ABSTRACT
Background@#Regimens for the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) have been changed from injectable-containing regimens to all-oral regimens. The economic effectiveness of new all-oral regimens compared with conventional injectable-containing regimens was scarcely evaluated. This study was conducted to compare the cost-effectiveness between all-oral longer-course regimens (the oral regimen group) and conventional injectablecontaining regimens (the control group) to treat newly diagnosed MDR-TB patients. @*Methods@#A health economic analysis over lifetime horizon (20 years) from the perspective of the healthcare system in Korea was conducted. We developed a combined simulation model of a decision tree model (initial two years) and two Markov models (remaining 18 years, sixmonth cycle length) to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the two groups. The transition probabilities and cost in each cycle were assumed based on the published data and the analysis of health big data that combined country-level claims data and TB registry in 2013–2018. @*Results@#The oral regimen group was assumed to spend 20,778 USD more and lived 1.093 years or 1.056 quality-adjusted life year (QALY) longer than the control group. The ICER of the base case was calculated to be 19,007 USD/life year gained and 19,674 USD/QALY. The results of sensitivity analyses showed that base case results were very robust and stable, and the oral regimen was cost-effective with a 100% probability for a willingness to pay more than 21,250 USD/QALY. @*Conclusion@#This study confirmed that the new all-oral longer regimens for the treatment of MDR-TB were cost-effective in replacing conventional injectable-containing regimens.
ABSTRACT
Background@#With increasing economic evaluation studies on the treatment of or screening tools for liver diseases that cause hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), interest in the analysis of the medical utilization and costs of HCC treatment is increasing. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the medical utilization and costs of HCC patients, and calculate the cost of main procedures for HCC treatment, including liver transplant (LT), hepatic resection (HR), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). @*Methods@#We analyzed claim data from January to December 2018 from the Health Insurance and Review and Assessment Service–National Patient Sample (HIRA-NPS-2018) dataset, including data of patients diagnosed with HCC (Korean Standard Classification of Diseases code C22.0) who had at least one inpatient claim for HCC. @*Results@#A total of 715 HCC patients were identified. In 2018, the yearly average medical cost per HCC patient was ₩18,460K (thousand), of which ₩14,870K was attributed to HCC. Among the total medical costs of HCC patients, the inpatient cost accounted for the largest portion of both the total medical and HCC-related costs. The major procedures of HCC treatment occurred most frequently in the order of TACE, RFA, HR, and LT. The average medical cost per treatment episode was the highest for LT (₩87,280K), followed by HR (₩10,026K), TACE (₩4,047K), and RFA (₩2,927K). @*Conclusion@#By identifying the medical costs of HCC patients and the costs of the main procedures of HCC treatment, our results provide basic information that could be utilized for cost estimation in liver disease-related economic evaluation studies.
ABSTRACT
Background@#With increasing economic evaluation studies on the treatment of or screening tools for liver diseases that cause hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), interest in the analysis of the medical utilization and costs of HCC treatment is increasing. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the medical utilization and costs of HCC patients, and calculate the cost of main procedures for HCC treatment, including liver transplant (LT), hepatic resection (HR), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). @*Methods@#We analyzed claim data from January to December 2018 from the Health Insurance and Review and Assessment Service–National Patient Sample (HIRA-NPS-2018) dataset, including data of patients diagnosed with HCC (Korean Standard Classification of Diseases code C22.0) who had at least one inpatient claim for HCC. @*Results@#A total of 715 HCC patients were identified. In 2018, the yearly average medical cost per HCC patient was ₩18,460K (thousand), of which ₩14,870K was attributed to HCC. Among the total medical costs of HCC patients, the inpatient cost accounted for the largest portion of both the total medical and HCC-related costs. The major procedures of HCC treatment occurred most frequently in the order of TACE, RFA, HR, and LT. The average medical cost per treatment episode was the highest for LT (₩87,280K), followed by HR (₩10,026K), TACE (₩4,047K), and RFA (₩2,927K). @*Conclusion@#By identifying the medical costs of HCC patients and the costs of the main procedures of HCC treatment, our results provide basic information that could be utilized for cost estimation in liver disease-related economic evaluation studies.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment with retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) versus repeated shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in patients with renal calculi. @*Materials and Methods@#The non-retreatment rates (NRRs) and their respective real-world costs for RIRS and SWL were derived through retrospective analysis of health insurance claims data from 2015 to 2017. Decision tree modeling was performed to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of RIRS. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the robustness of the results. @*Results@#Analysis of the obtained data showed that NRRs of single SWL ranged from 46% to 56%, whereas NRRs of single RIRS ranged from 75% to 93%. Introducing RIRS early in the treatment sequence was observed to be favorable for the reduction of overall failure (overall NRR, 0.997) compared to the results of repeated SWL (overall NRR, 0.928). The implementation of decision tree modeling revealed that the cost per retreatment-avoided increased with the introduction of RIRS at an earlier time (first line, second line, third line, fourth line: 18640 USD, 10376 USD, 4294 USD, 3377 USD, respectively). Probabilistic modeling also indicated that the introduction of RIRS as the first line of treatment was least likely to be cost-effective, when compared to other options of introducing RIRS as the second, third, or fourth line of treatment. @*Conclusion@#Performing RIRS as early as possible