Real-life cost-effectiveness of benralizumab in patients with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Availability of clinically effective and cost-effective treatments for severe asthma would be beneficial to patients and national healthcare systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and healthcare expenditure after incorporating benralizumab into the standard treatment of refractory eosinophilic asthma. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional multicentre study of consecutive patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma who received treatment with benralizumab during at least 12 months. Patient follow-up was performed in specialised severe asthma units. The main effectiveness parameters measured were: the avoidance of one asthma exacerbation, a 3-point increase in the asthma control test (ACT) score, and the difference in utility scores (health-related quality of life) between a 1-year baseline treatment and 1-year benralizumab treatment. The health economic evaluation included direct costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: After 1 year of treatment with benralizumab, patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma showed an improvement in all the effectiveness parameters analysed: improvement of asthma control and lung function, and decrease in the number of exacerbations, oral corticosteroid (both as corticosteroid courses and maintenance therapy), and inhaled corticosteroid use. The total annual cost per patient for the baseline and benralizumab treatment periods were €11,544 and €14,043, respectively, reflecting an increase in costs due to the price of the biological agent but a decrease in costs for the remaining parameters. The ICER was €602 per avoided exacerbation and €983.86 for every 3-point increase in the ACT score. CONCLUSIONS: All the pharmacoeconomic parameters analysed show that treatment with benralizumab is a cost-effective option as an add-on therapy in patients with refractory eosinophilic asthma.

[Pharmacoeconomic study of the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease]. / Estudio farmacoeconomico del tratamiento de la enfermedad de Parkinson avanzada.

INTRODUCTION: When oral or transdermal drug therapy in Parkinson's disease becomes less effective, there are three therapies using assisted devices that can reduce motor and non-motor complications: subcutaneous apomorphine infusion pump (SAIP), continuous levodopa/carbidopa duodenal infusion (LDI) and deep brain stimulation (DBS). AIM: Conduct a comparative pharmacoeconomic analysis of the use of SAIP, with LDI and DBS. As a secondary objective arises discuss the profile of the ideal candidate for each of the technicals. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Information on life years gained and quality adjusted life years (QALY) according to Hoehn and Yahr scale was obtained, as well as data on costs and resource use for each of the alternatives. The perspective of the analysis was the National Health System and the time horizon was 5 years for costs and patient´s lifetime for utilities. Outcome measures used were life years gained and QALYs, and incremental cost/utility ratio for comparison. RESULTS: Cost/utility ratio was obtained for each option: 31,956 euros/QALY for DBS, 38,249 euros/QALY for SAIP, and 75,206 euros/QALY for LDI. CONCLUSIONS: Our results allow us to add information about effectiveness of different treatments, as these are presented in gain of years lived in full health (QALY). Data obtained contribute to decision making that determine planning and management of each case, without forgetting patient and neurologist preferences, as well as budgetary limitations.

TITLE: Estudio farmacoeconomico del tratamiento de la enfermedad de Parkinson avanzada.Introduccion. Cuando el tratamiento farmacologico oral o transdermico de la enfermedad de Parkinson pierde eficacia, se dispone de tres terapias mediante dispositivos asistidos que pueden reducir las complicaciones motoras y no motoras: la apomorfina en infusion subcutanea (ASBI), la bomba de infusion duodenal continua de levodopa/carbidopa (IDL) y la estimulacion cerebral profunda (ECP). Objetivo. Efectuar un analisis farmacoeconomico comparativo del uso de ASBI con IDL y ECP; como objetivo secundario, discutir el perfil del candidato ideal para cada una de las tecnicas. Pacientes y metodos. Se extrajo informacion sobre datos de años de vida ganados y años de vida ganados ajustados por calidad (AVAC) segun la escala de Hoehn y Yahr, e informacion sobre costes y consumo de recursos para cada alternativa. La perspectiva del analisis fue la del Sistema Nacional de Salud, y el horizonte temporal fue de cinco años para los costes y toda la vida del paciente para las utilidades. Las medidas de resultado utilizadas fueron los años de vida ganados y AVAC, y en su comparacion se uso la ratio coste-utilidad incremental. Resultados. El coste-utilidad obtenido para cada opcion fue: 31.956 euros/AVAC para la ECP, 38.249 euros/AVAC para la ASBI y 75.206 euros/AVAC para la IDL. Conclusiones. Los resultados permiten evaluar la efectividad y utilidad de los diferentes tratamientos para la enfermedad de Parkinson avanzada, pues se presentan en ganancias de años vividos en plena salud. Los datos obtenidos contribuyen a la toma de decisiones que determinen la planificacion y gestion de cada caso, sin olvidar las preferencias del paciente y del neurologo, asi como las limitaciones presupuestarias.

[Quality of life of patients with asthma on beclomethasone/formoterol. Cost-utility analysis]. / Calidad de vida del paciente asmático con beclometasona/formoterol. Análisis de coste-utilidad.

