Cost-effectiveness analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer in the United States based on PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is associated with low median overall survival. Combination chemotherapy regimens FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel (GemNab) are the new adjuvant treatment standards for resectable pancreatic cancer. PRODIGE-24 and APACT trials demonstrated superior clinical outcomes with FOLFIRINOX and GemNab, each vs gemcitabine monotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FOLFIRINOX vs GemNab for resectable pancreatic cancer in adults from the U.S. payer perspective, in order to inform decision makers about which of these treatments is optimal. METHODS: A Markov model with 3 disease states (relapse free, progressive disease, and death) was developed. Cycle length was 1 month, and time horizon was 10 years. Transition probabilities were derived from PRODIGE-24 and APACT survival data. All cost and utility input parameters were obtained from published literature. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed to obtain total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years (LYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). A 3% annual discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. The effect of uncertainty on model parameters was assessed with 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). RESULTS: Our analysis estimated that the cost for FOLFIRINOX was $40,831 higher than GemNab ($99,669 vs. $58,837). Despite increased toxicity, FOLFIRINOX was associated with additional 0.18 QALYs and 0.25 LYs compared with GemNab (QALY: 1.65 vs. 1.47; LY: 2.09 vs. 1.84). The ICER for FOLFIRINOX vs GemNab was $226,841 per QALY and $163,325 per LY. FOLFIRINOX was not cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $200,000 per QALY, and this was confirmed by the PSA. CONCLUSIONS: Total monthly cost for FOLFIRINOX was approximately 1.7 times higher than GemNab. If the WTP threshold increases to or above $250,000 per QALY, FOLFIRINOX then becomes a cost-effective treatment option. DISCLOSURES: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Add-On Therapies in Cardiovascular Disease: Reviewing ICER's Report and the Potential Effect on Payers.

DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this commentary. The authors have nothing to disclose.

Cost-Effectiveness of Rifaximin Treatment in Patients with Hepatic Encephalopathy.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a complication of cirrhosis of the liver causing neuropsychiatric abnormalities. Clinical manifestations of overt HE result in increased health care resource utilization and effects on patient quality of life. While lactulose has historically been the mainstay of treatment for acute HE and maintenance of remission, there is an unmet need for additional therapeutic options with a favorable adverse event profile. Compared with lactulose alone, rifaximin has demonstrated proven efficacy in complete reversal of HE and reduction in the incidence of HE recurrence, mortality, and hospitalizations. Evidence suggests the benefit of long-term prophylactic therapy with rifaximin; however, there is a need to assess the economic impact of rifaximin treatment in patients with HE. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness of rifaximin ± lactulose versus lactulose monotherapy in patients with overt HE. METHODS: A Markov model was developed in Excel with 4 health states (remission, overt HE, liver transplantation, and death) to predict costs and outcomes of patients with HE after initiation of maintenance therapy with rifaximin ± lactulose to avoid recurrent HE episodes. Cost-effectiveness of rifaximin was evaluated through estimation of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) or life-year (LY) gained. Analyses were conducted over a lifetime horizon. One-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty in results. RESULTS: The rifaximin ± lactulose regimen provided added health benefits despite an additional cost versus lactulose monotherapy. Model results showed an incremental benefit of $29,161 per QALY gained and $27,762 per LY gained with rifaximin ± lactulose versus lactulose monotherapy. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the rifaximin ± lactulose regimen was cost-effective ~99% of the time at a threshold of $50,000 per QALY/LY gained, which falls within the commonly accepted threshold for incremental cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical benefit of rifaximin, combined with an acceptable economic profile, demonstrates the advantages of rifaximin maintenance therapy as an important option to consider for patients at risk of recurrent HE. DISCLOSURES: This analysis was funded by Salix Pharmaceuticals, a division of Bausch Health US. Salix and Xcenda collaborated on the methods, and Salix, Xcenda, Jesudian, and Ahmad collaborated on the writing of the manuscript and interpretation of results. Bozkaya and Migliaccio-Walle are employees of Xcenda. Ahmad reports speaker fees from Salix Pharmaceuticals, unrelated to this study. Jesudian reports consulting and speaker fees from Salix Pharmaceuticals, unrelated to this study. The results from this model were presented at AASLD: The Liver Meeting 2014; November 7-11; Boston, MA.

