Cost effectiveness of caplacizumab in acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura.

Acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) is a life-threatening disease characterized by thrombotic microangiopathy leading to end-organ damage. The standard of care (SOC) treatment is therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) alongside immunomodulation with steroids, with increasing use of rituximab ± other immunomodulatory agents. The addition of caplacizumab, a nanobody targeting von Willebrand factor, was shown to accelerate platelet count recovery and reduce TPE treatments and hospital length of stay in TTP patients treated in 2 major randomized clinical trials. The addition of caplacizumab to SOC also led to increased bleeding from transient reductions in von Willebrand factor and increased relapse rates. Using data from the 2 clinical trials of caplacizumab, we performed the first-ever cost-effectiveness analysis in TTP. Over a 5-year period, the projected incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in our Markov model was $1 482 260, significantly above the accepted 2019 US willingness-to-pay threshold of $195 300. One-way sensitivity analyses showed the utility of the well state and the cost of caplacizumab to have the largest effects on ICER, with a reduction in caplacizumab cost demonstrating the single greatest impact on lowering the ICER. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, SOC was favored over caplacizumab in 100% of 10 000 iterations. Our data indicate that the addition of caplacizumab to SOC in treatment of acquired TTP is not cost effective because of the high cost of the medication and its failure to improve relapse rates. The potential impact of caplacizumab on health system cost using longer term follow-up data merits further study.

Clarithromycin versus furazolidone for naïve Helicobacter pylori infected patients in a high clarithromycin resistance area.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The increase in antibiotic resistance makes the eradication of Helicobacter pylori more difficult. Considering the limitations of the application of susceptibility-guided therapy, it is important to find an effective empirical regimen. The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of clarithromycin-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (C-BQT) and furazolidone-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy (F-BQT) in naïve H. pylori positive patients. METHODS: This was an open-label, randomized controlled, crossover trial. The trial comprised two phases. In C-F group, patients received C-BQT in the first phase; those who were still positive for H. pylori infection after the first phase entered the second phase to receive F-BQT as rescue treatment. In F-C group, patients were treated with F-BQT firstly and rescued with C-BQT. RESULTS: As first-line treatments, the eradication rates of C-BQT and F-BQT were 89.7% (157/175) and 92.0% (161/175) (P = 0.458) in intention-to-treat analysis and 93.4% (156/167) and 95.8% (161/168) (P = 0.327) in per-protocol analysis, respectively. The cumulative eradication rates of the C-F group and the F-C group were both 94.3% in intention-to-treat analysis (P = 1.000). Cost-effectiveness indexes of F-BQT and C-BQT were 0.54 and 1.24 in first-line treatments. Frequencies of adverse events in F-BQT and C-BQT had no differences (36.0% in C-BQT vs 32.6% in F-BQT, P = 0.499). CONCLUSIONS: Furazolidone-based bismuth-containing quadruple therapy should be preferred for its excellent cost-effectiveness and acceptable safety.

Cost-utility of triple versus dual inhaler therapy in moderate to severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: An important proportion of asthma patients remain uncontrolled despite using inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. Clinical guidelines recommend, in these patients, using add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists (triple therapy) to treatment with high doses of inhaled corticosteroids-long-acting beta2-agonist (dual therapy). The purpose of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of triple therapy versus dual therapy for patients with severe asthma. METHODS: A probabilistic Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with severe asthma in Colombia. Total costs and QALYS of dual and triple therapy were calculated over a lifetime horizon. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of $19,000. RESULTS: The model suggests a potential gain of 1.55 QALYs per patient per year on triple therapy with respect to dual therapy. We observed a difference of US$304 in discounted cost per person-year on triple therapy with respect to dual therapy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$196 in the probabilistic model. In the sensitivity analysis, our base-case results were robust to variations in all assumptions and parameters. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, triple therapy in patients with moderate-severe asthma was cost-effective. Using triple therapy emerges with our results as an alternative before using oral corticosteroids or biologics, especially in resource-limited settings.

