Transportability of comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness between countries

Contextualization of cost-effectiveness evidence from literature for 382 health interventions for the Ethiopian essential health services package revision

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness of interventions was a criterion decided to guide priority setting in the latest revision of Ethiopia's essential health services package (EHSP) in 2019. However, conducting an economic evaluation study for a broad set of health interventions simultaneously is challenging in terms of cost, timeliness, input data demanded, and analytic competency. Therefore, this study aimed to synthesize and contextualize cost-effectiveness evidence for the Ethiopian EHSP interventions from the literature.

METHODS

The evidence synthesis was conducted in five key steps: search, screen, evaluate, extract, and contextualize. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE research databases for peer-reviewed published articles to identify average cost-effectiveness ratios (ACERs). Only studies reporting cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY), quality-adjusted life year (QALY), or life years gained (LYG) were included. All the articles were evaluated using the Drummond checklist for quality, and those with a score of at least 7 out of 10 were included. Information on cost, effectiveness, and ACER was extracted. All the ACERs were converted into 2019 US dollars using appropriate exchange rates and the GDP deflator.

RESULTS

In this study, we synthesized ACERs for 382 interventions from seven major program areas, ranging from US$3 per DALY averted (for the provision of hepatitis B vaccination at birth) to US$242,880 per DALY averted (for late-stage liver cancer treatment). Overall, 56% of the interventions have an ACER of less than US$1000 per DALY, and 80% of the interventions have an ACER of less than US$10,000 per DALY.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that it is possible to identify relevant economic evaluations using evidence from the literature, even if transferability remains a challenge. The present study identified several cost-effective candidate interventions that could, if scaled up, substantially reduce Ethiopia's disease burden.

Cost-Effectiveness of Saxagliptin Compared With Glibenclamide as a Second-Line Therapy Added to Metformin for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Ethiopia

Background. Metformin is a widely accepted first-line pharmacotherapy for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Treatment of T2DM with glibenclamide, saxagliptin, or one of the other second-line treatment agents is recommended when the first-line treatment (metformin) cannot control the disease. However, there is little evidence on the additional cost and cost-effectiveness of adding second-line drugs. Therefore, this study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of saxagliptin and glibenclamide as second-line therapies added to metformin compared with metformin only in T2DM in Ethiopia. Methods. This cost-effectiveness study was conducted in Ethiopia using a mix of primary data on cost and best available data from the literature on the effectiveness. We measured the interventions' cost from the providers' perspective in 2019 US dollars. We developed a Markov model for T2DM disease progression with five health states using TreeAge Pro 2020 software. Disability-adjusted life year (DALY) was the health outcome used in this study, and we calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per DALY averted. Furthermore, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed. Results. The annual unit cost per patient was US$70 for metformin, US$75 for metformin + glibenclamide, and US$309 for metformin + saxagliptin. The ICER for saxagliptin + metformin was US$2259 per DALY averted. The ICER results were sensitive to various changes in cost, effectiveness, and transition probabilities. The ICER was driven primarily by the higher cost of saxagliptin relative to glibenclamide. Conclusion. Our study revealed that saxagliptin is not a cost-effective second-line therapy in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled by metformin monotherapy based on a gross domestic product per capita per DALY averted willingness-to-pay threshold in Ethiopia (US$953).

Cost-Effectiveness of Adjuvant Trastuzumab Therapy for Early Breast Cancer in Asia: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review and assess the quality of the economic evidence of adjuvant trastuzumab usage in early breast cancer in Asian countries.

METHODS

Literature search was performed using 6 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, EconLit, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and ISI Web of Knowledge). The final search was performed in October 2018. All potential economic studies were then checked for eligibility. The reporting and methodological qualities of each study were independently assessed by 2 authors of this review, using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards, Drummond, and Philips checklists. To compare the different currencies used in these studies, all costs were converted into US dollars (2016).

RESULTS

A total of 6 studies were included; most of them were performed from the healthcare provider perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for evaluation performed for a lifetime horizon were reported at $8573 and $20 816 per quality-adjusted life-year in 2 studies. The model outcome was generally sensitive to the changes in trastuzumab drug acquisition cost and discount rate, as well as its clinical effectiveness. For the quality assessment, all studies fulfilled more than 50% of the requirements in the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards, Drummond, and Philips checklists.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant trastuzumab therapy is considered a cost-effective option for early breast cancer in Asian countries including China, Iran, Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan. All studies were generally well conducted. Economic evaluations from the societal perspective, with inclusion of indirect and informal care costs, are warranted to facilitate informed decision making among policy makers.

