Treatment for life for severe haemophilia A- A cost-utility model for prophylaxis vs. on-demand treatment

被引:47
|
作者
Farrugia, A. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Cassar, J. [4 ]
Kimber, M. C. [1 ]
Bansal, M. [1 ]
Fischer, K. [5 ]
Auserswald, G. [6 ]
O'Mahony, B. [7 ]
Tolley, K. [8 ]
Noone, D. [7 ]
Balboni, S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Plasma Prot Therapeut Assoc, Annapolis, MD 21401 USA
[2] Univ Western Australia, Sch Surg, Crawley, WA, Australia
[3] Australian Natl Univ, Sch Med, Canberra, ACT, Australia
[4] Univ Canberra, Fac Hlth, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
[5] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Van Creveldklin, Utrecht, Netherlands
[6] Klinikum Bremen Mitte, Ambulanz Thrombose & Haemostasestoerungen Prof He, Bremen, Germany
[7] Irish Haemophilia Soc, Dublin, Ireland
[8] Tolley Hlth Econ Ltd, Tolley, Derby, England
关键词
cost-utility; health economics; prophylaxis; IMMUNOLOGICAL DANGER SIGNALS; IMMUNE TOLERANCE INDUCTION; FACTOR-VIII; INTRACRANIAL HEMORRHAGE; TREATMENT STRATEGIES; HEALTH; TECHNOLOGY; INHIBITORS; GUIDELINES; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1111/hae.12121
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Prophylaxis has been established as the treatment of choice in children with haemophilia and its continuation into the adult years has been shown to decrease morbidity throughout life. The cost of factor therapy has made the option questionable in cost-effectiveness studies. The role of prophylaxis in pharmacokinetic dosage and tolerization against inhibitor formation were used to model the cost utility of prophylaxis vs. on-demand (OD) therapy over a lifetime horizon in severe haemophilia A. The model was applied to a single provider national health system exemplified by the United Kingdom's National Health Service and a third party provider in the United States. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated and compared to threshold values used by payer agencies to guide reimbursement decisions. A cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was also estimated for Sweden. Prophylaxis was dominant over OD treatment in the UK. The model resulted in an ICER - $68000 - within the range of treatments reimbursed in the USA. In Sweden, a cost/QALY of SEK 1.1 million was also within the range of reimbursed treatments in that country. Dosage- and treatment-induced inhibitor incidence were the most important variables in the model. Subject to continuing clinical evidence of the effectiveness of pharmacokinetic dosage and the role of prophylaxis in decreasing inhibitor incidence, treatment for life with prophylaxis is a cost-effective therapy, using current criteria for the reimbursement of health care technologies in a number of countries.
引用
收藏
页码:e228 / e238
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Treatment for life for severe haemophilia A. A cost-utility model for prophylaxis vs. on-demand treatment
    Farrugia, A.
    Bansal, M.
    Cassar, J.
    Kimber, M. C.
    Auserswald, G.
    Fischer, K.
    O'Mahony, B.
    Noone, D.
    Tolley, K.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS, 2013, 11 : 353 - 354
  • [2] COST-UTILITY OF PROPHYLAXIS VS. ON-DEMAND TREATMENT IN SEVERE HAEMOPHILIA A PATIENTS
    Gharibnaseri, Z.
    Davari, M.
    Cheraghali, A.
    Eshghi, P.
    Ravanbod, R.
    Spendar, R.
    Khedmati, J.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (07) : A591 - A591
  • [3] Cost-utility analysis of primary prophylaxis versus treatment on-demand for individuals with severe haemophilia
    Miners, AH
    Sabin, CA
    Tolley, KH
    Lee, CA
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2002, 20 (11) : 759 - 774
  • [4] Cost-Utility Analysis of Primary Prophylaxis versus Treatment On-Demand for Individuals with Severe Haemophilia
    Alexander H. Miners
    Caroline A. Sabin
    Keith H. Tolley
    Christine A. Lee
    [J]. PharmacoEconomics, 2002, 20 : 759 - 774
  • [5] Treatment for life: Prophylaxis in haemophilia A is more cost-effective than on-demand therapy in a cost-utility model
    Farrugia, A.
    Cassar, J.
    Kimber, M. C.
    Bansal, M.
    Balboni, S.
    [J]. HAEMOPHILIA, 2012, 18 (05) : 828 - 829
  • [6] Cost-effectiveness analysis of late prophylaxis vs. on-demand treatment for severe haemophilia A in Italy
    Coppola, A.
    D'Ausilio, A.
    Aiello, A.
    Amoresano, S.
    Toumi, M.
    Mathew, P.
    Tagliaferri, A.
    [J]. HAEMOPHILIA, 2017, 23 (03) : 422 - 429
  • [7] Cost-utility analysis of Canadian tailored prophylaxis, primary prophylaxis and on-demand therapy in young children with severe haemophilia A
    Risebrough, N.
    Oh, P.
    Blanchette, V.
    Curtin, J.
    Hitzler, J.
    Feldman, B. M.
    [J]. HAEMOPHILIA, 2008, 14 (04) : 743 - 752
  • [8] Prophylaxis vs. on-demand treatment with Nuwiq® (Human-cl rhFVIII) in adults with severe haemophilia A
    Tiede, A.
    Oldenburg, J.
    Lissitchkov, T.
    Knaub, S.
    Bichler, J.
    Manco-Johnson, M. J.
    [J]. HAEMOPHILIA, 2016, 22 (03) : 374 - 380
  • [9] COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF ANTIHEMOPHILIC FACTOR RFVIII-FS FOR SECONDARY PROPHYLAXIS VS ON-DEMAND THERAPY IN SEVERE HAEMOPHILIA A IN ITALY
    Tagliaferri, A.
    Coppola, A.
    Amoresano, S.
    Aiello, A.
    D'Ausilio, A.
    Toumi, M.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2015, 18 (07) : A671 - A671
  • [10] Cost-utility analysis of prophylaxis versus treatment on demand in severe hemophilia A
    Colombo, Giorgio L.
    Di Matteo, Sergio
    Mancuso, Maria Elisa
    Santagostino, Elena
    [J]. CLINICOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2011, 3 : 55 - 61