The Effectiveness and Value of Rivaroxaban and Icosapent Ethyl as Additive Therapies for Cardiovascular Disease.

DISCLOSURES: Funding for this summary was contributed by Arnold Ventures, Commonwealth Fund, California Health Care Foundation, National Institute for Health Care Management (NIHCM), New England States Consortium Systems Organization, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, and Partners HealthCare to the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), an independent organization that evaluates the evidence on the value of health care interventions. ICER's annual policy summit is supported by dues from Aetna, America's Health Insurance Plans, Anthem, Allergan, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Blue Shield of CA, Cambia Health Services, CVS, Editas, Express Scripts, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Harvard Pilgrim, Health Care Service Corporation, Health Partners, Johnson & Johnson (Janssen), Kaiser Permanente, LEO Pharma, Mallinckrodt, Merck, Novartis, National Pharmaceutical Council, Premera, Prime Therapeutics, Regeneron, Sanofi, Spark Therapeutics, and United Healthcare. Pearson is employed by ICER; Synnott was employed by ICER at the time of this report. Ollendorf, Campbell, and McQueen received grants from ICER for work on this review. Ollendorf also reports advisory board, consulting, and other fees from Sarepta Therapeutics, DBV Technologies, EMD Serono, Gerson Lehman Group, The CEA Registry Sponsors, Autolus, Analysis Group, Amgen, AbbVie, Cytokinetics, Aspen Institute/University of Southern California, and University of Colorado, unrelated to this review.

The Cost-effectiveness of Biological Therapy Cycles in the Management of Crohn's Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the cost-effectiveness of continued treatment for patients with moderate-severe Crohn's disease in clinical remission, with a combination of anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha [anti-TNFα] [infliximab] and immunomodulator therapy compared with two different withdrawal strategies: [1] withdrawal of the anti-TNFα therapy; and [2] withdrawal of the immunomodulator therapy, respectively. METHODS: A decision-tree model was constructed mimicking three treatment arms: [1] continued combination therapy with infliximab and immunomodulator; [2] withdrawal of infliximab; or [3] withdrawal of the immunomodulator. Relapses in each arm are managed with treatment intensification and re-institution of the de-escalated drug according to a prespecified algorithm. State-dependent relapse risks, remission probabilities, and quality of life weights were collected from previous published studies. RESULTS: Combination therapy was less costly and more efficient than the withdrawal of the immunomodulator, and more costly and more efficient than withdrawal of infliximab. Whether or not combination therapy is cost-effective, compared with the alternatives, depends primarily on current pharmaceutical prices and the willingness-to-pay per additional quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy using a combination of anti-TNFα [infliximab] and an immunomodulator is cost-effective in the treatment of Crohn's disease compared with treatment cycles in which the immunomodulator is withdrawn. Combination treatment is cost-effective compared with treatment cycles in which infliximab is withdrawn, at prices of infliximab below€192/100 mg, given a willingness-to-pay threshold at€49 020 [Sweden] per additional QALY.

Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium as add-on to ICS/LABA therapy in COPD: A UK perspective.

INTRODUCTION: The cost-effectiveness of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) umeclidinium bromide (UMEC) 62.5 µg as add-on therapy to other maintenance COPD treatments is unknown. METHODS: This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of the following in COPD: UMEC + fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 µg (FF/VI); UMEC + fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 µg (FP/SAL); and UMEC + several alternative choices of inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist (ICS/LABA). The model was informed with direct and indirect data from previously published studies, with a UK perspective and a lifetime horizon. Sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: For the lifetime horizon, compared with FF/VI, FP/SAL and ICS/LABAs, addition of UMEC was associated with incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) of £4050, £7210 and £5780, respectively, and incremental costs per life year gain of £3380, £6020 and £4940. All UMEC-containing regimens resulted in numerically lower exacerbation rates versus comparator regimens over a lifetime horizon. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of UMEC to various ICS/LABA treatments was associated with higher cost than ICS/LABA alone, but was cost-effective in most scenarios.

