[Cost-effectiveness analysis of a vaccine for Helicobacter pylori in southern Europe]. / Análisis coste-efectividad de una vacuna para Helicobacter pylori en el sur de Europa.

OBJECTIVE: There is sufficient evidence on the feasibility of a vaccine to prevent Helicobacter pylori infection. Modeling studies in low prevalence environments report a very probable long-term cost-effectiveness. The objective of this study was to quantify its efficiency in a local context. METHODS: The evolution of a cohort of newborns was simulated through a compartmental model representing a series of clinical situations regarding H. pylori infection and related diseases. The model was run under the assumption of both vaccination in the first year of life and no intervention. The time horizon was set as equivalent to the life expectancy and the perspective of the health system was taken into account. RESULTS: Vaccination against H. pylori would cost an average of €2,168/person more than no intervention. This would yield an average additional 0.32 quality-adjusted life years gained (QALY), which would entail an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €7,196/QALY. For a willingness to pay of €24,506/QALY, 99.96% of the simulations were cost-effective at eighty-four years old. This threshold was crossed thirty years after vaccination. The variables that carried the most weight in explaining the variability of the ICER were, in this order, vaccine effectiveness, the incidence of infection in young children, and the price of the vaccine. Vaccination would cease to be cost-effective with a price greater than €3,634/dose or with effective population coverage less than 11%. CONCLUSIONS: When implemented in an environment with the epidemiological and economic characteristics of Southern Europe, a prophylactic vaccination against H. pylori would be cost-effective in the long run.

OBJECTIVE: Existen pruebas de la factibilidad de una vacuna para prevenir la infección por Helicobacter pylori. Modelizaciones en entornos de baja prevalencia informan de una muy probable coste-efectividad a largo plazo. El objetivo de este estudio fue cuantificar su eficiencia en un contexto local. METHODS: Se simuló la evolución de una cohorte de nacidos a través de un modelo compartimental representativo de varios estados clínicos en relación a la infección por H. pylori. Se ejecutó dicho modelo bajo las premisas de vacunación en el periodo de lactante y de no intervención. El horizonte temporal fue equivalente a la esperanza de vida y se tuvo en cuenta la perspectiva del sistema de salud. RESULTS: La vacunación frente a H. pylori costaría de media 2.168 €/persona más que la no intervención. Con ello se obtendrían 0,32 años de vida ganados ajustados por calidad (AVAC), lo que implicaría una razón de coste-efectividad incremental (RCEI) media de 7.196 €/AVAC. Para una disposición a pagar de 24.506 €/AVAC, el 99,96% de las simulaciones resultaron coste-efectivas al alcanzar el horizonte temporal y se cruzó dicho umbral a partir de los treinta años de la vacunación. Las variables que más peso tuvieron para explicar la variabilidad de la RCEI fueron, en este orden, la efectividad vacunal, la incidencia de la infección en la primera infancia y el precio de la vacuna. La vacunación dejaría de ser coste-efectiva con un precio mayor de 3.634€/vial o con una cobertura poblacional efectiva menor del 11%. CONCLUSIONS: Una vacunación frente a la infección por H. pylori administrada en la infancia sería coste-efectiva a largo plazo en un entorno con las características epidemiológicas y económicas del sur de Europa.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the human recombinant epidermal growth factor in the management of patients with diabetic foot ulcers.

Introduction: Diabetic foot ulcers are one of the most frequent complications of diabetes; such ulcers cause an increase in the costs of the health care of the diabetic patient and can even cause disability due to amputation in the patient. Although a proportion of patients achieve a spontaneous closure of ulcers, others require medical or surgical treatment. Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of the intra- and perilesional application of recombinant human epidermal growth factor (rhEGF), as opposed to conventional therapy for the management of patients diagnosed with Wagner's 3 or 4 diabetic foot ulcer in Colombia. Methodology: Using a Markov model, the process of care of a diabetic patient with diagnosis of Wagner's 3 or 4 ulcer receiving conventional treatment, or intra- and perilesional rhEGF, is configured. The evaluation cycles of the treatments are weekly over a 5-year horizon and the outcomes evaluated are quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the number of amputations avoided by each treatment scheme, in addition to the total costs for treatments. Results: For the analysed base case, in the outcome of amputations, it was found that the factor presents 39 fewer amputations, in a cohort of 100 patients, compared with conventional treatment. Likewise, QALYs are 0.65 more with the use of rhEGF in an average patient. The estimated cost-utility ratio for the base case would be below the threshold established for Colombia. Conclusions: The intra- and perilesional application of rhEGF is a more effective therapeutic option than conventional therapy in the treatment of patients with Wagner's 3 or 4 diabetic foot ulcers and is cost-effective, taking as an outcome the QALYs for Colombia from the perspective of the health system.

