Cost-effectiveness of an 8% Capsaicin Patch in the Treatment of Brachioradial Pruritus and Notalgia Paraesthetica, Two Forms of Neuropathic Pruritus.

In brachioradial pruritus and notalgia paraesthetica, the 8% capsaicin patch is a novel and effective, but cost-intense, therapy. Routine data for 44 patients were collected 6 months retrospectively and prospectively to first patch application. The cost to health insurance and the patient, and patient-reported outcomes were analysed (visual analogue scale, numerical rating scale, verbal rating scale for pruritus symptoms, Dermatological Life Quality Index, and Patient Benefit Index). Mean inpatient treatment costs were reduced by €212.31, and mean outpatient treatment and medication costs by €100.74 per patient (p.p.). However, these reductions did not offset the high cost of the patch itself (€767.02 p.p.); thus the total cost to health insurance increased by €453.97 p.p. (p ≤ 0.01). The additional costs of therapy to the patient decreased by €441.06, thus the overall cost p.p. remained approximately the same (€3,306.03 vs. €3,318.94). Capsaicin patch therapy resulted in reduced pruritus, improved quality of life and greater patient benefit, thus long-term cost-efficiency analyses are necessary.

Assessing the Potential Cost-Effectiveness of Microneedle Patches in Childhood Measles Vaccination Programs: The Case for Further Research and Development.

OBJECTIVE: Currently available measles vaccines are administered by subcutaneous injections and require reconstitution with a diluent and a cold chain, which is resource intensive and challenging to maintain. To overcome these challenges and potentially increase vaccination coverage, microneedle patches are being developed to deliver the measles vaccine. This study compares the cost-effectiveness of using microneedle patches with traditional vaccine delivery by syringe-and-needle (subcutaneous vaccination) in children's measles vaccination programs. METHODS: We built a simple spreadsheet model to compute the vaccination costs for using microneedle patch and syringe-and-needle technologies. We assumed that microneedle vaccines will be, compared with current vaccines, more heat stable and require less expensive cool chains when used in the field. We used historical data on the incidence of measles among communities with low measles vaccination rates. RESULTS: The cost of microneedle vaccination was estimated at US$0.95 (range US$0.71-US$1.18) for the first dose, compared with US$1.65 (range US$1.24-US$2.06) for the first dose delivered by subcutaneous vaccination. At 95 % vaccination coverage, microneedle patch vaccination was estimated to cost US$1.66 per measles case averted (range US$1.24-US$2.07) compared with an estimated cost of US$2.64 per case averted (range US$1.98-US$3.30) using subcutaneous vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Use of microneedle patches may reduce costs; however, the cost-effectiveness of patches would depend on the vaccine recipients' acceptability and vaccine effectiveness of the patches relative to the existing conventional vaccine-delivery method. This study emphasizes the need to continue research and development of this vaccine-delivery method that could boost measles elimination efforts through improved access to vaccines and increased vaccination coverage.

Microneedle patches for vaccination in developing countries.

Millions of people die of infectious diseases each year, mostly in developing countries, which could largely be prevented by the use of vaccines. While immunization rates have risen since the introduction of the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI), there remain major challenges to more effective vaccination in developing countries. As a possible solution, microneedle patches containing an array of micron-sized needles on an adhesive backing have been developed to be used for vaccine delivery to the skin. These microneedle patches can be easily and painlessly applied by pressing against the skin and, in some designs, do not leave behind sharps waste. The patches are single-dose, do not require reconstitution, are easy to administer, have reduced size to simplify storage, transportation and waste disposal, and offer the possibility of improved vaccine immunogenicity, dose sparing and thermostability. This review summarizes vaccination challenges in developing countries and discusses advantages that microneedle patches offer for vaccination to address these challenges. We conclude that microneedle patches offer a powerful new technology that can enable more effective vaccination in developing countries.

[Capsaicin Cutaneous Patch: a Cost-consequences Study in a French University Hospital]. / Étude coût-conséquences sur la capsaïcine en patch cutané dans un CHU français.