Cost-effectiveness of roflumilast as an add-on to triple inhaled therapy vs triple inhaled therapy in patients with severe and very severe COPD associated with chronic bronchitis in the UK.

Purpose: Patients with severe COPD are at high risk of experiencing disease exacerbations, which require additional treatment and are associated with elevated mortality and increased risk of future exacerbations. Some patients continue to experience exacerbations despite receiving triple inhaled therapy (ICS plus LAMA plus LABA). Roflumilast is recommended by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease as add-on treatment to triple inhaled therapy for these patients. This cost-effectiveness analysis compared costs and quality-adjusted life-years for roflumilast plus triple inhaled therapy vs triple inhaled therapy alone, using data from the REACT and RE2SPOND trials. Patients and methods: Patients included in the analysis had severe to very severe COPD, FEV1 <50% predicted, symptoms of chronic bronchitis and ≥2 exacerbations per year. Our model was adapted from a previously published and validated model, and the analyses conducted from a UK National Health Service perspective. A scenario analysis considered a subset of patients who had experienced at least one COPD-related hospitalization within the previous year. Results: Roflumilast as add-on to triple inhaled therapy was associated with non-significant reductions in rates of both moderate and severe exacerbations compared with triple inhaled therapy alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for roflumilast as add-on to triple inhaled therapy was £24,976. In patients who had experienced previous hospitalization, roflumilast was associated with a non-significant reduction in the rate of moderate exacerbations, and a statistically significant reduction in the rate of severe exacerbations. The ICER for roflumilast in this population was £7,087. Conclusions: Roflumilast is a cost-effective treatment option for patients with severe or very severe COPD, chronic bronchitis, and a history of exacerbations. The availability of roflumilast as add-on treatment addresses an important unmet need in this patient population.

Nitric Oxide Releasing Nanoparticles as a Strategy to Improve Current Onychomycosis Treatments.

Topical antimicrobials are the ideal mode of onychomycosis treatment for efficient drug delivery and avoidance of sytemic effects associated with oral medications. However, high treatment costs, tissue penetration limitations, and low cure rates have continued to pose major challenges. To capitalize on the progress made by topical efinaconazole solution, efinaconazole was combined with inexpensive, previously-characterized nitric oxide releasing nanoparticles (NO-np), which have been shown to offer sustained nitric oxide release over time and enhanced barrier penetration, while exerting broad spectrum antimicrobial and immunomodulating properties. NO-np were combined with efinaconazole in varying concentrations and applied against reference strains of Trichophyton rubrum using a checkerboard method. Results demonstrated synergism of NO-np+efinaconazole against T. rubrum, which is noteworthy given the barriers present in the topical treatment of onychomycosis, and the multiple potential benefits offered by NO-np. Overall, this study illustrates the untapped potential of nanotechnology in the treatment of disorders of the skin, hair, and nails where drug delivery remains a challenge. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(7):717-720.

The Role of Combination Therapy in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Clinical Report from the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition.

The treatment goal for children suffering from inflammatory bowel disease has been evolving with biologic therapies like anti-tumor necrosis factor agents assuming a more central role in treatment of more aggressive and extensive phenotype. Earlier introduction of anti-tumor necrosis factor agents have shown to be more effective and may even alter the natural history of inflammatory bowel disease. Development of anti-drug antibodies, however, limits long-term usage and leads to dose adjustment in almost half of patients treated with these medications. One of the strategies to minimize the development of anti-drug antibodies has been concomitant use of immunomodulator medications, resulting in fewer infusion reactions and sustained trough levels, potentially lowering the need for dose adjustments. Balanced with these benefits of optimized dosing and likely more sustained response, however, is the concern about increased risk of complications, such as infections and malignancies. The current manuscript reviews the available pediatric literature regarding efficacy, safety, and side effect profile of combination (immunomodulator and biologics) therapy in pediatric Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis, with particular emphasis on cost constraints, and recommendations for selection of patients who would benefit most from combination therapy.

