with a methotrexate-based regimen versus a rotation regimen of modified cyclosporine and methotrexate.

BACKGROUND: Because health care resources are limited, therapeutic regimens should be assessed for their relative costs and effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: We assessed cost-effectiveness for treating psoriasis using two strategies: one consisted principally of methotrexate and the other was principally a rotational schedule of modified cyclosporine (Neoral) with methotrexate. METHODS: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis using a computerized decision analytic model of simulated patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. Patients were randomly assigned to receive treatment with one of the two strategies. Direct costs included acquisition of medications, laboratory and physician fees, and costs of treating side effects. Because of uncertainty regarding rates of clearing of psoriasis, the relative efficacy of methotrexate and cyclosporine was varied over a wide range in a sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: In the base case over a 10-year treatment period, the methotrexate strategy cost $33,000 and provided approximately 2 years clear of psoriasis compared with $38,000 and approximately 4 years clear of psoriasis for the rotational strategy. When the relative effectiveness of cyclosporine to methotrexate in clearing psoriasis varied from approximately 1 to 20, the rotational strategy cost from $4100 to $2700 per incremental clear year. CONCLUSION: In selecting therapies for psoriasis patients, both costs and effectiveness should be considered. In this simulation, patients could obtain additional periods clear of psoriasis at an incremental cost by using cyclosporine in rotation with methotrexate. If even a small utility gain accompanies the complete clearing of psoriasis, such a strategy may be a worthwhile investment of resources comparable to other healthcare interventions.