Public health impact and economic benefits of quadrivalent influenza vaccine in Latin America.

Annual trivalent influenza vaccines (TIV) containing 2 A strains and one B lineage have been recommended for the prevention of influenza in most of Latin American countries. However, the circulation of 2 B lineages (Victoria and Yamagata) and difficulties in predicting the predominating lineage have led to the development of quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIV), including both B lineages. Thus, the objective was to estimate the public health impact and influenza-related costs if QIV would have been used instead of TIV in 3 Latin American countries. We used a static model over the seasons 2010-2014 in Brazil, 2007-2014 in Colombia and 2006-2014 in Panama, focusing on population groups targeted by local vaccination recommendations: young children, adults with risk factors and the elderly. In Brazil, between 2010 and 2014, using QIV instead of TIV would have avoided US$ 6,200 per 100,000 person-years in societal costs, based on 168 influenza cases, 89 consultations, 3.2 hospitalizations and 0.38 deaths per 100,000 person-years. In Colombia and Panama, these would have ranged from US$ 1,000 to 12,700 (based on 34 cases, 13-25 consultations, 0.6-8.9 hospitalizations and 0.04-1.74 deaths) and from US$ 3,000 to 33,700 (based on 113 cases, 55-82 consultations, 0.5-27.8 hospitalizations and 0.08-6.87 deaths) per 100,000 person-years, respectively. Overall, the broader protection offered by QIV would have reduced the influenza humanistic and economic burden in the 3 countries. Despite the lack of local data leading to several extrapolations, this study is the first to give quantitative estimates of the potential benefits of QIV in Latin America.

Análisis de costo-utilidad del uso de detemir en pacientes con diabetes tipo 2 / Cost-Utility Analysis of the Use of Detemir in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes / Análise custo-efetividade para o uso do detemir em pacientes com Diabetes tipo 2

Objetivo: realizar un análisis de costo-utilidad para evaluar el tratamiento con las diferentes opciones de insulina en pacientes diabéticos tipo 2. Metodología: partiendo del análisis realizado previamente por Romero et al., se actualizó la información y se incluyó un análisis específico para calidad de vida. El modelo de Markov simuló pacientes tratados con insulina NPH, detemir o glargina. Se consideraron los eventos de hipoglucemia más sus complicaciones. Los costos corresponden al precio máximo de regulación por dosis. Los costos de eventos son tomados de registros del sistema de información de transacciones de entidades prestadoras de salud al año 2014. Resultados: los avac con detemir se calculan en 2,604, en comparación con 2,545 con glargina y 2,533 con NPH. Los análisis de sensibilidad muestran dominancia de detemir. Conclusiones: detemir es una opción favorable por su seguridad, efectividad y costo, demostrando beneficios medidos en avac sobre sus comparadores.

Objective: Performing a cost-utility analysis to assess the treatment with different insulin options in patients with Type 2 Diabetes. Methodology: Based on the analysis previously performed by Romero et al., we updated the information and included an specific analysis for the quality of life. The Markov model simulated patients treated with NPH, determir, or glargine insulin. We considered the hypoglycemia events and their complications. The costs corresponded to the maximum regulated price per dose. The event costs were taken from the transaction information system records of health care providers in 2014. Results: The qaly with detemir are calculated as 2.604, compared to 2.545 with glargine, and 2.533 con NPH. The sensitivity analysis show determir dominance. Conclusions: Detemir is a favorable option due to its safety, effectiveness, and cost, with proven benefits measured in qaly over the other items being compared.

