Does Trastuzumab Offer Good Value for Money for Breast Cancer Patients with Metastasis in Indonesia?

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in Indonesia, with Indonesia's breast cancer mortality rate being the highest among Southeast Asian countries. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impacts of adding trastuzumab to chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for HER2-positive breast cancer patients in Indonesia. METHODS: We performed a Markov model-based economic evaluation to assess cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and budget impact. Utility data, direct medical costs, and indirect costs were obtained primarily from interviewing patients. Clinical effectiveness data, on the other hand, were obtained from systematic reviews and real-world data and represented through progression free survival, overall survival, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULT: From a healthcare provider's perspective, the total costs for the combined group were USD 14,516, while chemotherapy alone cost USD 7,489. While the cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the combination group had a higher total cost by USD 7,027, PFS was longer in the chemotherapy alone group, with a difference of 2.2 months. The ICER was USD 17,307 for every QALY gained. The total cost of adding trastuzumab over a 5-year period was USD 589 million. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this economic evaluation suggests that the addition of trastuzumab to standard chemotherapy is not cost-effective in terms of PFS and OS compared with chemotherapy alone.
.

Economic Evaluation of Adding Bevacizumab to Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC) Patients in Indonesia.

OBJECTIVE: Since 2016, bevacizumab has been widely used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Indonesia. Nevertheless, the high cost of bevacizumab has raised the question of whether the therapy is considered cost-effective and should be included in the national health insurance system. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for the treatment of mCRC patients. METHODS: A Markov model was applied using the perspective of the Indonesian healthcare system to assess cost-effectiveness. The health outcomes were expressed in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALY) using the validated EuroQoL-5D-5L instrument. Data for medical costs were collected from hospital billings in four hospitals located in three different cities in Indonesia. Meanwhile, data for utility were obtained from interviewing 90 patients who came to the hospital. We compared those mCRC patients who received chemotherapy alone either with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI, versus patients who received the addition of bevacizumab. RESULTS: With the perspective of societal, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of adding bevacizumab was USD 49,312 per QALY gained using secondary data and USD 28,446 per QALY using real world data. CONCLUSION: Using either a healthcare or societal perspective, the addition of bevacizumab for mCRC treatment was considered not cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of genotyping for HLA-B*15:02 in Indonesian patients with epilepsy using a generic model.

Carbamazepine (CBZ)-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN) are strongly associated with the HLA-B*15:02 allele. Screening HLA-B*15:02 before CBZ administration might prevent CBZ-induced SJS/TEN by enabling clinicians to prescribe alternative therapy for positive patients. Similar to other Southeastern Asian countries, HLA-B*15:02 is highly prevalent in Indonesia. Therefore, we assessed the economic value of HLA-B*15:02 screening before CBZ prescription to patients with epilepsy in Indonesia. A generic cost-effectiveness model and decision support tool, developed to enable users to perform an initial cost-effectiveness analysis from a healthcare provider/payer perspective, were used to assess the value of HLA-B*15:02 genotyping. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of adopting universal HLA-B*15:02 screening was 656,444,671 Indonesian Rupiah (IDR)/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained for patients compared with 2,634,975,574 IDR/QALY gained for providing valproic acid (alternative drug) without screening. Thus, neither HLA-B*15:02 screening nor substitution with VPA meets the Indonesian threshold for cost effectiveness. However, the improved outcomes with this test in other Asian countries may inform the desirability of implementation in Indonesia even with suboptimal cost-effectiveness.