Rethinking the laryngopharyngeal reflux treatment algorithm: Evaluating an alternate empiric dosing regimen and considering up-front, pH-impedance, and manometry testing to minimize cost in treating suspect laryngopharyngeal reflux disease.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Empiric proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trials for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) are common. A majority of the patients respond to acid suppression. This work intends to evaluate once-daily, 40 mg omeprazole and once-nightly, 300 mg ranitidine (QD/QHS) dosing as an alternative regimen, and use this study's cohort to evaluate empiric regimens prescribed for LPR as compared to up-front testing with pH impedance multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) with dual pH probes and high-resolution manometry (HRM) for potential cost minimization. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort review and cost minimization study. METHODS: A chart review identified patients diagnosed with LPR. All subjects were treated sequentially and outcomes recorded. Initial QD/QHS dosing increased after 3 months to BID if no improvement and ultimately prescribed MII and HRM if they failed BID dosing. Decision tree diagrams were constructed to determine costs of two empiric regimens and up-front MII and HRM. RESULTS: Ninety-seven subjects met the criteria. Responders and nonresponders to empiric therapy were identified. Seventy-two subjects (74%) responded. Forty-eight (67% of responders and 49% of all) improved with QD/QHS dosing. Forty-nine (51%) subjects escalated to BID dosing. Twenty-four subjects (33% of responders and 25% of all) improved on BID therapy. Twenty-five subjects (26%) did not respond to acid suppression. Average weighted cost was $1,897.00 per patient for up-front testing, $3,033.00 for initial BID, and $3,366.00 for initial QD/QHS. CONCLUSIONS: An alternate QD/QHS regimen improved the majority who presented with presumed LPR. Cost estimates demonstrate that the QD/QHS regimen was more expensive than the initial BID high-dose PPI for 6 months. Overall per-patient cost appears less with up-front MII and HRM. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 127:S1-S13, 2017.

Extensively Drug-resistant Tuberculosis (XDR-TB): A daunting challenge to the current End TB Strategy and policy recommendations.

Extensively Drug-resistant Tuberculosis (XDR-TB) has emerged as one of the most formidable challenges to the End TB Strategy that has targeted a 95% reduction in TB deaths and 90% reduction in cases by 2035. Globally, there were an estimated 55,100 new XDR-TB cases in 2015 in 117 countries. However, only one in 30 XDR-TB cases had been reported so far. Drug susceptibility test (DST) is the mainstay for diagnosing XDR-TB, but the lack of laboratory facilities in the resource-limited endemic countries limit its uses. A few new drugs including bedaquiline and delamanid, have the potential to improve the efficiency of XDR-TB treatment, but the drugs have been included in 39 countries only. The costs of XDR-TB treatment are several folds higher than that of the MDR-TB. Despite the financing from the donors, there is an urgent need to fill the current funding gap of US$ 2 billion to ensure effective treatment and robust surveillance. In the review article we have addressed current update on XDR-TB, including surveillance, diagnosis and the interventions needed to treat and limit its spread, emphasis on extensive financial support for implementing of current recommendations to meet the goals of End TB Strategy.

Identification of groups with poor cost-effectiveness of peginterferon plus ribavirin for naïve hepatitis C patients with a real-world cohort and database.

