The cost-effectiveness of 5-FU-SA in the treatment of actinic keratoses of the face and scalp in the UK secondary care setting.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of Actikerall 1 (5-FU-SA) vs cryotherapy in a secondary care setting in the UK, for lesion-directed treatment in patients with actinic keratoses (AK) of the face and scalp. METHODS: The model was a simple decision tree, with a 6-month time horizon. The perspective was that of the UK National Health Service (NHS). Modeled treatment effects included reported per-patient histological clearance and recurrence rates. Cost inputs comprised professional consultation time and cost of medication. Health-related utility estimation followed previously published methodology. Adverse events were not modeled. The key data and model structural assumptions followed expected UK practice. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess structural and parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: 5-FU-SA was found to be less costly (-£204) and more effective (+0.001 QALY) in base case and sensitivity analyses. In the probabilistic analysis there was 100% probability of being cost-effective over cryotherapy at £20,000 willingness to pay. Cost of professional time was a key driver of the model outcome. 5-FU-SA remained dominant across a range of scenario analyses, including exploration of assumptions around setting of care. LIMITATIONS: The time horizon of the analysis was short and data were not extrapolated beyond the duration of the clinical trial; however, this approach is consistent with likely follow-up of an AK patient. The clinical outcomes observed in the trial were based on a large proportion of cryotherapy patients undergoing an additional cycle of treatment; this may not occur or be required in an experienced secondary care setting. CONCLUSION: 5-FU-SA could be considered as a cost-effective choice for treatment of AK lesions of the face and scalp in secondary and mixed care settings in the UK. Use of 5-FU-SA in patients who would otherwise be managed with cryotherapy has the potential to result in cost savings.

A cost-utility analysis of ingenol mebutate gel for the treatment of actinic keratosis: a Scottish perspective.

BACKGROUND: Actinic keratosis (AK) is a UV-induced, pre-malignant skin condition that is common in adults over 60 years of age with fair skin in Scotland. The most commonly prescribed first-line treatment for AK in Scotland is currently diclofenac gel (3 %). Ingenol mebutate gel is a recently developed topical therapy available in two strengths for the treatment of AK lesions on the face and scalp (150 mcg/g once daily for 3 consecutive days) or trunk and extremities (500 mcg/g once daily for 2 consecutive days). OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of two strengths of ingenol mebutate gel developed to treat AK lesions on the face and scalp (150 mcg/g once daily for 3 consecutive days) or trunk and extremities (500 mcg/g once daily for 2 consecutive days) with other first-line AK therapies including diclofenac gel, 5-FU, 5-FU/salicylic acid, and cryotherapy for the first-line treatment of AK in adult patients, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in Scotland. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was conducted using a decision-tree approach to calculate the costs and benefits of different treatment strategies for AK on the face and scalp or trunk and limbs over a 12-month time horizon. Data on the relative efficacy of treatments were obtained from a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Utility scores and resource-use data were obtained from published sources. RESULTS: Over 12 months, ingenol mebutate 150 mcg/g gel and 500 mcg/g gel were cost-effective compared with the most commonly used topical therapy in Scotland, diclofenac (3 %) gel, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY, with a minimal additional cost of £43 and £105, respectively per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Ingenol mebutate gel is a cost-effective therapy for the first-line treatment of AK from a Scottish NHS perspective.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of 5-fluorouracil 0.5%/salicylic acid 10% in the treatment of actinic keratosis in Spain.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of 5-fluorouracil 0.5%/salicylic acid 10% (5-FU/SA) in the treatment of isolated hyperkeratotic actinic keratosis lesions in Spain. METHODS: An analytical decision-making model was constructed to compare whether 5-FU/SA was a cost-effective option compared with cryotherapy from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System with a time horizon of 6 months. Costs were expressed in 2014 euros. RESULTS: The cost of patients with hyperkeratotic actinic keratosis treated with 5-FU/SA or cryotherapy was €266 and €285, respectively. 5-FU/SA was associated with higher rates of treatment success and, consequently, more quality-adjusted life years, than cryotherapy. Therefore, 5-FU/SA was the dominant treatment, as it was associated with a lower treatment cost and greater effectiveness than cryotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Economically, 5-FU/SA was a dominant option compared with cryotherapy in the treatment of isolated hyperkeratotic actinic keratosis lesions in Spain.