Helicobacter pylori eradication regimens in an antibiotic high-resistance European area: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Helicobacter pylori infection (H pylori-I) affects more than half of the global population and consists an important burden to public health and healthcare expenditures, by contributing to many diseases' pathogenesis. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the current nonbismuth quadruple eradication regimens in a high antibiotic resistance area, such as Greece, concerning their cost-effectiveness, especially during financial crisis period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight hundred and nine patients who received eradication treatment against H pylori-I were included to evaluate five different regimens, using amoxicillin, clarithromycin, and metronidazole as antibiotics and one proton-pump inhibitor, based on their current eradication rates. Regimes compared 10-day concomitant use of (a) pantoprazole or (b) esomeprazole; 10-day sequential use of (c) pantoprazole or (d) esomeprazole; and 14-day hybrid using esomeprazole. Cost-effectiveness analysis ratio (CEAR) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated taking into account all direct costs and cases who needed second-line treatment. Additionally, sensitivity analysis was performed to predict all potential combinations. RESULTS: Ten-day concomitant regimen with esomeprazole was characterized by the lowest CEAR (179.17€) followed by the same regimen using pantoprazole (183.27€). Hybrid regimen, although equivalent in eradication rates, was found to have higher CEAR (187.42€), whereas sequential regimens were not cost-effective (CEAR: 204.12€ and 216.02€ respectively). DISCUSSION: This is the first study evaluating the cost-effectiveness of H pylori-I treatment regimens in a high clarithromycin-resistance (≈26.5%) European area, suggesting the 10-day concomitant regimen with generics using esomeprazole 40 mg as the most appropriate one. National and regional guidelines should include cost-effectiveness in their statements, and further studies are required to clarify the necessity of a wide "test and treat" policy for H pylori-I.

Comparing healthcare cost associated with the use of enzyme-inducing and non-enzyme active antiepileptic drugs in elderly patients with epilepsy in the UK: a long-term retrospective, matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In elderly patients (≥65 years of age) with epilepsy who take medications for comorbid conditions, some antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) may alter the metabolism of other treatments and increase the risk of adverse consequences and healthcare utilisation. This analysis compares healthcare costs associated with enzyme-inducing AEDs (EIAEDs) and non-enzyme active AEDs (nEAAEDs) use in elderly patients with epilepsy. METHODS: This retrospective matched cohort study used the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) of UK primary care medical records, linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database. Selected patients with epilepsy were ≥ 65 years and prescribed an EIAED or nEAAED between 2001 and 2010 (index) after ≥1 year without AEDs (baseline) and followed until the first occurrence of the following: end of HES data coverage, end of GP registration, or death; practice's up-to-standard status or addition of an AED belonging to another cohort or discontinuation of the last AED of that cohort. Propensity score matching reduced confounding factor effects between cohorts. Key outcomes included time to cohort treatment failure, time to index AED treatment failure, and direct healthcare costs in 2014 Pound Sterling (£) values. RESULTS: Overall, 1425 elderly patients were included: 964 with EIAEDs and 461 with nEAAEDs. At baseline, the EIAED cohort was older (mean age, 76.2 vs. 75.1 years) and a higher proportion were male. Baseline direct healthcare costs were similar. After matching (n = 210 each), and over the entire follow-up period, median monthly direct healthcare costs were higher for patients taking EIAEDs than nEAAEDs (£403 vs. £317; p = 0.0150, Mann-Whitney U). Costs were higher for patients remaining in the EIAED cohort after 3 follow-up years. The median time to cohort treatment failure for the EIAED cohort was 1110 days vs. 1175 days for the nEAAED cohort. CONCLUSION: Newly treated elderly patients with epilepsy were more likely to be prescribed EIAEDs than nEAAEDs. In matched cohorts, elderly patients with epilepsy treated with EIAEDs had higher average total direct and epilepsy-related healthcare costs than nEAAED-treated patients; this difference was greater than previously reported in the overall adult population. Changing treatment practices could improve patient care and reduce costs.