Objetivo: realizar análise de custo-efetividade para avaliar o tratamento com as diferentes opcoes de insulina em pacientes diabéticos tipo 2. Metodologia: partindo da análise realizada previamente por Romero et al., foi atualizada a informação e incluiu-se análise específica para qualidade de vida. O modelo de Markov simulou pacientes tratados com insulina NPH, detemir ou glargina. Eventos de hipoglicemia foram considerados além das complicares. Os custos correspondem ao preco máximo de regulamentação por dose. Os custos de eventos sao tirados de registos do sistema de informação de transações de entidades prestadoras de saúde no ano 2014. Resultados: os avac do detemir calculam-se em 2,604, em comparação com 2,545 da glargina e 2,533 do NPH. As análises de sensibilidade demostram dominancia de detemir. Conclusoes: detemir é uma opcao favorável por sua seguranca, efetividade e custo, demostrando beneficios medidos em avac sobre os comparadores.

Análisis de costo-efectividad del uso de Detemir en pacientes con diabetes tipo 2 en riesgo de presentar eventos cardiovasculares y muerte en Colombia / Cost-effectiveness of using Detemir for patients with type 2 diabetes in risk of cardiovascular events and death in Colombia

Objetivo: Analizar la costo-efectividad del uso de Detemir frente a otras insulinas (Glargine e NPH) para tratamiento de diabetes tipo 2 en Colombia. Métodos: Mediante un modelo deMarkov se analizó la costo-efectividad desde la perspectiva del tercero pagador, en una cohorte de 10000 personas de 45 años, en un horizonte temporal de 5 años. Como desenlaces se evaluaron eventos cardiovasculares y muertes evitadas -medidas en Años de Vida Salvados (AVS)- relacionadas con eventos de hipoglicemia severa. Los costos se tomaron de bases de datos de prestadores de servicios de salud a precios 2013. Se utilizó una tasa de descuento del 3% para costos y resultados. Se aplicó un análisis de sensibilidad para comprobar la robustez del modelo. Resultados: Detemir presentó un menor número de eventos de hipoglicemia severa (730) frente a Glargine (1.910) y NPH (2.140), y un menor número de eventos macrovasculares (1.053) y microvasculares (1.019) frente a Glargine (1.116,1.037, respectivamente) y NPH (1.129 y 1.042, respectivamente). Detemir evitó 122 y 147 muertes frente a Glargine y NPH, respectivamente, equivalentes a 4.233 y 3.513 AVS, respectivamente. Tras el descuento el ICER por AVS con Detemir frente a Glargine fue de USD $ 998,39 y frente a NPH fue de USD $4.096,86. En el análisis de sensibilidad tipo Montecarlo, Detemir se mantiene costo-efectivo en el 100% de los casos, según el umbral propuesto por la OMS. Conclusiones: Detemir, desde la perspectiva del tercero pagador, es costo-efectivo frente a Glargine y NPH para tratamiento de diabetes tipo 2 en Colombia.

Objective: Analyze the cost-effectiveness of using Detemir versus using other insulins (Glargine and NPH insulin) for treatment of type 2 diabetes in Colombia. Methods: A Markov model was used to evaluate cost-effectiveness of Determir from a third-party payer's perspective in a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients, aged 45 years, with type 2 diabetes in risk of cardiovascular events and death in a 5-year time horizon. Both cardiovascular events and deaths avoided -expressed in Life-Year Saved- related to severe hypoglycemia events were considered as outcomes. Costs were obtained from health care providers databases at 2013 prices. A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and outcomes. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the robustness of the model. Results: In the model, using Detemir has fewer numbers of severe hypoglycemic events (730) versus NPH insulin (1,910) and Glargine (2,140), and fewer number of macrovas-cular (1,053) and microvascular (1,019) events versus Glargine (1,116; 1,037) and NPH (1,129; 1,042). Using Detemir, 122 and 147 deaths were avoided compared to Glargine and NPH respectively; those figures are respectively equivalent to 4,233and 3,513 Life-Year Saved. As discount was applied the ICER per Life-Year Saved for Detemir versus Glargine was US$ 998.39 and USD 4,096.86 against NPHinsulin. In the Montecarlo sen-sitivity analysis Detemir remains cost effective in 100% of cases according to the WHO-proposed threshold. Conclusion: From a third-party payer's perspective,Detemir is cost-effective compared to Glargine and NPH insulin for treatment of type 2 diabetes in Colombia.