EVerT: cryotherapy versus salicylic acid for the treatment of verrucae--a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen versus patient daily self-treatment with 50% salicylic acid for the treatment of verrucae (plantar warts). DESIGN: A multicentre, pragmatic, open, two-armed randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation. Randomisation was simple, with the allocation sequence generated by a computer in a 1 : 1 ratio. SETTING: Podiatry clinics, university podiatry schools and primary care in England, Scotland and Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Patients were eligible if they presented with a verruca which, in the opinion of the health-care professional, was suitable for treatment with both salicylic acid and cryotherapy, and were aged 12 years and over. INTERVENTIONS: Cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen delivered by a health-care professional compared with daily patient self-treatment with 50% salicylic acid (Verrugon, William Ransom & Son Plc, Hitchin, UK) for a maximum of 8 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was complete clearance of all verrucae at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were complete clearance of all verrucae at 12 weeks, controlling for age, whether or not the verrucae had been previously treated and type of verrucae, with a second model to explore the effect of patient preferences, time to clearance of verrucae, clearance of verrucae at 6 months, number of verrucae at 12 weeks and patient satisfaction with the treatment. RESULTS: In total, 240 eligible patients were recruited, with 117 patients allocated to the cryotherapy group and 123 to the salicylic acid group. There was no evidence of a difference in clearance rates between the treatment groups in the primary outcome [17/119 (14.3%) in the salicylic acid group vs 15/110 (13.6%) in the cryotherapy group; p = 0.89]. The results of the study did not change when controlled for age, whether or not the verrucae had been previously treated and type of verrucae, or when patient preferences were explored. There was no evidence of a difference in time to clearance of verrucae between the two groups [hazard ratio (HR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 1.25; p = 0.33] or in the clearance of verrucae at 6 months (33.7% cryotherapy vs 30.5% salicylic acid). There was no evidence of a difference in the number of verrucae at 12 weeks between the two groups (incidence rate ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.43; p = 0.62). Nineteen participants reported 28 adverse events, 14 in each group, with two treatment-related non-serious adverse events in the cryotherapy group. Cryotherapy was also associated with higher mean costs per additional healed patient (£101.17, 95% bias-corrected and accelerated CI £85.09 to £117.26). The probability of cryotherapy being cost-effective is 40% for a range of willingness-to-pay thresholds of £15,000-30,000 per patient healed. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence for a difference in terms of clearance of verrucae between cryotherapy and salicylic acid (at both 12 weeks and 6 months), number of verrucae at 12 weeks and time to clearance of verrucae. Cryotherapy was associated with higher mean costs per additional healed patient compared with salicylic acid. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN18994246. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 15, No. 32. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

The EVERT (effective verruca treatments) trial protocol: a randomised controlled trial to evaluate cryotherapy versus salicylic acid for the treatment of verrucae.

BACKGROUND: Verrucae are a common, infectious and sometimes painful problem. The optimal treatment for verrucae is unclear due to a lack of high quality randomised controlled trials. The primary objective of this study is to compare the clinical effectiveness of two common treatments for verrucae: cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen versus salicylic acid. Secondary objectives include a comparison of the cost-effectiveness of the treatments, and an investigation of time to clearance of verrucae, recurrence/clearance of verrucae at six months, patient satisfaction with treatment, pain associated with treatment, and use of painkillers for the treatments. METHODS/DESIGN: This is an open, pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial with two parallel groups: cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen delivered by a healthcare professional for a maximum of 4 treatments (treatments 2-3 weeks apart) or daily self-treatment with 50% salicylic acid for a maximum of 8 weeks. Two hundred and sixty-six patients aged 12 years and over with a verruca are being enrolled into the study. The primary outcome is complete clearance of all verrucae as observed on digital photographs taken at 12 weeks compared with baseline and assessed by an independent healthcare professional. Secondary outcomes include self-reported time to clearance of verrucae, self-reported clearance of verrucae at 6 months, cost-effectiveness of the treatments compared to one another, and patient acceptability of both treatments including possible side effects such as pain. The primary analysis will be intention to treat. It is planned that recruitment will be completed by December 2009 and results will be available by June 2010. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN18994246.