Sequential Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy in Myanmar; a randomized clinical trial of efficacy and tolerability.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is little published research to examine the best approach to the management of Helicobacter pylori in Myanmar. This study aimed to determine the relative efficacy and tolerability of sequential eradication therapy compared to Myanmar's current recommendation of a concomitant four drug regimen. METHODS: Patients were screened for H. pylori using monoclonal Stool Antigen Testing (SAT). Those testing positive were randomized 1:1 to receive receive Myanmar's first-line regimen of 14 days of concomitant rabeprazole, clarithromycin, amoxycillin and tinidazole (140 pills, cost US$23) or 10 days of sequential rabeprazole, clarithromycin, amoxycillin and tinidazole (60 pills, cost US$10). Adherence and adverse effects were recorded, and the efficacy of the regimens assessed with repeat SAT. RESULTS: Of the 1011 patients screened for H. pylori infection, 313 (31%) tested positive. There was no statistical difference in the cure rates of the two regimens in either intention-to-treat: 128/157 (82%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 75-87%) receiving sequential therapy versus 123/156 (79%; 95% CI: 72-85%) receiving concomitant therapy (P = 0.55) or per-protocol analysis: 125/131 (95%; 95% CI: 90-98) receiving sequential therapy versus 121/130 (93%; 95% CI: 87-96) receiving concomitant therapy (P = 0.42). Side effects of therapy were reported in 54/157 (47%) patients taking sequential therapy compared with 62/156 (53%) taking concomitant therapy, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: In this high-burden, resource-poor setting, less expensive sequential therapy was as effective and as well tolerated as the currently recommended concomitant four drug regimen for eradication of H. pylori.

Cost-effectiveness of omalizumab for the treatment of inadequately controlled severe allergic asthma in Chinese children.

Objective: The addition of omalizumab to standard therapy has proven to be efficacious in children with severe allergic asthma. The goal of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of adding omalizumab to standard treatment for asthma in Chinese pediatric patients.Methods: A Markov model was constructed to project the health and economic outcomes in pediatric patients with severe allergic asthma. Model inputs were obtained from the literature. Cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were measured over a five-year time horizon. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.Results: For the base-case analysis, the addition of omalizumab to standard therapy yielded an incremental cost of $49,047 for 0.232 incremental QALY, led to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $211,217/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were robust for these results.Conclusions: This study found that the addition of omalizumab is not a cost-effective strategy compared with standard therapy for children with severe allergic asthma in China due to its high cost.

Advantage of inhaled corticosteroids as additional therapy to systemic corticosteroids for pediatric acute asthma exacerbations: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Objective: Although the efficacy of systemic corticosteroids (SCs) in acute asthma exacerbations is well established, the fact that many children still require admission to hospital and that SCs have a slow onset of action are cause of concern. For this reason, the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as a therapy added to SCs has been explored, with no clarity about its cost-effectiveness. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ICS in addition to SCs (ICS + SCs) compared to standard therapy with SCs for treating pediatric asthma exacerbations.Methods: A decision-analysis model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of SCs compared to ICS + SCs for treating pediatric patients with acute asthma exacerbations. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Cost data obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia. The main outcome of the model was avoidance of hospital admission.Results: For the base-case analysis, the model showed that compared to SCs, therapy with ICS + SCs was associated with lower total costs (US$88.76 vs.US$97.71 average cost per patient) and a lower probability of hospital admission (0.9060 vs. 0.9000), thus showing dominance.Conclusions: This study shows that compared with standard therapy with SCs, ICS + SCs for treating pediatric patients with acute asthma exacerbations is the preferred strategy because it was associated with a lower probability of hospital admission, at lower total treatment costs.

Cost-effectiveness of a fixed combination of netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA) relative to aprepitant plus granisetron (APR + GRAN) for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): a trial-based analysis.

PURPOSE: To assess, from a United States (US) perspective, the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis using a single dose of netupitant and palonosetron in a fixed combination (NEPA) versus aprepitant plus granisetron (APR + GRAN), each in combination with dexamethasone, in chemotherapy-naïve patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). METHODS: We analyzed patient-level outcomes over a 5-day post-HEC period from a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial of NEPA (n = 412) versus APR + GRAN (n = 416). Costs and CINV-related utilities were assigned to each subject using published sources. Parameter uncertainty was addressed via multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). RESULTS: Compared to APR + GRAN, NEPA resulted in a gain of 0.09 quality-adjusted life-days (QALDs) (4.04 vs 3.95; 95% CI -0.06 to 0.25) and a significant total per-patient cost reduction of $309 ($943 vs $1252; 95% CI $4-$626), due principally to $258 in lower medical costs of CINV-related events ($409 vs $668; 95% CI -$46 to $572) and $45 in lower study drug costs ($531 vs $577). In the PSA, NEPA resulted in lower costs and higher QALD in 86.5% of cases and cost ≤ $25,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained in 97.8% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This first-ever economic analysis using patient-level data from a phase 3 trial comparing neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA) antiemetic regimens suggests that NEPA is highly cost-effective (and in fact cost-saving) versus an aprepitant-based regimen in post-HEC CINV prevention. Actual savings may be higher, as we focused only on the first chemotherapy cycle and omitted the impact of CINV-related chemotherapy discontinuation.

