Economic evaluation of trifluridine and tipiracil hydrochloride in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Greece.

AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of trifluridine and tipiracil hydrochloride (FTD/TPI) compared with best supportive care (BSC) or regorafenib for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who have been previously treated with or are not considered candidates for available therapies including fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapies, anti-VEGF agents and anti-EGFR agents in Greece. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was locally adapted from a third-party payer perspective over a 10 year time horizon. Efficacy data and utility values were extracted from published studies. Resource consumption data were obtained from local experts using a questionnaire developed for the purpose of the study and was combined with unit costs obtained from official sources. All costs reflect the year 2017 in euros. Primary outcomes were patients' life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per QALY and LYs gained. RESULTS: Total life time cost per patient for FTD/TPI, BSC and regorafenib was estimated to be €10,087, €1,879 and €10,850, respectively. In terms of health outcomes, FTD/TPI was associated with 0.25 and 0.11 increment in LYs compared with BSC and regorafenib, respectively. Furthermore, FTD/TPI was associated with 0.17, and 0.07 increment in QALYs compared with BSC and regorafenib, resulting in ICERs of €32,759 per LY gained and €49,326 per QALY gained versus BSC. Moreover, FTD/TPI was a dominant alternative over regorafenib. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that FTD/TPI may represent a cost-effective treatment option compared with other alternative therapies as a third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in Greece.

A Targeted Literature Review Examining Biologic Therapy Compliance and Persistence in Chronic Inflammatory Diseases to Identify the Associated Unmet Needs, Driving Factors, and Consequences.

Chronic inflammatory diseases (CIDs) represent a substantial clinical and economic burden to patients, providers, payers and society overall. Biologics, such as tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), have emerged as effective treatment options for patients with CIDs. However, the therapeutic potential of biologics is not always achieved in clinical practice, with results from studies examining the use of biologics in real-world settings suggesting lower levels of treatment effectiveness compared with clinical trial results. Using a targeted approach, this literature review demonstrates that compliance and persistence with biologic therapy is suboptimal and that this has implications for both clinical outcomes and treatment costs. The review identified a variety of predictors of treatment compliance and persistence, including increased age, female gender, presence of comorbidities, increased disease activity, longer disease duration, smoking, increased body mass index, higher biologic treatment dose, higher treatment cost and lower health-related quality-of-life scores. Patients often cited factors associated with medication delivery as a reason for non-compliance and non-persistence, and device-related improvements to treatment delivery were associated with higher rates of compliance and persistence. The articles identified in this review provide insights that have the potential to help guide the development of new solutions to improve disease management and optimize treatment regimens. This has the potential to benefit patients' health by improving clinical outcomes and to reduce the burden to society by limiting the economic impact of patients' disease. FUNDING: UCB Pharma.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Rivaroxaban for Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism in Greece.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprising deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a major healthcare concern that results in substantial morbidity and mortality with great economic burden for healthcare systems. Hence, the need for effective and efficient treatment of patients with VTE is important for both clinical and economic reasons. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared to standard of care (SoC) with enoxaparin followed by dose-adjusted vitamin-K antagonists for the treatment of DVT and PE in Greece. METHODS: An existing Markov model was locally adapted from a third-party payer perspective to reflect the management and complications of DVT and PE in the course of 3-month cycles, up to death. The clinical inputs and utility values were extracted from published studies. Direct medical costs, obtained from local resources, were incorporated in the model and refer to year 2017. Both costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was calculated. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was carried out to deal with uncertainty. RESULTS: The base-case analysis showed that rivaroxaban in 3- and 6-month treatment duration for DVT and PE, respectively, as this is the common clinical practice in Greece, was associated with a 0.02 and 0.01 increment in QALYs compared to SoC, respectively. Rivaroxaban was associated with a reduced total cost in DVT (€85) but with an additional total cost in PE (€2) compared to SoC. Therefore, rivaroxaban was a dominant (less costly, more effective) and cost-effective (ICER: €177) alternative over SoC for the management of DVT and PE, respectively. PSA revealed that the probability of rivaroxaban being cost effective at a threshold of €34,000 per QALY gained was 99% and 81% for DVT and PE, respectively. CONCLUSION: Rivaroxaban may represent a cost-effective option relative to SoC for the management of DVT and PE in Greece.

Cost-Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin as Add-On to Metformin for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Greece.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic progressive disease that has been spread worldwide over the past three decades and associated with increased morbidity and mortality resulting in considerable socioeconomic implications for national healthcare systems. Effective management of disease is highly needed ensuring patients receive the best possible care within the available budget. The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor, compared with a sulfonylurea (SU) or a dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i), when added to metformin, in T2DM patients inadequately controlled on metformin alone in Greece. METHODS: The published and validated Cardiff diabetes model, a lifetime micro-simulation model, was adapted to a Greek healthcare setting to determine the incidence of micro- and macro-vascular complications and diabetes-specific and all-cause mortality. Clinical, cost, and utility data were retrieved from literature and assigned to model parameters to calculate total quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and total costs as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The analysis was conducted from the perspective of a third-party payer in Greece. Uncertainty surrounding important model parameters was explored with univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). RESULTS: Over a patient's lifetime, dapagliflozin was associated with 0.48 and 0.04 incremental QALYs compared with SU and DPP-4i, respectively, at additional costs of €5142 and €756, respectively. The corresponding ICERs were €10,623 and €17,695 per QALY gained versus the treatment with SU and DPP-4i, respectively. Results were robust across various univariate and scenario analyses. At the defined willingness-to-pay threshold of €34,000 per QALY gained, PSA estimated that treatment with dapagliflozin had a 100 % and 79.7 % probability of being cost-effective relative to the SU and DPP-4i treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin in combination with metformin was shown to be a cost-effective treatment alternative for patients with T2DM whose metformin regimen does not provide sufficient glycemic control in a Greek healthcare setting.

