Outcomes and cost of lung cancer patients treated surgically or medically in Catalunya: cost-benefit implications for lung cancer screening programs.

Lung cancer screening programs with computed tomography of the chest reduce mortality by more than 20%. Yet, they have not been implemented widely because of logistic and cost implications. Here, we sought to: (1) use real-life data to compare the outcomes and cost of lung cancer patients with treated medically or surgically in our region and (2) from this data, estimate the cost-benefit ratio of a lung cancer screening program (CRIBAR) soon to be deployed in our region (Catalunya, Spain). We accessed the Catalan Health Surveillance System (CHSS) and analysed data of all patients with a first diagnosis of lung cancer between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016. Analysis was carried forward until 30 months (t = 30) after lung cancer diagnosis. Main results showed that: (1) surgically treated lung cancer patients have better survival and return earlier to regular home activities, use less healthcare related resources and cost less tax-payer money and (2) depending on incidence of lung cancer identified and treated in the program (1-2%), the return on investment for CRIBAR is expected to break even at 3-6 years, respectively, after its launch. Surgical treatment of lung cancer is cheaper and offers better outcomes. CRIBAR is estimated to be cost-effective soon after launch.

Optimisation of cardiac resynchronisation therapy device selection guided by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: Cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: A recent study showed that the presence and characteristics of myocardial scar could independently predict appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies and the risk of sudden cardiac death in patients receiving a de novo cardiac resynchronisation device. DESIGN: The aim was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging-based algorithms versus clinical practice in the decision-making process for the implantation of a cardiac resynchronisation device pacemaker versus cardiac resynchronisation device implantable cardioverter-defibrillator device in heart failure patients with indication for cardiac resynchronisation therapy. METHODS: An incidental Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime progression of a heart failure patient cohort. Key health variables included in the model were New York Heart Association functional class, hospitalisations, sudden cardiac death and total mortality. The analysis was done from the healthcare system perspective. Costs (€2017), survival and quality-adjusted life years were assessed. RESULTS: At 5-year follow-up, algorithm I reduced mortality by 39% in patients with a cardiac resynchronisation device pacemaker who were underprotected due to misclassification by clinical protocol. This approach had the highest quality-adjusted life years (algorithm I 3.257 quality-adjusted life years; algorithm II 3.196 quality-adjusted life years; clinical protocol 3.167 quality-adjusted life years) and the lowest lifetime costs per patient (€20,960, €22,319 and €28,447, respectively). Algorithm I would improve results for three subgroups: non-ischaemic, New York Heart Association class III-IV and ≥65 years old. Furthermore, implementing this approach could generate an estimated €702 million in health system savings annually in European Society of Cardiology countries. CONCLUSION: The application of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging-based algorithms could improve survival and quality-adjusted life years at a lower cost than current clinical practice (dominant strategy) used for assigning cardiac resynchronisation device pacemakers and cardiac resynchronisation device implantable cardioverter-defibrillators to heart failure patients.

Elective or emergency heart transplantation: Cost comparison in a single center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Heart transplantation (HT) is the treatment of choice for selected cases of advanced heart failure. There is an increasing rate of emergency HT in our country. The aim of this study was to determine the cost of HT in our hospital according to emergent vs. elective transplantation status. METHODS: The costs of all consecutive HTs performed in our center between January 2010 and May 2015 were analyzed. The cost of elective and emergent HT was compared. RESULTS: HT mean cost at our institution was €62 203 ± 47 976. Elective HT mean cost was €47 540 ± 25 140, whereas emergent HT cost was €102 733 ± 68 050 (emergency status 1, as regional priority, was €66 077 ± 28 067 and emergency status 0, as the highest national priority, was €136 056 ± 77 080; P < 0.001). Increased emergent HT cost was mainly related to a longer admission (32 ± 24 days vs. 69 ± 53 days; P = 0.006; accounting for a cost of €14 517 ± 12 475 vs. €37 846 ± 31 702; P < 0.001) and increased drug-related expenses (€6622 ± 7465 vs. €15,171 ± 15,758; P < 0.02). Elective HT survival rate was 96%, compared to 68% for emergent HT; P = 0.002. CONCLUSIONS: Elective HT showed a high survival rate with a relatively low and less variable cost, leading to a favorable economic balance in today's public health reimbursement system. In contrast, emergent HT showed a higher cost and a lower survival rate. New treatment strategies should be identified for heart failure patients at risk of requiring emergency HT.

InnovaSEC in Action: Cost-effectiveness of Barostim in the Treatment of Refractory Hypertension in Spain.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: In Spain, 0.3% of patients with hypertension are refractory to conventional treatment. The complications resulting from deficient control of this condition can lead to poor quality of life for the patient and considerable health care costs. Barostim is an implantable device designed to lower blood pressure in these patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of Barostim compared with drug therapy in hypertensive patients refractory to conventional treatment (at least 3 antihypertensive drugs, including 1 diuretic agent). METHODS: We used a Markov model adapted to the epidemiology of the Spanish population to simulate the natural history of a cohort of patients with refractory hypertension over their lifetime. Data on the effectiveness of the treatments studied were obtained from the literature, and data on costs were taken from hospital administrative databases and official sources. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Barostim increased the number of quality-adjusted life years by 0.78 and reduced the number of hypertension-associated clinical events. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in a cohort of men reached 68 726 euros per year of quality-adjusted life. One of the main elements that makes this technology costly is the need for battery replacement. The results were robust. CONCLUSIONS: Barostim is not a cost-effective strategy for the treatment of refractory hypertension in Spain. The cost-effectiveness ratio could be improved by future reductions in the cost of the battery.