Economic burden of dengue in Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: Dengue is associated with significant economic expenditure and it is estimated that the Asia Pacific region accounts for >50% of the global cost. Indonesia has one of the world's highest dengue burdens; Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus are the primary and secondary vectors. In the absence of local data on disease cost, this study estimated the annual economic burden during 2015 of both hospitalized and ambulatory dengue cases in Indonesia. METHODS: Total 2015 dengue costs were calculated using both prospective and retrospective methods using data from public and private hospitals and health centres in three provinces: Yogyakarta, Bali and Jakarta. Direct costs were extracted from billing systems and claims; a patient survey captured indirect and out-of-pocket costs at discharge and 2 weeks later. Adjustments across sites based on similar clinical practices and healthcare landscapes were performed to fill gaps in cost estimates. The national burden of dengue was extrapolated from provincial data using data from the three sites and applying an empirically-derived epidemiological expansion factor. RESULTS: Total direct and indirect costs per dengue case assessed at Yogyakarta, Bali and Jakarta were US$791, US$1,241 and US$1,250, respectively. Total 2015 economic burden of dengue in Indonesia was estimated at US$381.15 million which comprised US$355.2 million for hospitalized and US$26.2 million for ambulatory care cases. CONCLUSION: Dengue imposes a substantial economic burden for Indonesian public payers and society. Complemented with an appropriate weighting method and by accounting for local specificities and practices, these data may support national level public health decision making for prevention/control of dengue in public health priority lists.

Development of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for off-patent pharmaceuticals - an application on improving tender decision making in Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: Off-patent pharmaceuticals (OPPs) hold vital importance in meeting public health objectives, especially in developing countries where resources are limited. OPPs are comprised of off-patent originals, branded generics and unbranded generics; nonetheless, these products are not identical and often there are differences in their equivalence, manufacturing quality standards and reliability of supply. This necessitates reconsideration of the lowest price policy objective in pharmaceutical decision making. The aim of this study was to develop a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework through a pilot workshop to inform the national procurement of OPPs in Indonesia. METHODS: An initial list of potentially relevant criteria was identified based on previous work and a literature review. In a 2-day pilot policy workshop, twenty local experts representing different stakeholder groups and decision-making bodies selected the final criteria, approved the scoring function for each criterion, and assigned weights to each criterion. RESULTS: An MCDA framework was proposed for OPP drug decision making in developing countries, which included price and 8 non-price criteria. Based on the pilot policy workshop 6 + 1 criteria were considered relevant for Indonesia: pharmaceutical price (40% weight), manufacturing quality (18.8%), equivalence with the reference product (12.2%), product stability and drug formulation (12.2%), reliability of drug supply (8.4%), real world clinical or economic outcomes, such as adherence or non-drug costs (4.2%) and pharmacovigilance (3.6%). CONCLUSIONS: According to the pilot policy workshop, other criteria apart from price need to be strengthened in the tendering process. The introduction of additional criteria for OPP procurement in an MCDA framework creates incentives for manufacturers to invest into improved manufacturing standards, equivalence proof, product quality, reliability of supply or even additional real-world data collection, which ultimately may result in more health gain for the society.

Economic evaluation of policy options for dialysis in end-stage renal disease patients under the universal health coverage in Indonesia.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the value for money and budget impact of offering hemodialysis (HD) as a first-line treatment, or the HD-first policy, and the peritoneal dialysis (PD) first policy compared to a supportive care option in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in Indonesia. METHODS: A Markov model-based economic evaluation was performed using local and international data to quantify the potential costs and health-related outcomes in terms of life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Three policy options were compared, i.e., the PD-first policy, HD-first policy, and supportive care. RESULTS: The PD-first policy for ESRD patients resulted in 5.93 life years, equal to the HD-first policy, with a slightly higher QALY gained (4.40 vs 4.34). The total lifetime cost for a patient under the PD-first policy is around 700 million IDR, which is lower than the cost under the HD-first policy, i.e. 735 million IDR per patient. Compared to supportive care, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the PD-first policy is 193 million IDR per QALY, while the HD-first policy resulted in 207 million IDR per QALY. Budget impact analysis indicated that the required budget for the PD-first policy is 43 trillion IDR for 53% coverage and 75 trillion IDR for 100% coverage in five years, which is less than the HD-first policy, i.e. 88 trillion IDR and 166 trillion IDR. CONCLUSIONS: The PD-first policy was found to be more cost-effective compared to the HD-first policy. Budget impact analysis provided evidence on the enormous financial burden for the country if the current practice, where HD dominates PD, continues for the next five years.