Mark Nuijten

Cost Effectiveness of Palivizumab for Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prophylaxis in High-Risk Children

ObjectiveTo assess the cost effectiveness of palivizumab (a preventative treatment against severe respiratory syncytial virus [RSV] infection) in children at high risk of hospitalisation, i.e. preterm infants ≤35 weeks gestation, children with bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and children with congenital heart disease (CHD).MethodsA decision tree model was developed employing data sources from the published literature, palivizumab clinical trials, official UK price/tariff lists and national population statistics. The comparator was no prophylaxis. The primary perspective of the study was that of the UK NHS. In a societal perspective scenario analysis, the future lost productivity of a child resulting from RSV-related mortality (indirect costs) was also included. The cost of administration of palivizumab, hospital care for RSV infections and the cost of asthma treatment were included.The analysis was based on a lifetime follow-up period in order to capture the impact of palivizumab on long-term morbidity and mortality resulting from an RSV infection. The primary efficacy outcome in the palivizumab clinical trials was the number of RSV hospitalisations avoided, which was extrapolated to effectiveness outcomes, i.e. number of life-years gained and number of QALYs. Costs and effects were discounted by 3.5%.ResultsIn preterm infants and children with BPD, prophylaxis with palivizumab compared with no prophylaxis had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £7042/QALY without discounting outcomes, increasing to £16 720/QALY after discounting. In babies with CHD, the use of palivizumab resulted in an ICER of £2427/QALY without discounting outcomes and £6664/QALY after discounting. One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model. A scenario analysis showed that the inclusion of indirect costs leads to further improvement in the cost-effectiveness outcomes for palivizumab.ConclusionThis study suggests that palivizumab prophylaxis against severe RSV infection in children at high risk may be cost effective from the NHS perspective (vs no prophylaxis), and that the positive clinical and economic benefits may persist beyond one RSV season.

A Cost-Cost Study Comparing Etanercept with Infliximab in Rheumatoid Arthritis

AbstractObjective: The objective of this study was to compare the total costs associated with the administration of two different tumour necrosis factor (TNF) strategies used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA): etanercept, a soluble TNF receptor that can be administered at home by subcutaneous injection, versus infliximab, an antibody that requires an intravenous infusion in a hospital outpatient setting. Design and setting: The main analytical framework of the study was a cost-cost analysis comparing the total annual costs associated with the administration of etanercept and infliximab in adult RA patients. The perspective of the study was that of the Dutch society. An economic model was constructed to determine the costs of both treatments. The cost evaluation included direct medical costs, direct nonmedical costs and indirect costs. The base-case analysis compared monotherapy with etanercept versus a combination therapy with infliximab and methotrexate. Data for the economic model came from published literature, expert opinion and official price and tariff lists. All costs were in 1999 values. Patients and participants: The analysis was performed for the adult RA population eligible for treatment with etanercept or infliximab in The Netherlands. Main outcome measures and results: The analysis showed that the total annual drug costs per patient do not differ substantially between infliximab and etanercept, with costs of Netherland guilders (NLG)31 526 (

The Selection of Data Sources For Use in Modelling Studies

US12 610) and NLG31 334 (

Reporting Format for Economic Evaluation: Part II: Focus on Modelling Studies

US12 534), respectively. However, the other medical costs (i.e. excluding the costs of the two drugs themselves) are substantially higher for infliximab due to the additional costs associated with administration in an outpatient clinic and the use of methotrexate [NLG12 621 (

A Markov Process Analysis Comparing the Cost Effectiveness of Maintenance Therapy with Citalopram versus Standard Therapy in Major Depression

US5048) versus NLG269 (

Primary prevention of nephrolithiasis is cost‐effective for a national healthcare system

US107) for etanercept]. The impact of direct nonmedical costs (transportation) and indirect costs were negligible. Overall treatment with infliximab is more expensive than treatment with etanercept with total costs of NLG45 115 (

Increased Water Intake as a Prevention Strategy for Recurrent Urolithiasis: Major Impact of Compliance on Cost-Effectiveness

US18 046) and NLG31 621 (

Nutrition economics – characterising the economic and health impact of nutrition

US12 648), respectively (42.7% increase). Conclusions: Based on the assumptions used in themodel, we may conclude that the use of etanercept compares favourably with infliximab from a budgetary and health economic perspective: the total costs are substantially lower when the efficacy of etanercept is assumed to be at least equivalent to the efficacy of infliximab.

Patterns of Dosage changes with transdermal buprenorphine and transdermal fentanyl for the treatment of noncancer and cancer pain: A retrospective data analysis in Germany

SummaryEconomic analysis has become increasingly important in healthcare in general, and particularly with respect to pharmaceuticals. Therefore, it is vital that the methods used in such evaluations are carefully scrutinised and refined. However, guidelines contain only a limited number of recommendations for the use of secondary data in modelling studies.In this manuscript, the selection of data sources in modelling studies will be addressed. The objectives of this manuscript are as follows: (i) to present a general strategy on how to determine the appropriateness of a data source for a model; and (ii) to present recommendations on a transparent reporting format for the selection of data sources.

Cost Effectiveness of Treatment of Parkinson’s Disease with Entacapone in the United States

This article presents the first version of a reporting format for modelling studies which is based on a general reporting format by our taskforce, which was published in the previous issue of this journal. The use of decision-analytical models for economic evaluations is increasing because, in practice, it is not always possible to derive information from prospective studies. However, the acceptance of modelling studies is generally lower than prospective studies not only because of the use of secondary data, but also because the reports of modelling studies do not always have sufficient transparency. Hence, a standardised reporting format may improve the transparency and, consequently, the acceptance of modelling studies. This article presents an example of a reporting format for economic evaluation based on modelling studies, which may facilitate the development of future guidelines for modelling studies. The format consists of a number of headings, which are followed by a brief recommendation on the content. This format does not deal with methodology and data management, but especially addresses validation and quality assurance, which may increase the transparency of the report.