Cost-Utility Analysis of Adjuvant Olaparib for Germline BRCA1/2-Mutated, High-Risk HER2-Negative Early Breast Cancer in Spain.

OBJECTIVE: Here we estimate the cost-effectiveness of olaparib in the Spanish National Health Service (SNHS) as adjuvant treatment of early germline mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes (gBRCAm) HER2-negative (HER2neg) breast cancer (BC) with high risk of recurrence. METHODS: A semi-Markov model was adapted to the Spanish healthcare setting, using the perspective of the SNHS, and a lifetime horizon. Two scenarios were compared: receiving olaparib versus standard of care (SoC) treatment. The model comprised five health states and included the clinical results of the OlympiA trial, along with the direct healthcare costs associated with the use of early BC and subsequent treatment resources (€2023). A discount rate of 3% was applied for future cost and quality-of-life outcomes. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was carried out. RESULTS: The introduction of olaparib as adjuvant treatment for patients with early gBRCAm HER2neg BC with high risk of recurrence could involve an incremental cost of €44,273 and €50,164, with an improvement of 1.14 and 1.28 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and triple-negative (TN) patients, respectively. Therefore, adjuvant olaparib could be cost-effective for early gBRCAm HER2neg BC, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €38,839/QALY and €39,084/QALY for HR+ and TN patients, respectively. The results from the PSA showed that 75.7% and 82.2% of the simulations fell below the €60,000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib as adjuvant treatment could be cost-effective in gBRCAm patients with early HER2neg BC in Spain.

Impacto económico del uso de patiromer en enfermedad renal crónica o insuficiencia cardíaca para el tratamiento de la hiperpotasemia crónica en España / Economic impact of the use of patiromer in chronic kidney disease or heart failure for the treatment of chronic hyperkalemia in Spain

Introducción La hiperpotasemia crónica tiene consecuencias negativas a medio y largo plazo, condicionando generalmente la suspensión de fármacos nefro y cardioprotectores, en pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica (ERC) e insuficiencia cardíaca (IC), como son los inhibidores del sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona. Existe una alternativa a la suspensión o reducción de dosis de estos tratamientos y es la administración de quelantes del potasio. El objetivo de este estudio es estimar el impacto económico que supondría el uso de patiromer en pacientes con ERC o IC e hiperpotasemia en España. Material y métodos Se ha estimado el impacto económico anual del uso de patiromer desde la perspectiva de la sociedad española, comparando 2 escenarios: pacientes con ERC o IC e hiperpotasemia tratada con patiromer y sin patiromer. Los costes se han actualizado a euros de 2020, utilizando el índice de precios de consumo de Sanidad. Se han considerado los costes directos sanitarios relacionados con el uso de recursos (el tratamiento con inhibidores del sistema renina-angiotensina-aldosterona, la progresión de la ERC, los eventos cardiovasculares y la hospitalización por hiperpotasemia), los costes directos no sanitarios (cuidados informales: costes derivados del tiempo de dedicación por parte de los familiares del paciente), los costes indirectos (pérdidas de productividad laboral), así como un coste intangible (por mortalidad prematura). Se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad determinístico para validar la consistencia de los resultados del estudio. Resultados El coste medio anual por paciente en el escenario sin patiromer es de 9.834,09 € y 10.739,37 € en ERC e IC, respectivamente. El uso de patiromer supondría un ahorro de costes superior al 30% en ambas enfermedades. En el caso de la ERC, el mayor ahorro procede del retraso de la progresión de la ERC (AU)

Introduction Chronic hyperkalemia has negative consequences in the medium and long term, and determines the suspension of nephro and cardioprotective drugs, such as renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi). There is an alternative to the suspension or dose reduction of these treatments: the administration of potassium chelators. The aim of this study is to estimate the economic impact of the use of patiromer in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) or heart failure (HF) and hyperkalemia in Spain. Materials and method The annual economic impact of the use of patiromer has been estimated from the perspective of the Spanish society. Two scenarios were compared: patients with CKD or HF and hyperkalemia treated with and without patiromer. The costs have been updated to 2020 euros, using the Health Consumer Price Index. Direct healthcare costs related to the use of resources (treatment with RAASi, CKD progression, cardiovascular events and hospitalization due to hyperkalemia), direct non-healthcare costs (informal care: costs derived from time dedicated by patient's relatives), the indirect costs (productivity loss), as well as an intangible cost (due to premature mortality) were considered. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed to validate the robustness of the study results. Results The mean annual cost per patient in the scenario without patiromer is €9834.09 and €10,739.37 in CKD and HF, respectively. The use of patiromer would lead to cost savings of over 30% in both diseases. The greatest savings in CKD come from the delay in the progression of CKD. While in the case of HF, 80.1% of these savings come from premature mortality reduction. The sensitivity analyses carried out show the robustness of the results, obtaining savings in all cases (AU)