An Educational Review About Using Cost Data for the Purpose of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

This paper provides an educational review covering the consideration of costs for cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), summarising relevant methods and research from the published literature. Cost data are typically generated by applying appropriate unit costs to healthcare resource-use data for patients. Trial-based evaluations and decision analytic modelling represent the two main vehicles for CEA. The costs to consider will depend on the perspective taken, with conflicting recommendations ranging from focusing solely on healthcare to the broader 'societal' perspective. Alternative sources of resource-use are available, including medical records and forms completed by researchers or patients. Different methods are available for the statistical analysis of cost data, although consideration needs to be given to the appropriate methods, given cost data are typically non-normal with a mass point at zero and a long right-hand tail. The choice of covariates for inclusion in econometric models also needs careful consideration, focusing on those that are influential and that will improve balance and precision. Where data are missing, it is important to consider the type of missingness and then apply appropriate analytical methods, such as imputation. Uncertainty around costs should also be reflected to allow for consideration on the impacts of the CEA results on decision uncertainty. Costs should be discounted to account for differential timing, and are typically inflated to a common cost year. The choice of methods and sources of information used when accounting for cost information within CEA will have an effect on the subsequent cost-effectiveness results and how information is presented to decision makers. It is important that the most appropriate methods are used as overlooking the complicated nature of cost data could lead to inaccurate information being given to decision makers.

Incremental clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of providing supervised physiotherapy in addition to usual medical care in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: 2-year results of the MOA randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness at 2-year follow-up of providing individual, supervised exercise physiotherapy and/or manual physiotherapy in addition to usual medical care.

METHOD

People with hip or knee osteoarthritis meeting the American College of Rheumatology clinical diagnostic criteria were randomised (1:1, concealed, assessor-blinded) to four groups: usual medical care; supervised exercise physiotherapy; manual physiotherapy; or combined exercise and manual physiotherapy. Physiotherapy group participants were provided 10 50-min treatment sessions including booster sessions at 4 and 13 months, in addition to usual care. The primary outcome at 2-year follow-up was incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of each physiotherapy intervention in addition to usual care, compared with usual care alone, from the health system and societal perspectives. To allow interpretation of negative ICURs, we report incremental net benefit (INB). The primary clinical outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC).

RESULTS

Of 206 patients, 186 (90·3%) were retained at 2-year follow-up. Exercise physiotherapy and manual physiotherapy dominated usual care, demonstrating cost savings; combined therapy did not. Exercise therapy had the highest incremental net benefits (INBs), statistically significant at all willingness-to-pay (base-case: societal New Zealand (NZ)$6,312, 95%CI 334 to 12,279; health system NZ$8,065, 95%CI 136 to 15,994). Clinical improvements were superior to usual care only in the exercise physiotherapy group (-28.2 WOMAC points, 95%CI -49.2 to -7.1). No serious adverse events were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Individually supervised exercise therapy is cost-effective and clinically effective in addition to usual medical care at 2-year follow-up, and leads to cost savings for the health system and society.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospectively registered with the Australian NZ Clinical Trials Registry, reference ACTRN12608000130369.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of sofosbuvir compared to current standard treatment in Swiss patients with chronic hepatitis C

In clinical trials, sofosbuvir showed high antiviral activity in patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) across all genotypes. We aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of sofosbuvir-based treatment compared to current standard treatment in mono-infected patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) genotypes 1-4 in Switzerland. Cost-effectiveness was modelled from the perspective of the Swiss health care system using a lifetime Markov model. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) used an endpoint of cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Treatment characteristics, quality of life, and transition probabilities were obtained from published literature. Country-specific model inputs such as patient characteristics, mortality and costs were obtained from Swiss sources. We performed extensive sensitivity analyses. Costs and effects were discounted at 3% (range: 0-5%) per year. Sofosbuvir-containing treatment in mixed cohorts of cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients with CHC genotypes 1-4 showed ICERs between CHF 10,337 and CHF 91,570 per QALY gained. In subgroup analyses, sofosbuvir dominated telaprevir- and boceprevir-containing treatment in treatment-naïve genotype 1 cirrhotic patients. ICERs of sofosbuvir were above CHF 100,000 per QALY in treatment-naïve, interferon eligible, non-cirrhotic patients infected with genotypes 2 or 3. In deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, results were generally robust. From a Swiss health care system perspective, treatment of mixed cohorts of cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients with CHC genotypes 1-4 with sofosbuvir-containing treatment versus standard treatment would be cost-effective if a threshold of CHF 100,000 per QALY was assumed.