Evaluation of Cost-Utility of Thoracic Interlaminar Epidural Injections.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Chronic thoracic pain, even though not as prevalent as low back and neck pain, appears in approximately 30% of the general population. The severity of thoracic pain and degree of disability seems to be similar to other painful conditions. Despite this severity, interventions in managing chronic thoracic pain are less frequent, and there is a paucity of literature regarding epidural injections and facet joint interventions. RECENT FINDINGS: As with lumbar and cervical spine, a multitude of interventions are offered in managing chronic thoracic pain, including interventional techniques with epidural injections and facet joint interventions. A single randomized controlled trial (RCT) has been published with a 2-year follow-up of clinical effectiveness of the results. However, there have not been any cost-utility analysis studies pertaining to either epidural injections or facet joint interventions in thoracic pain. Based on the results of the RCT, a cost-utility analysis of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections was undertaken. Evaluation of the cost-utility analysis of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids in managing thoracic disc herniation, thoracic spinal stenosis, and thoracic discogenic or axial pain was assessed in 110 patients with a 2-year follow-up. Direct payment data from 2018 was utilized for procedural costs and indirect costs. Costs, including drug costs, were determined by multiplication of direct procedural payment data by a factor of 1.67 or addition of 40% of cost to accommodate for indirect payments and arrive at overall costs. Cost-utility analysis showed direct procedural cost of USD $1943.19, whereas total estimated costs year per QALY were USD $3245.12.

Fixed Combination Calcipotriene and Betamethasone Dipropionate (Cal/BD) Foam for Beyond-Mild Psoriasis: A Possible Alternative to Systemic Medication.

Calcipotriene 0.005% plus betamethasone dipropionate 0.064% (Cal/BD) aerosol foam is a topical agent indicated for the treatment of plaque psoriasis. While topical treatments are typically reserved for milder disease, in clinical trials with Cal/BD foam, the vast majority of patients had beyond-mild psoriasis at baseline, and multiple studies (including subgroup analyses from randomized controlled trials and other small-scale studies) have demonstrated favorable outcomes with the use of Cal/BD foam in this population. The objective of this article is to review existing data on the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of Cal/BD foam used in patients with beyond-mild psoriasis, either alone as topical monotherapy or as adjunctive therapy. Practical recommendations for managing beyond-mild psoriasis with Cal/BD foam are also provided. J Drugs Dermatol. 2020;19(8): doi:10.36849/JDD.2020.5300.

Cost-Effectiveness of Buprenorphine-Naloxone Versus Extended-Release Naltrexone to Prevent Opioid Relapse.

Background: Not enough evidence exists to compare buprenorphine-naloxone with extended-release naltrexone for treating opioid use disorder. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine-naloxone versus extended-release naltrexone. Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a previously reported randomized clinical trial of 570 adults in 8 U.S. inpatient or residential treatment programs. Data Sources: Study instruments. Target Population: Adults with opioid use disorder. Time Horizon: 24-week intervention with an additional 12 weeks of observation. Perspective: Health care sector and societal. Interventions: Buprenorphine-naloxone and extended-release naltrexone. Outcome Measures: Incremental costs combined with incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental time abstinent from opioids. Results of Base-Case Analysis: Use of the health care sector perspective and a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY showed buprenorphine-naloxone to be preferable to extended-release naltrexone in 97% of bootstrap replications at 24 weeks and in 85% at 36 weeks. Similar results were obtained with incremental time abstinent from opioids as an outcome and with use of the societal perspective. Results of Sensitivity Analysis: The base-case results were sensitive to the cost of the 2 treatments and the success of randomized treatment initiation. Limitation: Relatively short follow-up for a chronic condition, substantial missing data, no information on patient out-of-pocket and social service costs. Conclusion: Buprenorphine-naloxone is preferred to extended-release naltrexone as first-line treatment when both options are clinically appropriate and patients require detoxification before initiating extended-release naltrexone. Primary Funding Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health.