Economic impact of the use of patiromer in chronic kidney disease or heart failure for the treatment of chronic hyperkalemia in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic hyperkalemia has negative consequences in the medium and long term, and determines the suspension of nephro and cardioprotective drugs, such as renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi). There is an alternative to the suspension or dose reduction of these treatments: the administration of potassium chelators. The aim of this study is to estimate the economic impact of the use of patiromer in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) or heart failure (HF) and hyperkalemia in Spain. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The annual economic impact of the use of patiromer has been estimated from the perspective of the Spanish society. Two scenarios were compared: patients with CKD or HF and hyperkalemia treated with and without patiromer. The costs have been updated to 2020 euros, using the Health Consumer Price Index. Direct healthcare costs related to the use of resources (treatment with RAASi, CKD progression, cardiovascular events and hospitalization due to hyperkalemia), direct non-healthcare costs (informal care: costs derived from time dedicated by patient's relatives), the indirect costs (productivity loss), as well as an intangible cost (due to premature mortality) were considered. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed to validate the robustness of the study results. RESULTS: The mean annual cost per patient in the scenario without patiromer is €9,834.09 and €10,739.37 in CKD and HF, respectively. The use of patiromer would lead to cost savings of over 30% in both diseases. The greatest savings in CKD come from the delay in the progression of CKD. While in the case of HF, 80.1% of these savings come from premature mortality reduction. The sensitivity analyses carried out show the robustness of the results, obtaining savings in all cases. CONCLUSIONS: The incorporation of patiromer allows better control of hyperkalemia and, as a consequence, maintain treatment with RAASi in patients with CKD or HF. This would generate a 32% of annual savings in Spain (€3,127 in CKD; €3,466 in HF). The results support the positive contribution of patiromer to health cost in patients with only CKD or in patients with only HF.

Cost-benefit analysis of ALK diagnosis vs. non-diagnosis in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer in Spain.

Introduction: In recent years, target therapies to specific molecular alterations in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been identified and have shown superior efficacy compared to non-targeted treatments. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) is one of the therapeutic targets; nevertheless, ALK diagnosis is not performed in all NSCLC patients in Spain. The objective of this study is to estimate in monetary terms the benefit for the Spanish society of ALK diagnosis in advanced NSCLC patients. Methods: A cost-benefit analysis of ALK diagnosis vs. non-diagnosis in advanced NSCLC patients was carried out from the Spanish social perspective, with a time horizon of 5 years. Costs, benefits and the cost-benefit ratio were measured. The analysis has considered the overall survival in advanced NSCLC patients treated with the ALK-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) alectinib. The natural history of NSCLC was simulated using a Markov model. A 3% discount rate was applied to both costs and benefits. The result was tested using a deterministic sensitivity analysis. Results: The cost of ALK diagnosis vs. non-diagnosis in the base case would be €10.19 million, generating benefits of €11.71 million. The cost-benefit ratio would be €1.15. In the sensitivity analysis, the cost-benefit ratio could range from €0.89 to €2.10. Conclusions: The results justify the universal application of ALK diagnosis in advanced NSCLC, which generates a benefit for Spanish society that outweighs its costs and allows optimal treatment with targeted therapies for these patients.

Olaparib as first line in BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian carcinoma: Is it cost-effective in Spain?

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of olaparib after being funded by the Spanish National Health Service (SNHS) as first-line monotherapy maintenance treatment in patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSOC) and BRCA mutations in Spain. METHODS: A semi-Markov model with one-month cycles was adapted to the Spanish healthcare setting, using the perspective of the SNHS, and a time horizon of 50 years. Two scenarios were compared: receiving olaparib vs. no maintenance treatment. The model comprised four health states and included the clinical results of the SOLO1 study, along with the direct healthcare costs associated with the use of first-line and subsequent treatment resources (2020 €). A discount rate of 3% was applied for future cost and quality-of-life outcomes. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was also carried out and a cost-effectiveness threshold of €25,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) was considered. RESULTS: The introduction of olaparib as a first-line maintenance treatment for advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations implied a cost of €131,614.98 compared to €102,369.54 without olaparib (difference: €29,245.44), with an improvement of 2.00 QALYs (5.56 and 3.57, respectively). Therefore, olaparib is cost-effective for advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €14,653.2/QALY. The results from the PSA showed that 92.1% of the simulations fell below the €25,000/QALY threshold. The model showed that olaparib could improve the overall survival by 2 years, vs. no maintenance treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib as first-line maintenance treatment is cost-effective in advanced HGSOC patients with BRCA mutations in Spain.

Cost of illness of invasive meningococcal disease caused by serogroup B Neisseria meningitidis in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: Invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) is a severe infectious disease, mainly affecting children under 5 years, associated with long-term physical, neurological and psychological sequelae. In Spain, most IMD cases are caused by meningococcal serogroup B (MenB). This study estimates its economic burden from a societal perspective in Spain. METHODS: A previously published bottom-up, model-based incidence costing approach by Scholz et al. (2019) to estimate the economic burden of MenB in Germany was adapted to the Spanish setting. Diagnosis and age-related costs for a hypothetical Spanish cohort were calculated over a lifetime horizon. Official Spanish databases, literature and expert opinion were used as data sources. The costs were updated to 2019 prices, and a 3% discount rate was applied. Direct costs related to the acute IMD phase, long-term sequelae, rehabilitation and public health response were considered. Indirect costs included productivity losses and premature mortality and were calculated using the human-capital approach (HCA) and friction-cost approach (FCA). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULT: At base-case, the total cost for a cohort of 142 patients (2017-2018 period) was €4.74 million (€33,484/case) using the FCA and €13.14 million (€92,768/case) using the HCA. Direct costs amounted to €4.65 million (€32,765/case). Sequelae costs represented 62.46% of the total cost using the FCA and 77.63% using the HCA. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that variation of ± 20% in the input parameter values (population, epidemiology, productivity, costs) had the greatest influence on the base-case results, and the probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed the probability of fitting base-case estimates was > 99%, both for FCA and HCA. DISCUSSION: MenB IMD is an uncommon but severe disease, with a high economic burden for Spanish society. The elevated costs per IMD case reflect its severity in each patient suffering this disease, especially due to the development of sequelae.