Cost effectiveness of first-line oral antiviral therapies for chronic hepatitis B : a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Chronic hepatitis B is a common, progressive disease, particularly when viral replication is detected. Oral antivirals can suppress viral replication and prevent or delay the development of cirrhosis and liver-related complications.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to systematically review the quality of cost-effectiveness evidence on first-line treatment with entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir difumarate (TDF) for patients with chronic hepatitis B.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases and retrieved articles published up to October 2011, in which the cost effectiveness of ETV or TDF was compared with that of other oral antivirals. The quality of the studies identified was assessed with a standard checklist for critical appraisal.

RESULTS

We selected 16 original papers, all published in the last 5 years. There was a conflict of interest in 12 of the 16 studies due to sponsorship by the corresponding pharmaceutical companies. According to the validity assessment, ten studies were classified as high quality. Five studies performed a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing ETV with TDF; they concluded that TDF dominates ETV. The other 11 studies compared ETV or TDF with other strategies; all concluded that ETV and TDF are both cost-effective interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review shows that there is valid evidence suggesting that ETV and TDF are cost-effective interventions for the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis B in many health systems. In countries where both alternatives are available, it appears that TDF dominates ETV. These results could help decision makers and clinicians to understand economic issues regarding the available drugs for first-line treatment of hepatitis B.

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Alongside Randomised Controlled Trials of Acupuncture

Objective

To summarise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture.

Methods

We identified full economic evaluations such as cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA) alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the consequences and costs of acupuncture for any medical condition. Eleven electronic databases were searched up to March 2011 without language restrictions. Eligible RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane criteria for risk of bias and a modified version of the checklist for economic evaluation. The general characteristics and the results of each economic analysis such as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were extracted.

Results

Of 17 included studies, nine were CUAs that measured quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and eight were CEAs that assessed effectiveness of acupuncture based on improvements in clinical symptoms. All CUAs showed that acupuncture with or without usual care was cost-effective compared with waiting list control or usual care alone, with ICERs ranging from ¢3011/QALY (dysmenorrhoea) to ¢22 298/QALY (allergic rhinitis) in German studies, and from £3855/QALY (osteoarthritis) to £9951/QALY (headache) in UK studies. In the CEAs, acupuncture was beneficial at a relatively low cost in six European and Asian studies. All CUAs were well-designed with a low risk of bias, but this was not the case for CEAs.

Conclusions

Overall, this review demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of acupuncture. Despite such promising results, any generalisation of these results needs to be made with caution given the diversity of diseases and the different status of acupuncture in the various countries.

Searching the clinical fitness landscape

Widespread unexplained variations in clinical practices and patient outcomes suggest major opportunities for improving the quality and safety of medical care. However, there is little consensus regarding how to best identify and disseminate healthcare improvements and a dearth of theory to guide the debate. Many consider multicenter randomized controlled trials to be the gold standard of evidence-based medicine, although results are often inconclusive or may not be generally applicable due to differences in the contexts within which care is provided. Increasingly, others advocate the use “quality improvement collaboratives”, in which multi-institutional teams share information to identify potentially better practices that are subsequently evaluated in the local contexts of specific institutions, but there is concern that such collaborative learning approaches lack the statistical rigor of randomized trials. Using an agent-based model, we show how and why a collaborative learning approach almost invariably leads to greater improvements in expected patient outcomes than more traditional approaches in searching simulated clinical fitness landscapes. This is due to a combination of greater statistical power and more context-dependent evaluation of treatments, especially in complex terrains where some combinations of practices may interact in affecting outcomes. The results of our simulations are consistent with observed limitations of randomized controlled trials and provide important insights into probable reasons for effectiveness of quality improvement collaboratives in the complex socio-technical environments of healthcare institutions. Our approach illustrates how modeling the evolution of medical practice as search on a clinical fitness landscape can aid in identifying and understanding strategies for improving the quality and safety of medical care.