Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Patient Prefer Adherence ; 17: 107-118, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36647442

RESUMO

Objective: The objectives of this study were to elicit self-reported health status, quantify osteoporosis-related burden, and understand preferences for treatment attributes among postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis in Greece. Methods: Postmenopausal women with self-reported severe osteoporosis, defined as having suffered at least one osteoporotic fracture and reporting a T-score of ≤-2.5, were asked to evaluate their health status, osteoporosis management, and disease-related physical, emotional, and financial burden. Participants were also asked to rate a series of treatment attributes and state their preference for unlabeled anabolic treatments, based on scenarios describing key treatment characteristics. Results: Approximately one third (31%) of the 186 participants who responded to the survey in full had been living with severe osteoporosis for more than 10 years. Three quarters of participants (72%) considered their overall quality of life (QoL) to be worse than it had been 10 years prior, and the vast majority (89%) attributed this deterioration to osteoporosis. Direct, out of pocket, disease-related costs of at least €100 per month were reported by 86% of participants. Patients attached the greatest value to a treatment that would decrease probability of future fractures, followed by increase in bone density, safety, and mode and frequency of administration. When asked to select their preferred treatment scenario between two anabolic treatments, 70% of participants opted for the scenario that shared treatment characteristics with romosozumab over a scenario that shared treatment characteristics with teriparatide. Conclusion: Our study revealed that osteoporosis placed a considerable burden on QoL for postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis in Greece. Patients reported valuing treatment efficacy, measured through reduction in future fractures and increase in bone density, and safety, as key treatment attributes.

2.
J Med Econ ; 22(4): 359-364, 2019 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30652931

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Epilepsy is the most common serious neurological disorder worldwide. Approximately 40% of patients with focal epileptic seizures remain uncontrolled with antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy or polytherapy. Lacosamide has been recently approved by the European Medicines Agency as monotherapy for the treatment of focal seizures. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lacosamide compared with zonisamide as first-line treatment of focal epilepsy in patients with epilepsy aged ≥ 16 years to inform clinical decision-making in Greece. METHODS: A discrete event simulation model was adapted to reflect treatment pathways and resource use within the Greek national healthcare system, as specified by clinical experts. The model captures time-varying events and patient characteristics. Clinical inputs were sourced from pivotal trials and a network meta-analysis comparing lacosamide with other AEDs. The model predicts disease progression and seizures, relevant and most common adverse events, withdrawal due to lack of efficacy or adverse events, and epilepsy-specific and all-cause mortality over a 2-year time horizon. Unit costs were retrieved from published Greek sources. Health outcomes were measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs); secondary outcome was the cost per seizure avoided. Robustness of the results was tested with univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The lacosamide treatment pathway was associated with higher costs (i.e. €1,064) and an additional 0.119 QALYs when compared with zonisamide, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €8,938 per QALY gained. The sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the results are most sensitive to the efficacy and utility estimates. LIMITATIONS: There are a number of limitations which stem from the process of model adaptation and lack of local real-world evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Lacosamide is a cost-effective option at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY, representing a valuable monotherapy treatment option for patients with focal epileptic seizures in the Greek setting.


Assuntos
Anticonvulsivantes/uso terapêutico , Epilepsias Parciais/tratamento farmacológico , Lacosamida/uso terapêutico , Zonisamida/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Anticonvulsivantes/efeitos adversos , Anticonvulsivantes/economia , Simulação por Computador , Análise Custo-Benefício , Progressão da Doença , Feminino , Grécia , Gastos em Saúde , Recursos em Saúde/economia , Recursos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Lacosamida/efeitos adversos , Lacosamida/economia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Zonisamida/economia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...