BACKGROUND: For decades, peginterferon and ribavirin (PegIFN/RBV) have been the standard-of-care for chronic hepatitis C virus (CHC) infection. However, the actual cost-effectiveness of this therapy remains unclear. We purposed to explore the real-world cost effectiveness for subgroups of treatment-naïve CHC patients with PegIFN/RBV therapy in a large real-world cohort using a whole population database. METHODS: A total of 1809 treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients (829 HCV genotype 1 [G1] and 980 HCV G2) treated with PegIFN/RBV therapies were linked to the National Health Insurance Research Database, covering the entire population of Taiwan from 1998 to 2013 to collect the total medical-care expenses of outpatient (antiviral agents, nonantiviral agents, laboratory, and consultation costs) and inpatient (medication, logistic, laboratory, and intervention costs) visits. The costs per treatment and the cost per sustained virological response (SVR) achieved were calculated. RESULTS: The average medical-care cost was USD $4823 (±$2984) per treatment and $6105 (±$3778) per SVR achieved. With SVR rates of 68.6% and 87.8%, the cost/SVR was significantly higher in G1 than those in G2 patients, respectively ($8285 vs $4663, P < .001). Treatment-naïve G1 patients of old ages, those with advanced fibrosis, high viral loads, or interleukin-28B unfavorable genotypes, or those without a rapid virological response (RVR: undetectable HCV RNA at week 4), or those with complete early virological response (cEVR: undetectable HCV RNA at week 12). Treatment-naïve G2 patients with high viral loads or without RVR or cEVR incurred significantly higher costs per SVR than their counterparts. The cost/SVR was extremely high among patients without RVR and in patients without cEVR. CONCLUSION: We investigated the real-world cost effectiveness data for different subgroups of treatment-naïve HCV patients with PegIFN/RBV therapies, which could provide useful, informative evidence for making decisions regarding future therapeutic strategies comprising costly direct-acting antivirals.

Cost-effectiveness of nitrendipine and hydrochlorothiazide or metoprolol to treat hypertension in rural community health centers in China.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this article is to compare blood pressure (BP)-lowing effects of nitrendipine and hydrochlorothiazide and nitrendipine and metoprolol, and estimate the economic effect of these therapies on hypertension. METHODS: Outpatients (N = 793) 18-70 years of age with stage 2 or severe hypertension (SBP ≥ 160 mmHg and/or DBP ≥ 100 mmHg) were recruited from four randomly selected rural community health centers in Beijing and Jilin. After drug wash out, they were randomly divided into nitrendipine and hydrochlorothiazide group or nitrendipine and metoprolol group. The costs of drug treatment for hypertension were calculated and general estimation, whereas effectiveness was measured as a reduction in SBP and DBP at the end of a 24-week study period. RESULTS: Overall, 623 patients were eligible for the study and after a 24-week follow-up, SBP and DBP were 131.2/82.2 mmHg for the nitrendipine and hydrochlorothiazide group and 131.4/82.9 mmHg for the nitrendipine and metoprolol group and these were not significantly different (P = 0.7974 SBP and P = 0.1166 DBP). Comparing with nitrendipine and metoprolol, the cost of nitrendipine and hydrochlorothiazide was less, and its effectiveness was similar. The cost/effect ratio (US$/mmHg) was 1.4 for SBP and 2.8 for DBP for the nitrendipine and hydrochlorothiazide group, and 1.9 and 3.8 for the nitrendipine and metoprolol group's SBP and DBP values, respectively. The incremental cost per patient for achieving target BP was 5.1. Adverse events were mild or moderate and there were no differences between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Treating hypertension with nitrendipine and hydrochlorothiazide was cost-effective than nitrendipine and metoprolol, and these data will allow more reasonable and efficient allocation of limited resources in low-income countries.

Analysis of the cost-effectiveness of using vonoprazan-amoxicillin-clarithromycin triple therapy for first-line Helicobacter pylori eradication.

BACKGROUND: Vonoprazan (VPZ)-based triple therapy has been reported to have greater efficacy than a proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication. However, because VPZ is more expensive than PPIs such as rabeprazole (RPZ), economic evaluation is essential. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study on 209 patients who underwent first-line eradication of H. pylori infection in Fuyoukai Murakami Hospital from 1 March 2015 to 31 March 2016. Patients who received VPZ, amoxicillin (AMPC) and clarithromycin (CAM) were assigned to the VPZ/AC group (n = 111) and patients who received RPZ, AMPC and CAM to the RPZ/AC group (n = 98). We compared the patients' backgrounds, including age, gender, use of high-dose CAM, past history of peptic ulcer, smoking and drug-related adverse events between the two groups. We defined cost as direct medical costs per patient and effectiveness as the first-line eradication rate in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis and analyzed the cost-effectiveness using the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the patients' backgrounds. The ITT analysis revealed an eradication rate of 94.6% for VPZ/AC and 86.7% for RPZ/AC. VPZ/AC cost 1155.4 Japanese yen (JPY) higher than RPZ/AC (34063.4 vs. 32908.0, JPY). CER of VPZ/AC was less than that of RPZ/AC (360.1 vs. 379.4, JPY per percent) and ICER of VPZ/AC was 147.0 JPY (1.28 Euro (EUR), 1 EUR =115 JPY) per percent. CONCLUSIONS: VPZ/AC was more cost-effective than RPZ/AC as first-line therapy for H. pylori eradication.

