Meta-analysis of health state utility values measured by EuroQol 5-dimensions (EQ5D) questionnaire in Chinese women with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: To synthesise EQ5D health state utility values in Chinese women with breast cancer for parameterising a cost utility model. METHODS: Eligible studies had to report health state utility values measured by EQ-5D in Chinese women diagnosed with breast cancer. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS). Data from single arm studies was pooled using meta-analysis of single proportions to provide overall point estimates and 95% confidence intervals for fixed and random effects models using the inverse variance and Der Simonian-Laird methods respectively. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic and sensitivity analysis and meta-regression were conducted. RESULTS: Five papers were included, when all studies were combined (n = 4,100) the mean utility (95% confidence interval) for random effects model was 0.83 (0.78, 0.89); for TNM 0-1 0.85 (0.75, 0.95); for TNM II 0.85 (0.78, 0.93); for TNM III 0.83 (0.77, 0.90) and for TNM IV 0.73 (0.63, 0.82).The utility of patients in State P (first year after primary breast cancer) 0.84 (0.80, 0.88); in State R (first year after recurrence) 0.73 (0.69, 0.76), in State S (second and following years after primary breast cancer or recurrence) 0.88 (0.83, 0.92); and in State M (metastatic disease) 0.78 (0.74, 0.82). Mean utility for duration since diagnosis 13 to 36 months was 0.88 (0.80, 0.96, I2 =95%); for 37 to 60 months 0.89 (0.82, 0.96, I2 =90%); for more than 60 months 0.86 (0.76, 0.96, I2 =90%). Mean utility for chemotherapy was 0.86 (0.79, 0.92, I2 =97%); for radiotherapy 0.83 (0.69, 0.96, I2 =97%); surgery 0.80 (0.69, 0.91, I2 =98%); concurrent chemo-radiation 0.70 (0.60, 0.81, I2 =86%) and endocrine therapy 0.90 (0.83, 0.97, I2 =91%). CONCLUSION: This study synthesises the evidence for health state utility values for Chinese women with breast cancer which is useful to inform cost utility models.

Cost utility, budget impact, and scenario analysis of racecadotril in addition to oral rehydration for acute diarrhea in children in Malaysia.

OBJECTIVE: To perform cost utility (CU) and budget impact (BI) analyses augmented by scenario analyses of critical model structure components to evaluate racecadotril as adjuvant to oral rehydration solution (ORS) for children under 5 years with acute diarrhea in Malaysia. METHODS: A CU model was adapted to evaluate racecadotril plus ORS vs ORS alone for acute diarrhea in children younger than 5 years from a Malaysian public payer's perspective. A bespoke BI analysis was undertaken in addition to detailed scenario analyses with respect to critical model structure components. RESULTS: According to the CU model, the intervention is less costly and more effective than comparator for the base case with a dominant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of -RM 1,272,833/quality-adjusted life year (USD -312,726/quality-adjusted life year) in favor of the intervention. According to the BI analysis (assuming an increase of 5% market share per year for racecadotril+ORS for 5 years), the total cumulative incremental percentage reduction in health care expenditure for diarrhea in children is 0.136578%, resulting in a total potential cumulative cost savings of -RM 73,193,603 (USD -17,983,595) over a 5-year period. Results hold true across a range of plausible scenarios focused on critical model components. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant racecadotril vs ORS alone is potentially cost-effective from a Malaysian public payer perspective subject to the assumptions and limitations of the model. BI analysis shows that this translates into potential cost savings for the Malaysian public health care system. Results hold true at evidence-based base case values and over a range of alternate scenarios.

The cost utility and budget impact of adjuvant racecadotril for acute diarrhea in children in Thailand.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost utility and the budget impact of adjuvant racecadotril for the treatment of acute diarrhea in children in Thailand. METHODS: A cost utility model has been adapted to the context of Thailand to evaluate racecadotril plus oral rehydration solution (R+ORS) versus oral rehydration solution (ORS) alone for acute diarrhea in children <5 years old. The decision tree Excel model evaluates the costs and effects (quality-adjusted life years) over a 6-day time horizon from a public health care payer's perspective in Thailand. Deterministic sensitivity analysis and budget impact analysis have been undertaken. RESULTS: According to the cost utility model, the intervention (R+ORS) is less costly and more effective than the comparator (ORS) for the base case with a dominant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of -2,481,390฿ for the intervention. According to the budget impact analysis (assuming an increase of 5% market share for R+ORS over 5 years), the year-on-year reduction for diarrhea as a percentage of the total health care expenditure is -0.0027%, resulting in potential net cost savings of -35,632,482฿ over 5 years. CONCLUSION: Subject to the assumptions and limitations of the models, adjuvant racecadotril versus ORS alone is potentially cost-effective for children in Thailand and uptake could translate into savings for the Thailand public health care system.

Evaluating the cost utility of racecadotril for the treatment of acute watery diarrhea in children: the RAWD model.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of racecadotril to treat acute watery diarrhea (AWD) in children is well established, however its cost effectiveness for infants and children in Europe has not yet been determined. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost utility of racecadotril adjuvant with oral rehydration solution (ORS) compared to ORS alone for the treatment of AWD in children younger than 5 years old. The analysis is performed from a United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) perspective. METHODS: A decision tree model has been developed in Microsoft(®) Excel. The model is populated with the best available evidence. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) have been performed. Health effects are measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the model output is cost (2011 GBP) per QALY. The uncertainty in the primary outcome is explored by probabilistic analysis using 1000 iterations of a Monte Carlo simulation. RESULTS: Deterministic analysis results in a total incremental cost of -£379 in favor of racecadotril and a total incremental QALY gain in favor of racecadotril of +0.0008. The observed cost savings with racecadotril arise from the reduction in primary care reconsultation and secondary referral. The difference in QALYs is largely attributable to the timely resolution of symptoms in the racecadotril arm. Racecadotril remains dominant when base case parameters are varied. Monte Carlo simulation and PSA confirm that racecadotril is the dominant treatment strategy and is almost certainly cost effective, under the central assumptions of the model, at a commonly used willingness to pay proxy threshold range of £20,000-£30,000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: Racecadotril as adjuvant therapy is more effective and less costly compared to ORS alone, from a UK payer perspective, for the treatment of children with acute diarrhea.