Inhaled Corticosteroid-Containing Regimens Reduce Hospitalizations and Healthcare Costs among Elderly Asthmatics: Real-World Validation Using the National Health Insurance Claims Database.

The high rates of mortality and hospitalization among elderly asthmatics, as well as their increasing healthcare costs have become an important public health issue. It would be worthwhile to assess whether inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) can resolve these problems. To explore ICS prescription rates for elderly asthmatics and the factors influencing them and to investigate their association with hospitalization and healthcare costs, we analyzed data from the National Health Insurance Claims Database for the same time frame (December 1 to February 28) across three different periods (2011-2012; 2014-2015; and 2017-2018), from which we identified 6,619, 5,619, and 6,880 elderly individuals, respectively. The prescription rates of ICS increased (52.8%, 65.5% and 68.8%, in the first, second and third survey period, respectively) and inversely the hospital admission rates declined (3.7%, 3.2% and 2.5%, in the first, second and third survey period, respectively). The total healthcare costs per month were significantly lower for patients who received ICS-containing regimens than for those who did not. A multivariate analysis revealed that increasing age, rural residence, receiving a prescription from a clinic, hospital admission, and prescription of asthma medications other than ICS were associated with non-prescription of ICS, whereas cross-boundary treatment increased the ICS-prescription rate. Our study suggests that increases in the prescription rate of ICS are associated with reduced hospital admission rates and lower medical costs in the real-world. ICS prescription rates in rural areas and at clinics, which remain low, need to be increased.

Cost-effectiveness of lipid lowering with statins and ezetimibe in chronic kidney disease.

Statin-based treatments reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in patients with non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD), but it is unclear which regimen is the most cost-effective. We used the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP) CKD-CVD policy model to evaluate the effect of statins and ezetimibe on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health care costs in the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK). Net costs below $100,000/QALY (US) or £20,000/QALY (UK) were considered cost-effective. We investigated statin regimens with or without ezetimibe 10 mg. Treatment effects on cardiovascular risk were estimated per 1-mmol/L reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol as reported in the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration meta-analysis, and reductions in LDL cholesterol were estimated for each statin/ezetimibe regimen. In the US, atorvastatin 40 mg ($0.103/day as of January 2019) increased life expectancy by 0.23 to 0.31 QALYs in non-dialysis patients with stages 3B to 5 CKD, at a net cost of $20,300 to $78,200/QALY. Adding ezetimibe 10 mg ($0.203/day) increased life expectancy by an additional 0.05 to 0.07 QALYs, at a net cost of $43,600 to $91,500/QALY. The cost-effectiveness findings and policy implications in the UK were similar. In summary, in patients with non-dialysis-dependent CKD, the evidence suggests that statin/ezetimibe combination therapy is a cost-effective treatment to reduce the risk of CVD.

Cost-effectiveness of 3 months of weekly rifapentine and isoniazid compared with other standard treatment regimens for latent tuberculosis infection: a decision analysis study.

Background: Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is a critical driver of the global burden of active TB, and therefore LTBI treatment is key for TB elimination. Treatment regimens for LTBI include self-administered daily isoniazid for 6 (6H) or 9 (9H) months, self-administered daily rifampicin plus isoniazid for 3 months (3RH), self-administered daily rifampicin for 4 months (4R) and weekly rifapentine plus isoniazid for 3 months self-administered (3HP-SAT) or administered by a healthcare worker as directly observed therapy (3HP-DOT). Data on the relative cost-effectiveness of these regimens are needed to assist policymakers and clinicians in selecting an LTBI regimen. Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of all regimens for treating LTBI. Methods: We developed a Markov model to investigate the cost-effectiveness of 3HP-DOT, 3HP-SAT, 4R, 3RH, 9H and 6H for LTBI treatment in a cohort of 10000 adults with LTBI. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated from a health system perspective over a 20 year time horizon. Results: Compared with no preventive treatment, 3HP-DOT, 3HP-SAT, 4R, 3RH, 9H and 6H prevented 496, 470, 442, 418, 370 and 276 additional cases of active TB per 10000 patients, respectively. All regimens reduced costs and increased QALYs compared with no preventive treatment. 3HP was more cost-effective under DOT than under SAT at a cost of US$27948 per QALY gained. Conclusions: Three months of weekly rifapentine plus isoniazid is more cost-effective than other regimens. Greater recognition of the benefits of short-course regimens can contribute to the scale-up of prevention and achieving the 'End TB' targets.

