Transurethral water vapor therapy for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a cost-minimization and budget impact analysis from an Italian healthcare perspective.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the costs and budget impact of adopting water vapor thermal therapy with the Rezum™ System, for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), from an Italian hospital healthcare perspective. METHODS: A Markov model (4-year time horizon, 3-month cycle length), developed to support a submission to the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England, was adapted to an Italian payer perspective. A cost minimization analysis was conducted, assuming equal efficacy between both therapies. Net difference in costs per patient was reported, considering procedure, adverse events and retreatment costs. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses considered the uncertainty of the results. Population data and market share distribution assumptions were applied to a cohort of Italian patients treated in one year to report the budget and capacity impact of increased use of Rezum. RESULTS: Over 4 years, the costs per patient with Rezum were €2072 compared to €2836 with TURP, resulting in net savings of €764. Sensitivity analyses showed that this conclusion was robust. Replacing 10% of TURP procedures with Rezum generates cost-savings of € 7,139,549 over 4 years and saves 4671 theatre hours and 26,856 bed days in one year. Replacing 30% of BPH surgical procedures with Rezum generates cost-savings to € 21,418,647 over 4 years, saves 14,012 theatre hours and 80,567 bed-days in one year. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that Rezum is highly likely to be cost-saving compared to TURP from an Italian hospital healthcare perspective.

Omalizumab and long-term quality of life outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a highly prevalent chronic inflammatory airways disease, with a considerable impact on quality of life (QoL). To express the effects of asthma on patients' subjective experience, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) represent an important instrument. The asthma QoL questionnaire (AQLQ) is one of the main PROs among these. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To identify long-term asthma-related QoL outcomes associated with omalizumab therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma, we developed a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines. Published real-world effectiveness studies of adults or adolescents (12 years or older) with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma treated with omalizumab for at least 48 weeks were reviewed. Sources used were Medline ( PubMed), the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar up to February 2018. In addition, a cross-referencing search was conducted to complete the revision. RESULTS: A total of 255 potential papers were identified in the first search through the database. After full-text viewing, eight articles were finally included in the review. We summarized the results according to the study design, patient baseline characteristics and effectiveness outcomes assessed by AQLQ score results: variation from baseline to the end of study. Results confirmed the long-term benefits of omalizumab as an add-on therapy in patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. Since there is a lot of evidence on omalizumab effectiveness, we aimed to focus on how a therapy can change patient's QoL in a long time period. Data showed long-term effects of omalizumab treatment on subjective (PROs) and objective (lung function, corticosteroid use, hospitalizations, asthma exacerbation) effectiveness measures. CONCLUSION: Studies included in our review were observational trials that, due to their design, present a potential risk of selection bias in the patients included. Beyond this limit, the evaluation of QoL using the AQLQ showed a clear increase over time, following both 48 weeks and 9 years of observation, where QoL improvements still were significant over baseline values.

Cost-minimization analysis of degludec/liraglutide versus glargine/aspart: economic implications of the DUAL VII study outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes represents a relevant public health problem worldwide due to its increasing prevalence and socioeconomic burden. There is no doubt that tight glycemic control reduces the development of diabetic complications such as the long-term costs related to the disease. The aim of our model was to calculate total direct costs associated with the two treatments considered in DUAL VII study, and hence evaluate the potential economic benefits for the National Health System (NHS) deriving from the use of insulin degludec plus liraglutide (IDegLira) in a once-daily fixed combination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We applied the cost-minimization technique adopting the NHS point of view to the DUAL VII trial outcomes. In the model, developed in Microsoft Excel®, we calculated and compared annual costs per patient of the two therapeutic options for type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients not achieving glycemic control on basal insulin and metformin described in the trial, including costs of therapy management and side effects, both negative and positive. Annual treatment costs were calculated based on IDegLira and basal bolus end-of-trial doses resulting in a 1:2 ratio (40.4 U vs 84.1 U). Therefore, maintaining the IDegLira/basal bolus at 1:2 dose ratio, we calculated the correlation between the dose reduction and costs compared to DUAL VII doses base case scenario. RESULTS: Total treatment costs were obtained by adding annual cost of drug, needles, glycemic self-monitoring, hypoglycemic events, and effect on consumption of other drugs. Total annual costs of IDegLira combination resulted in €434 higher than basal bolus in DUAL VII base case (40.4 U); the two treatments reported equal costs at 34% dose reduction (26.7 U), while below this value IDegLira treatment became less expensive, with about €215 gain at 50% dose reduction (20.2 U). It is also important to notice that above the break-even point, until an IDegLira dose of 30 U, the cost difference is negligible in view of the clinical benefit provided by the fixed combination highlighted in DUAL VII trial. CONCLUSION: Adding the significant clinical findings derived from DUAL VII trial to our economic evaluation, IDegLira seems to offer an important alternative to basal-bolus therapy.

The preventive effect on respiratory tract infections of Oscillococcinum®. A cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anas barbariae hepatis et cordis extractum 200K (Oscillococcinum®) is used to treat and prevent seasonal colds and airway inflammatory affections, improve symptom control, and reduce the frequency of respiratory tract infection (RTI) episodes. The objective of this controlled observational study is to investigate, from the Italian National Health Service (NHS) point of view, the role of Anas barbariae hepatis et cordis extractum 200K in preventing RTIs and estimate the annual average cost per patient due to visits and medicines in a real-world setting, investigating whether this method of treatment can bring savings for the NHS. METHODS: Data from a single center from 2002 to 2011 were used. The analysis examined 455 patients who suffered from respiratory diseases. Of the total number of patients, 246 were treated with Anas barbariae hepatis et cordis extractum 200K while 209 were not treated (Control group). All the data concerning RTI episodes, pharmacological treatments, and pneumological visits were extracted from the database. RESULTS: It was found that, regardless of the diagnosis, the frequency of RTI episodes was always lower in patients treated with Anas barbariae hepatis et cordis extractum 200K; the difference between the numbers of events occurring was statistically significant in every class of patients (p<0.001). The costs that the NHS had to incur were significantly lower in the classes of patients treated (p<0.001). DISCUSSION: The results indicate that Anas barbariae hepatis et cordis extractum 200K has a preventive effect on the onset of RTI episodes. The analysis shows that treating patients with Anas barbariae hepatis et cordis extractum 200K lowers costs for the NHS; this is primarily due to the fact that the medication causes fewer episodes of RTI to develop. This study suggests that the treatment with Anas barbariae hepatis et cordis extractum 200K could be helpful in preventing RTIs and improving the health status of patients who suffer from respiratory diseases, and it could lead to savings to the Italian NHS.