INTRODUCTION: The capsaïcine 8% cutaneous patch (Qutenza®) was recently approved for the management of patients with peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP). Considering its limited clinical efficacy data, its improvement of medical benefit was determined to be 5 which was insufficient to support its reimbursement in addition to diagnosis related groups'tarifs. Nevertheless its commercialization was associated with a marked interest considering the unmet therapeutic needs for patients with PNP. OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to assess the effectiveness, the safety, and the economic impact of Qutenza® in real-life conditions. METHODS: An observational cost-consequences study was launched under the aegis of the Drug Committee of our hospital. Medical charts and prescriptions of all patients who received at least one patch application were analyzed. Effectiveness and safety were assessed after 12-week and 24-week of follow-up. The economic impact was measured within the Hospital and Health Insurance perspective and with limitation to direct costs. RESULTS: From March 2012 to October 2013, 91 patients (54.3 ± 14.1 years; 52.7% of male) received at least one application. The average follow- up duration was 188.3 ± 86.4 days. The PNP etiologies were mainly post-surgery (42.9%) and post-traumatology (20.8%). A therapeutic response (decrease of ENS score of least 30%) after 12 weeks and 24 weeks was observed in 27.9% and 37.1% of patients respectively. The SF-36 mental score was significantly improved. The safety profile was good. The application of the patch resulted in incremental costs of 154 euros per hospital stay without impact on outpatient-prescription drug expenditures. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the interest of Qutenza® for heavily pretreated, refractory patients with PNP. The clinical profile of responders has to be further investigated in large observational studies.

Achieving cost-neutrality with long-acting reversible contraceptive methods.

OBJECTIVES: This analysis aimed to estimate the average annual cost of available reversible contraceptive methods in the United States. In line with literature suggesting long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods become increasingly cost-saving with extended duration of use, it aimed to also quantify minimum duration of use required for LARC methods to achieve cost-neutrality relative to other reversible contraceptive methods while taking into consideration discontinuation. STUDY DESIGN: A three-state economic model was developed to estimate relative costs of no method (chance), four short-acting reversible (SARC) methods (oral contraceptive, ring, patch and injection) and three LARC methods [implant, copper intrauterine device (IUD) and levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) 20 mcg/24 h (total content 52 mg)]. The analysis was conducted over a 5-year time horizon in 1000 women aged 20-29 years. Method-specific failure and discontinuation rates were based on published literature. Costs associated with drug acquisition, administration and failure (defined as an unintended pregnancy) were considered. Key model outputs were annual average cost per method and minimum duration of LARC method usage to achieve cost-savings compared to SARC methods. RESULTS: The two least expensive methods were copper IUD ($304 per women, per year) and LNG-IUS 20 mcg/24 h ($308). Cost of SARC methods ranged between $432 (injection) and $730 (patch), per women, per year. A minimum of 2.1 years of LARC usage would result in cost-savings compared to SARC usage. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis finds that even if LARC methods are not used for their full durations of efficacy, they become cost-saving relative to SARC methods within 3 years of use. IMPLICATIONS: Previous economic arguments in support of using LARC methods have been criticized for not considering that LARC methods are not always used for their full duration of efficacy. This study calculated that cost-savings from LARC methods relative to SARC methods, with discontinuation rates considered, can be realized within 3 years.

Does switching contraceptive from oral to a patch or vaginal ring change the likelihood of timely prescription refill?

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated contraceptive refill patterns of women insured commercially in the US who switched from oral contraceptives (OCs) to the patch or vaginal ring and assessed if switching contraceptive methods changes refill patterns. STUDY DESIGN: Women aged 15-44 with ≥2 patch or ring prescriptions and ≥2 OC prescriptions before the first patch/ring prescription were identified from the MarketScan® Commercial database (1/1/2002-6/30/2011). Refill patterns 1-year pre- and postindex date (first patch/ring prescription) were evaluated, and women were categorized as timely or delayed refillers on OCs and patch/ring. Regression modeling was used to investigate the association between refill patterns and contraceptive methods and switching effects on refill patterns. RESULTS: Of 17,814 women identified, 7901 switched to the patch, and 9913 switched to the ring. Among timely OC refillers, the percentage of timely refills decreased (patch: 95.6% to 79.4%, p<.001; ring: 96.5% to 74.3%, p<.001). However, among delayed OC refillers, the percentage of timely refills improved (patch: 47.9% to 72.2%, p<.001; ring: 50.4% to 64.0%, p<.001) during patch/ring use. Nonetheless, compared to timely OC refillers, women who were delayed OC refillers had 1.68-fold [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52-1.84, p<.001] and 1.85-fold greater odds (CI: 1.69-2.02, p<.001) of being a delayed refiller while on the patch and ring, respectively. CONCLUSION: Switching to the patch or ring may improve refill behavior for women who have problems refilling OCs timely; however, the magnitude of the improvement may fail to improve ultimate contraceptive efficacy by simply switching to the patch or ring. IMPLICATIONS: The impact on timely refills of switching from OCs to either the patch or ring is complex and varies depending on the pattern of timely refills on OCs.

Costs of giving out free nicotine patches through a telephone quit line.