AIM: To perform a cost-utility analysis on asthmatic patients on beclomethasone/formoterol fixed combination in Primary Health Care. Material and methods Non-probability sampling was used to select a group of asthmatic patients with moderate/severe persistent severity (GEMA 2009), treated with beclomethasone/formoterol fixed combination, over 18 years, had given their informed consent. The study observation period was 6 months. The variables studied were: age, sex, duration of disease, health resources used, analysis of health related quality of life by EQ-5D and SF-36, and the specific Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. For the qualitative variables, the frequency and percentages were calculated, and for the quantitative variables, the mean, SD and 95% CI. Chi-square, Student t-test and ANOVA were used for statistical inference. Comparisons were made with a statistical significance of 0.05. RESULTS: Of the 64 patients that completed the study, 59.4% were female. The mean age was 49 years, and mean disease duration was 93 months. For asthma control, 53% of patients had a prescription pattern of one/12h. All health related quality of life scales were modified with respect to the baseline and the differences were statistically significant. Our patients had a better health related quality of life than Spanish asthma cohort. The incremental cost utility beclomethasone/formoterol versus usual treatment option was € 6,256/QALY.

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of fixed dose antihypertensive drugs]. / Análisis coste-eficacia de los antihipertensivos en dosis fijas.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the efficiency of different fixed-dose combinations of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockers and calcium channel blockers, to use it as a guide to assist the rational prescribing in antihypertensive therapy. METHODS: The efficacy of each drug was obtained from intervention studies randomized, double-blind, made with these combinations and a utility-cost modeling from the model proposed and used by NICE. The perspective of our analysis is the National Health System and the time horizon is long enough to achieve therapeutic goals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per mmHg reduction in BP, percentage of reduction necessary to achieve the therapeutic goals for hypertension control and cost, and finally quantity and quality of life gained with these treatments in patients with hypertension, diabetes. RESULTS: We studied three fixed-dose combinations: amlodipine/olmesartán, amlodipine/valsartan and manidipine/delapril. The cost per mmHg systolic BP ranged from 24.93 to 12.34 €/mmHg, and diastolic BP ranged from 34.24 to 18.76 €/mmHg, depending on the drug used. For an initial value of 165mmHg systolic BP the most efficient treatment to achieve the therapeutic goal of hypertension control (<140mmHg) is manidipine/delapril with a cost of 67.76 €. The use of these drugs to control diabetic and hypertensive patients resulted in all cases being cost-effective (more effective and lower cost compared to "no treatment"). Manidipine/delapril showed the best relation cost-utility (1,970 €/QALY (quality-adjusted life year)) followed by amlodipine/olmesartan and amlodipine/valsartan (2,087 and 2,237 €/QALY, respectively).

[Statistical Process Control (SPC) can help prevent treatment errors without increasing costs in radiotherapy]. / El control estadístico de proceso puede ayudar a prevenir los errores de tratamiento sin aumentar los costes en radioterapia.

PURPOSE: Statistical Process Control (SPC) was applied to monitor patient set-up in radiotherapy and, when the measured set-up error values indicated a loss of process stability, its root cause was identified and eliminated to prevent set-up errors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Set up errors were measured for medial-lateral (ml), cranial-caudal (cc) and anterior-posterior (ap) dimensions and then the upper control limits were calculated. Once the control limits were known and the range variability was acceptable, treatment set-up errors were monitored using sub-groups of 3 patients, three times each shift. These values were plotted on a control chart in real time. RESULTS: Control limit values showed that the existing variation was acceptable. Set-up errors, measured and plotted on a X chart, helped monitor the set-up process stability and, if and when the stability was lost, treatment was interrupted, the particular cause responsible for the non-random pattern was identified and corrective action was taken before proceeding with the treatment. CONCLUSION: SPC protocol focuses on controlling the variability due to assignable cause instead of focusing on patient-to-patient variability which normally does not exist. Compared to weekly sampling of set-up error in each and every patient, which may only ensure that just those sampled sessions were set-up correctly, the SPC method enables set-up error prevention in all treatment sessions for all patients and, at the same time, reduces the control costs.

[Impact in the quality of health care and cost-effectiveness analysis of the reform of an emergency medicine service]. / Evaluación del impacto en la calidad asistencial y análisis coste-efectividad de la reforma de un servicio de urgencias de medicina.

BACKGROUND: To determine the effects that the reform of an emergency department (ED) have on efficacy, health care quality and efficiency. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Reforms consisted of 50% and 34% increases in structural and human resources, respectively. Roles of each ED member were redetermined, new assistance pathways were implemented, and the relationship between ED and the remaining hospital departments was reassessed. As efficacy markers, we determined the number of patients waiting to be attended (Pesp), the waiting time of patients to receive medical assistance (T(esp)),and the total waiting time of patients staying in the ED (T(total)). As health-care quality markers, we determined the percentage of patients leaving ED without having been visited by a physician(IPNV), the percentage of patients who were visited again (IPR),and the percentage of mortality (IPF). We also quantified the number of visits to the ED. All these data were obtained daily over 3 weeks, before (February 1999) and after (February 2000)the reforms. Effectiveness was estimated from the ratio P(total)/T(esp)(E1) and P(total)/P(esp) (E2). Costs were recorded for both periods and a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to study the efficiency. RESULTS: In 2000, the number of visits increased by +12% (CI 95%: 2% to 22%). Despite this increase, we observed an improvement of most efficacy and health-care quality markers after the ED reforms. E1 increased by 996% (CI 95%: 335% to 1,658%) and E2 increased by 186% (CI 95%: -23%to 395%). Cost-effectiveness analysis showed 70% (CI 95%: 33%to 107%) and 56% (CI 95%: 18% to 94%) increases regarding E1 and E2, respectively, after the reforms. CONCLUSIONS: Providing ED with the necessary resources leads to an objective improvement of its efficacy and health-care quality and, consequently, the service and quality perceived by users improve. Despite the total cost increase after the ED reforms, efficiency also improves.