Half-dose clarithromycin-containing bismuth quadruple therapy is effective and economical in treating Helicobacter pylori infection: A single-center, open-label, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Clarithromycin-containing bismuth quadruple therapy has been recommended as the first-line therapy for H pylori infection in China. However, its expensive cost and high antibiotic-related adverse reactions are always haunting us. To find a safer, more cost-effective, and high eradicative strategy for Helicobacter treatment, we investigated the efficacy of 14-day bismuth quadruple therapy and different doses of clarithromycin in the first-line treatment. METHOD: A total of 210 patients with H pylori infection were recruited and randomly assigned to half-dose clarithromycin group (esomeprazole 20 mg bid, amoxicillin 1 g bid, clarithromycin 250 mg bid, and bismuth potassium citrate 0.6 g bid) for 14 days or standard-dose clarithromycin group (esomeprazole 20 mg bid, amoxicillin 1 g bid, clarithromycin 500 mg bid, and bismuth potassium citrate 0.6 g bid) for 14 days. A 13 C-urea breath test (13 C-UBT) was performed at least 4 weeks after treatment. The eradication rate of H pylori, the incidence of side effects, and the cost-effectiveness of regimens were evaluated in this study. RESULTS: The eradication frequencies were 86.67% for both groups in the intention-to-treat analysis, while the per-protocol eradication rates were 91% vs. 91.92% (p=0.817). The incidence of adverse events was higher in standard dose group (54.21% vs. 34.29%; p=0.004), especially bitter taste symptom. There was a higher level of costs per person associated with the standard-dose group as compared with half-dose group (ï¿¥804.3 vs ï¿¥654.36). The cost-effectiveness ratio of the half dose was less than that of the standard dose (7.55 vs 9.16 CNY per percent). CONCLUSIONS: A 14-day half-dose clarithromycin-containing bismuth quadruple regimen is as effective as the standard bismuth quadruple therapy at eradicating H pylori, which is better tolerated and more economical. (ChiCTR-ROC-15007406).

Healthcare and associated costs related to type 2 diabetes in youth and adolescence: the TODAY clinical trial experience.

The economic issues related to medical treatments in youth with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are rarely reported and thus not fully understood. The Treatment Options for type 2 Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth clinical trial of youth recently diagnosed with T2D collected healthcare and related cost information from the largest cohort studied to date. Costs related to medical treatments and expenses faced by caregivers were identified over a 2-year period from 496 participants. Data were collected by surveys and diaries to document frequency of use of diabetes care (excluding study laboratory tests), non-diabetes care services and treatments, caregiver time, and expenses related to exercise and dietary activities recommended for patients. Economic costs were derived by applying national cost values to the reported utilization frequency data. Annual medical costs in the first year varied by the treatment group, averaging $1798 in those assigned to metformin alone (M), $2971 to combination drug therapy with metformin + rosiglitazone (M + R), and $2092 to metformin + an intensive lifestyle and behavior change program (M + L). Differences were primarily due to costs related to combination drug therapy. Adult caregiver support costs were higher for participants in the lifestyle program, which was delivered in weekly sessions in the first 6 months. Expenses for purchases to enhance diet and exercise change did not vary by treatment assignment. In year 2, medication costs increased in M and M + L due to the initiation of insulin in subjects who failed to maintain glycemic control on the assigned treatment. Data are reported for use by researchers and those providing healthcare to this vulnerable patient population.