BACKGROUND: Many telephone quit lines provide free nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to smokers who are trying to stop smoking. However, providing free NRT to smokers can be costly. OBJECTIVE: To compare NRT usage patterns, quit rate, and costs of giving smokers calling a telephone quit line different amounts of free NRT. DESIGN: A 3-group randomized trial was conducted. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2806 adult smokers of 10+ cigarettes per day who called the New York State Smokers' Quit Line (NYSSQL) were sent different amounts of nicotine patches for free as follows: (1) a 2-week supply of nicotine patches, (2) a 4-week supply, and (3) a 6-week supply. In addition, all study participants received a free stop smoking guide plus 1 proactive follow-up call attempt conducted 2 weeks after initially contacting the NYSSQL. Of the 2806 enrolled participants, 1682 completed the 7-month follow-up to assess their use of the NRT sent to them and smoking status. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Nicotine patch usage, quit rates, reductions in cigarette consumption, and cost-effectiveness measures. RESULTS: Most respondents (85%) reported using the nicotine patches sent to them, although the amount used varied in direct proportion to the amount sent. The 7- and 30-day nonsmoker prevalence rates measured at 7-month follow-up did not differ significantly between the 3 groups. The cost per attributable quit was also not significantly different between the 3 groups. CONCLUSION: Sending out more than a free 2-week supply of patches to smokers who contact a quit line is no more effective in achieving smoking cessation than sending just 2 weeks of patches.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a new 8% capsaicin patch compared to existing therapies for postherpetic neuralgia.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of a new 8% capsaicin patch, compared to the current treatments for postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), including tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), topical lidocaine patches, duloxetine, gabapentin, and pregabalin. METHODS: A 1-year Markov model was constructed for PHN with monthly cycles, including dose titration and management of adverse events. The perspective of the analysis was from a payer perspective, managed-care organization. Clinical trials were used to determine the proportion of patients achieving at least a 30% improvement in PHN pain, the efficacy parameter. The outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY); second-order probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The effectiveness results indicated that 8% capsaicin patch and topical lidocaine patch were significantly more effective than the oral PHN products. TCAs were least costly and significantly less costly than duloxetine, pregabalin, topical lidocaine patch, 8% capsaicin patch, but not gabapentin. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the 8% capsaicin patch overlapped with the topical lidocaine patch and was within the accepted threshold of cost per QALY gained compared to TCAs, duloxetine, gabapentin, and pregablin. The frequency of the 8% capsaicin patch retreatment assumption significantly impacts its cost-effectiveness results. There are several limitations to this analysis. Since no head-to-head studies were identified, this model used inputs from multiple clinical trials. Also, a last observation carried forward process was assumed to have continued for the duration of the model. Additionally, the trials with duloxetine may have over-predicted its efficacy in PHN. Although a 30% improvement in pain is often an endpoint in clinical trials, some patients may require greater or less improvement in pain to be considered a clinical success. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness results demonstrated that 8% capsaicin and topical lidocaine patches had significantly higher effectiveness rates than the oral agents used to treat PHN. In addition, this cost-effectiveness analysis found that the 8% capsaicin patch was similar to topical lidocaine patch and within an accepted cost per QALY gained threshold compared to the oral products.

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of the rivastigmine transdermal patch for Alzheimer's disease in the UK using MMSE- and ADL-based models.

OBJECTIVE: Assess long-term cost-effectiveness of rivastigmine patch in Alzheimer's disease (AD) management in the UK, using cognitive and functional models based on clinical trial efficacy data. METHODS: Incremental costs and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) associated with rivastigmine patch and capsule treatment versus best supportive care (BSC) were calculated using two economic models, one based solely on Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores, and one also incorporating activities of daily living (ADL) scores. The clinical pathway was populated with data from a clinical trial of rivastigmine patch (9.5 mg/24 h) and capsules (12 mg/day) versus placebo. Costs were based on the UK health and social care costs and basic UK National Health Service (NHS) prices. Disease progression was modelled beyond the trial period over 5 years using published equations to predict natural decline in AD patients. Base case costing variables included drugs, clinical monitoring, and institutionalization. RESULTS: The MMSE model estimated incremental costs per QALY of £10 579 for rivastigmine patch and £15 154 for capsule versus BSC. The MMSE-ADL model estimated incremental costs per QALY of £9114 for rivastigmine patch and £13 758 for capsules. The main difference between the models was a greater number of institutionalized days avoided for rivastigmine versus BSC estimated by the MMSE-ADL model. CONCLUSIONS: Both the MMSE and MMSE-ADL models suggest that rivastigmine patch and capsules are cost-effective treatments versus BSC. Incorporating ADL evidence makes a marginal but important difference to estimates in this case. Future economic evaluations of AD treatment should include measures of both cognition and functioning.