Comprehensive overview: efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness of irbesartan.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension represents a major health problem, affecting more than one billion adults worldwide. Irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, is considered to be a highly effective treatment in the management of hypertension. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability profile, and cost-effectiveness of treatment with irbesartan in hypertension. METHODS: A review of the literature was conducted using the electronic PubMed and Cochrane Library databases and the Health Economic Evaluations Database of search terms relating to irbesartan efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness, and the results were utilized. RESULTS: Findings from the present analysis show that irbesartan either as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive agents can achieve significant reductions in blood pressure, both systolic and diastolic, compared with alternative treatment options. Irbesartan was also found to have a renoprotective effect independent of its blood pressure-lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Furthermore, irbesartan demonstrated an excellent safety and tolerability profile, with either lower or equal adverse events compared with placebo and other alternative treatments. In terms of economic analyses, compared with other antihypertensive therapy alternatives, irbesartan was found to be a preferred option, that is less costly and more effective. CONCLUSION: The evidence indicates that treating patients with hypertension alone or with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy using irbesartan can control hypertension, prolong life, and reduce costs in relation to existing alternatives.

Photoselective GreenLight™ laser vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate in Greece: a comparative cost analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) using the 120W GreenLight™ laser with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in terms of their cost to the Greek National Health Service (NHS) or to the Public Insurance Sickness Funds (PISF). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective cost evaluation with 1-year follow-up of 60 patients with infravesical obstruction of benign prostatic hyperplasia origin who underwent o either TURP (n=30) or PVP (n=30). The cost of equipment, consumables, anesthesia, drugs, inpatient hospitalization, and complication management within 1 year postoperatively were used to calculate the cost for the NHS. PISF reimbursements to hospitals and PISF opportunity cost from the lost days of work were used to calculate PISF perspective. RESULTS: From the NHS perspective, the average cost was €1722 ($2371) for PVP and €2132 ($2935) for TURP. From the PISF perspective, the average cost for hospital reimbursement was €1348 ($1856) in the case of PVP and €938 ($1291) in the case of TURP. Nevertheless, in the case of patients still working, total PISF reimbursement cost was €2038 ($2806) for PVP and €2666 ($3671) for TURP. CONCLUSIONS: PVP for 40 to 70 cc prostates is preferable from the perspective of the NHS. From the perspective of PISF, PVP is less costly only in the case of patients who are still working, because patients who undergo PVP stay much less out of work. Further investigation in larger populations as well as in different protocols of PVP hospitalization and return to work times is deemed necessary to reinforce the conclusions of this study.

Health technology assessment: what is it? Current status and perspectives in the field of electrophysiology.

Health technology assessment (HTA) is the multidisciplinary field of policy analysis that studies medical, social, ethical, and economic implications of the development, diffusion, and use of health technologies. Its worldwide diffusion needs to be understood in the context of evidence-based healthcare delivery policy, and it is strongly driven by the search for new cost-containment policies by the governments of universal healthcare systems. This article presents the three main pillars of HTA: evaluating comparative effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and organizational impact. While comparative analysis is more familiar to cardiologists, cost-effectiveness and organizational studies are less widely known because they expand the perspective of the evaluation to institutional settings and society at large and require significant inter-disciplinary work. Sound economic and organizational studies that extend comparative effectiveness studies may facilitate dialogue between medical science and policymaking.

XELOX versus FOLFOX6 as an adjuvant treatment in colorectal cancer: an economic analysis.

OBJECTIVES: An economic analysis (based on interim data from a long-term, randomised, multi-centre, controlled, clinical trial) to evaluate chemotherapy with XELOX (capecitabine/oxaliplatin) versus FOLFOX6 (5Fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin) as an adjuvant treatment for high risk colorectal cancer patients in Greece. METHODS: As survival rate was the same in the two arms, a cost-minimisation analysis was carried out, from the perspectives of the National Health Service (NHS), Social Insurance Funds (SIF) and patients in Greece. Patient data were combined with 2008 unit prices to estimate the total cost of patient care, the patients' travelling expenditure and their productivity losses. Raw data were bootstrapped 5000 times in order to allow statistical testing. RESULTS: From an NHS perspective, the mean chemotherapy cost was 8762 euro with FOLFOX6 and 9713 euro with XELOX; costs of administration and hospitalisations were 5154 euro and 1050 euro, respectively. Total treatment cost with FOLFOX6 reached 17,480 euro and with XELOX 12 525 euro, a difference of 4955 euro (p < 0.001) in favour of the latter therapy. From an SIF perspective, the total cost of treatment was 16,240 euro with FOLFOX6 and 12,617 euro with XELOX, a reduction of 3623 euro (p < 0.001) with the latter therapy. Mean patient travelling cost was 184 euro with FOLFOX6 and 80 euro with XELOX, a difference of 104 euro (p < 0.001). Mean productivity loss was 100 euro with FOLFOX6 and 31 euro with XELOX, a difference of 69 euro (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy combining oral capecitabine and oxaliplatin reduces total treatment cost for the Greek National Health Service and Social Insurance Funds, mainly through a reduction in the cost of administration. From patients' perspective, it reduces travelling expenditure and productivity losses. Therefore, this combination may be a cost-effective approach for the management of colorectal cancer patients who have had surgery in Greece. This is an analysis alongside a clinical trial, and should be interpreted in this specific context in which it was undertaken.