Cost-effectiveness of a tailored Helicobacter pylori eradication strategy based on the presence of a 23S ribosomal RNA point mutation that causes clarithromycin resistance in Korean patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The Helicobacter pylori eradication rate using conventional triple therapy has decreased due to clarithromycin (CAM) resistance in H. pylori. Recently, dual priming oligonucleotide (DPO)-based multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) can be used to detect H. pylori and point mutations in the 23S ribosomal RNA gene causing CAM resistance. This study aimed to evaluate the success rate and cost-effectiveness of tailored H. pylori eradication using DPO-PCR. METHODS: The H. pylori-positive patients diagnosed by a rapid urease test or DPO-PCR were enrolled from a single academic hospital. The patients with positive rapid urease test results received a CAM-based triple regimen. In the tailored therapy group that underwent DPO-PCR testing, patients with A2142G and/or A2143G point mutations were treated with a bismuth-containing quadruple regimen. The cost-effectiveness of H. pylori eradication success was evaluated according to the average cost per patient and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: A total of 243 patients were allocated to the triple therapy group and 124 patients to the tailored therapy group. The first-line eradication rate of H. pylori was significantly higher in the tailored therapy group than in the conventional triple therapy group (92.7% vs 76.5%, P < 0.001). The average costs per patient for tailored therapy were $307.37 and $299.59 for first-line and second-line treatments, respectively. Compared with triple therapy, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of tailored therapy were $3.96 and -$3.81 per patient for first-line and second-line treatments, respectively. CONCLUSION: In Korea, tailored H. pylori eradication using DPO-PCR may be more cost-effective than conventional triple therapy.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of metformin with enzalutamide in the metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer setting.

INTRODUCTION: Enzalutamide (Enza) is an effective treatment for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCPRC). However, Enza is not cost-effective (CE) at willingness to pay (WTP) thresholds from $0-$125 000/quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and is therefore a strain on valuable health care dollars. Metformin (Met) is inexpensive (~$8.00/month) and is thought to improve prostate cancer specific and overall survival compared to those not taking Met. We hypothesized that there must be an added effect Met could provide that would make Enza CE thereby alleviating this financial strain on government health care budgets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We constructed a Markov model and performed a threshold analysis to narrow in on the added effect needed to make such a combination therapy cost-effective at various WTP thresholds. RESULTS: At a WTP threshold of $50 000/QALY Enza + Met is unlikely to be CE unless it increases Enza's efficacy by more than 30%. At a WTP threshold of $100 000, Enza + Met could be CE barring Met adds 18.73% to the efficacy of Enza. CONCLUSIONS: Enza + Met is unlikely to be CE at WTP thresholds less than $100 000/QALY; these results make sense because a therapy that is not CE at these WTP thresholds by itself is unlikely to be CE with an adjuvant therapy that keep a patient on such a treatment for even longer. Finally, our model suggests that the mCRPC setting is not the optimal place to trial adding Met as the relative costs are high and utility values low.

Patient perspectives on de-simplifying their single-tablet co-formulated antiretroviral therapy for societal cost savings.

OBJECTIVES: The incremental costs of expanding antiretroviral (ARV) drug treatment to all HIV-infected patients are substantial, so cost-saving initiatives are important. Our objectives were to determine the acceptability and financial impact of de-simplifying (i.e. switching) more expensive single-tablet formulations (STFs) to less expensive generic-based multi-tablet components. We determined physician and patient perceptions and acceptance of STF de-simplification within the context of a publicly funded ARV budget. METHODS: Programme costs were calculated for patients on ARVs followed at the Southern Alberta Clinic, Canada during 2016 (Cdn$). We focused on patients receiving Triumeq® and determined the savings if patients de-simplified to eligible generic co-formulations. We surveyed all prescribing physicians and a convenience sample of patients taking Triumeq® to see if, for budgetary purposes, they felt that de-simplification would be acceptable. RESULTS: Of 1780 patients receiving ARVs, 62% (n = 1038) were on STF; 58% (n = 607) of patients on STF were on Triumeq®. The total annual cost of ARVs was $26 222 760. The cost for Triumeq® was $8 292 600. If every patient on Triumeq® switched to generic abacavir/lamivudine and Tivicay® (dolutegravir), total costs would decrease by $4 325 040. All physicians (n = 13) felt that de-simplifying could be safely achieved. Forty-eight per cent of 221 patients surveyed were agreeable to de-simplifying for altruistic reasons, 27% said no, and 25% said maybe. CONCLUSIONS: De-simplifying Triumeq® generates large cost savings. Additional savings could be achieved by de-simplifying other STFs. Both physicians and patients agreed that selective de-simplification was acceptable; however, it may not be acceptable to every patient. Monitoring the medical and cost impacts of de-simplification strategies seems warranted.