To freeze or not to freeze: a cost-effectiveness analysis of wart treatment.

BACKGROUND: Several general practitioner (GP)-prescribed and over-the-counter therapies for warts and verrucae are available. However, the cost-effectiveness of these treatments is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness of different treatments for cutaneous warts. METHODS: We designed a decision-analytic Markov simulation model based on systematic review evidence to estimate the cost-effectiveness of various treatments. The outcome measures studied are percentage of patients cured, cost of treatment and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for each treatment, compared with no treatment, after 18 weeks. RESULTS: Duct tape was most cost-effective but published evidence of its effectiveness is sparse. Salicylic acid was the most cost-effective over-the-counter treatment commonly used. Cryotherapy administered by a GP was less cost-effective than GP-prescribed salicylic acid and less cost-effective than cryotherapy administered by a nurse. CONCLUSIONS: Duct tape could be adopted as the primary treatment for cutaneous warts if its effectiveness is verified by further rigorous trials. Nurse-administered cryotherapy is likely to be more cost-effective than GP-administered cryotherapy.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of salicylic acid and cryotherapy for cutaneous warts. An economic decision model.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the costs of commonly used treatments for cutaneous warts, as well as their health benefits and risk. To create an economic decision model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these treatments, and, as a result, assess whether a randomised controlled trial (RCT) would be feasible and cost-effective. DATA SOURCES: Focus groups, structured interviews and observation of practice. Postal survey sent to 723 patients. A recently updated Cochrane systematic review and published cost and prescribing data. REVIEW METHODS: Primary and secondary data collection methods were used to inform the development of an economic decision model. Data from the postal survey provided estimates of the effectiveness of wart treatments in a primary care setting. These estimates were compared with outcomes reported in the Cochrane review of wart treatment, which were largely obtained from RCTs conducted in secondary care. A decision model was developed including a variety of over-the-counter (OTC) and GP-prescribed treatments. The model simulated 10,000 patients and adopted a societal perspective. RESULTS: OTC treatments were used by a substantial number of patients (57%) before attending the GP surgery. By far the most commonly used OTC preparation was salicylic acid (SA). The results of the economic model suggested that of the treatments prescribed by a GP, the most cost-effective treatment was SA, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 2.20 pound/% cured. The ICERs for cryotherapy varied widely (from 1.95 to 7.06 pound/% cured) depending on the frequency of applications and the mode of delivery. The most cost-effective mode of delivery was through nurse-led cryotherapy clinics (ICER = 1.95 pound/% cured) and this could be a cost-effective alternative to GP-prescribed SA. Overall, the OTC therapies were the most cost-effective treatment options. ICERs ranged from 0.22 pound/% cured for OTC duct tape and 0.76 pound/% cured for OTC cryotherapy to 1.12 pound/% cured for OTC SA. However, evidence in support of OTC duct tape and OTC cryotherapy is very limited. Side-effects were commonly reported for both SA and cryotherapy, particularly a burning sensation, pain and blistering. CONCLUSIONS: Cryotherapy delivered by a doctor is an expensive option for the treatment of warts in primary care. Alternative options such as GP-prescribed SA and nurse-led cryotherapy clinics provide more cost-effective alternatives, but are still expensive compared with self-treatment. Given the minor nature of most cutaneous warts, coupled with the fact that the majority spontaneously resolve in time, it may be concluded that a shift towards self-treatment is warranted. Although both duct tape and OTC cryotherapy appear promising new self-treatment options from both a cost and an effectiveness perspective, more research is required to confirm the efficacy of these two methods of wart treatment. If these treatments are shown to be as cost-effective as or more cost-effective than conventional treatments, then a shift in service delivery away from primary care towards more OTC treatment is likely. A public awareness campaign would be useful to educate patients about the self-limiting nature of warts and the possible alternative OTC treatment options available. Two future RCTs are recommended for consideration: a trial of SA compared with nurse-led cryotherapy in primary care, and a trial of home treatments. Greater understanding of the efficacy of these home treatments will give doctors a wider choice of treatment options, and may help to reduce the overall demand for cryotherapy in primary care.