Treatment patterns and costs for anti-TNFα biologic therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data regarding anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (anti-TNFα) biologic therapy use in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are limited; therefore, we described treatment patterns and costs of anti-TNFα therapy in PsA patients in the United States. METHODS: PsA patients (N = 990) aged ≥18 years who initiated anti-TNFα therapy were selected from MarketScan claims databases (10/1/2009 to 9/30/2010). Number of patients on first- (n = 881), second- (n = 72), or third- or greater (n = 37) line of anti-TNFα therapy, persistence, time-to-switch or modification, pharmacy and medical costs (measured per patient per month [PPPM]) for each line of therapy were observed during the 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: PsA patients receiving only one line of anti-TNFα therapy remained on first-line for ~17 months while those who switched to second- or third- or greater persisted on first-line for ~11 to 12 months, respectively. Time to first-line modification was longer for patients who switched to third- or greater line therapy (7 months) than those who did not switch or switched to second-line (range, ~2 to 4 months). Time-to-switch and time to first-line modification was progressively shorter with each line of therapy for patients who received third- or greater line. PPPM medical costs were higher for patients who did not switch ($322) than those who switched to second- ($167) or third- or greater ($217) line. PPPM pharmacy costs were greater for patients with third- or greater line therapy ($2539) than those who did not switch ($1985) or switched to second-line ($2045). CONCLUSION: While the majority of patients received only one line of anti-TNFα therapy, a subset of patients switched to multiple lines of therapy during the 3-year follow-up period. Persistence and therapy modifications differed between these patients and those receiving only one line. Overall medical costs were highest for patients who did not switch, and pharmacy costs increased as patients switched to each new line of therapy.

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.

Comparison of the efficacy of culture-based tailored therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication with that of the traditional second-line rescue therapy in Korean patients: a prospective single tertiary center study.

OBJECTIVE: The effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori therapies has declined with an increase in antibiotic resistance. To overcome this problem, the efficacy of tailored H. pylori eradication therapy based on antimicrobial susceptibility testing was compared with that of empirical second-line rescue regimens. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who had persistent H. pylori infection after the first eradication were recommended to undergo culture for determining the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) via gastroscopy, which increased the cost by 300%. Fourteen-day esomeprazole, tripotassium dicitrate bismuthate, metronidazole and tetracycline (EBMT) therapy or esomeprazole, moxifloxacin and amoxicillin (MEA) therapy was performed according to the results of antibiotic susceptibility testing. In case of refusal to undergo culture, the participants were treated with either 14-day empirical EBMT or MEA regimen for second eradication after explaining the complexity, side effects and costs associated with each regimen. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov (NCT 02349685). RESULTS: In the 219 patients included, the intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) eradication rates was 75.3% and 79.8% in the 14-day EBMT group (n = 89), 70.8% and 72.4% in the 14-day MEA group (n = 89) and 87.8% and 100.0% in the 14-day tailored therapy group (n = 41), respectively. Based on the PP analysis, the 14-day tailored therapy group showed a significantly higher eradication rate than the 14-day EBMT or MEA group (both p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Tailored therapy based on H. pylori culture and MIC test could be an option as a second-line eradication regimen in the presence of high level of antimicrobial resistance.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Alternative Antiviral Strategies for the Treatment of HBeAg-Positive and HBeAg-Negative Chronic Hepatitis B in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Seven drugs are licensed for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in the United Kingdom. Which initial treatment, secondary therapy, and whether antivirals should be given alone or in combination are questions of considerable uncertainty. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this model was to undertake a comprehensive economic evaluation of all antiviral treatments for CHB to recommend the most cost-effective therapeutic sequence. METHODS: We developed a probabilistic Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of all clinically relevant antiviral treatment sequences for nucleos(t)ide-naive adults with hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg)-positive or HBeAg-negative CHB. Relative rates of HBeAg seroconversion and viral suppression were obtained from a network meta-analysis. Data on mortality, antiviral drug resistance, durability of response, adverse events, and costs were obtained from published literature. Results are reported in terms of lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and expected net benefit. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, pegylated interferon alpha-2a (peg-IFN α-2a) followed by tenofovir disoproxil fumarate was most effective and cost-effective in HBeAg-positive patients, with a cost of £7488 per QALY gained compared with no treatment. In HBeAg-negative patients, peg-IFN α-2a followed by entecavir was most effective and cost-effective, with a cost of £6981 per QALY gained. The model was robust to a wide range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Peg-IFN α-2a followed by tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or entecavir is the most effective antiviral treatment strategy for people with both variants of CHB. At a cost of less than £10,000 per QALY gained, these sequences are considered cost-effective in England and Wales. The results of this analysis were used to inform 2013 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline recommendations.

Cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin plus a vitamin K antagonist for the treatment of venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprised of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is commonly treated with a low-molecular-weight heparin such as enoxaparin plus a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) to prevent recurrence. Administration of enoxaparin + VKA is hampered by complexities of laboratory monitoring and frequent dose adjustments. Rivaroxaban, an orally administered anticoagulant, has been compared with enoxaparin + VKA in the EINSTEIN trials. The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin + VKA as anticoagulation treatment for acute, symptomatic, objectively-confirmed DVT or PE. METHODS: A Markov model was built to evaluate the costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios associated with rivaroxaban compared to enoxaparin + VKA in adult patients treated for acute DVT or PE. All patients entered the model in the 'on-treatment' state upon commencement of oral rivaroxaban or enoxaparin + VKA for 3, 6, or 12 months. Transition probabilities were obtained from the EINSTEIN trials during treatment and published literature after treatment. A 3-month cycle length, US payer perspective ($2012), 5-year time horizon and a 3% annual discount rate were used. RESULTS: Treatment with rivaroxaban cost $2,448 per-patient less and was associated with 0.0058 more QALYs compared with enoxaparin + VKA, making it a dominant economic strategy. Upon one-way sensitivity analysis, the model's results were sensitive to the reduction in index VTE hospitalization length-of-stay associated with rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin + VKA. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed rivaroxaban to be cost-effective compared with enoxaparin + VKA approximately 76% of the time. LIMITATIONS: The model did not account for the benefits associated with an oral and minimally invasive administration of rivaroxaban. 'Real-world' applicability is limited because data from the EINSTEIN trials were used in the model. Also, resource utilization and costs were based on the US healthcare system. CONCLUSION: Rivaroxaban is a cost-effective option for anticoagulation treatment of acute VTE patients.

[Psychiatric polypharmacy: hazard through drug-drug-interaction and possibilities for prevention]. / Psychiatrische Polypharmazie: Risiken durch Arzneimittel-wechselwirkungen und mögliche Vermeidungsstrategien.

Psychiatric diseases and comorbidity have increased over the past years. Commonly used psychotropic drugs contain a high risk of drug interactions and adverse drug events (ADE). With a frequency of 10-12% psychotropic drugs are, among all pharmaceuticals, the most common cause of hospitalisation due to ADE. During a hospital stay the application of psychotropic drugs can also lead to adverse drug events--sometimes due to drug interactions. Currently, ADEs and drug interactions are the most frequent cause of death for in-patients (18% of all causes of death) with an overall mortality of 0.95%. As studies have shown, hospitals as well as insurers could save a considerable amount of resources by implementing a system with on-ward pharmacists, hereby reducing ADE and re-hospitalisation rates. In recent studies a large amount of current ADEs were rated as preventable. Patient impairment due to ADE is leading to an increase in liability cases with an expected 5% increase of compensation payments in 2011. To evaluate these ADE-related cases, a pharmaceutical assessment should be included in the expert trials, especially since a lack of awareness of medication errors is prevalent. When aiming towards a successful drug therapy, physicians must also consider that cheaper substances may often have an unfavourable drug interaction profile.