Cost-effectiveness analysis

成本效益分析
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:自2015年以来,大多数中国血液中心已在常规献血者筛查HBV感染中实施了迷你池(MP)HBV核酸检测(NAT)和HBsAgELISA,并且一些中心最近将MP升级为个人捐赠(ID)NAT筛查,迫切需要对不同筛查策略进行成本效益分析。为了防止HBV的输血传播感染(TTI),三种不同筛查策略的成本效益分析:单独的HBsAg,HBsAg加MPNAT和HBsAg加IDNAT在来自中国南方HBV感染流行的献血者中进行。
    方法:并行采用MP-6HBVNAT和IDNAT筛选献血者,作进一步的比较分析。根据筛选数据和记录的参数,窗口期(WP)感染的数量,HBV急性感染,慢性乙型肝炎感染(CHB)和隐匿性乙型肝炎感染(OBI)进行了评估,并根据成本效益分析通过估算模型预测这三种策略的潜在预防HBVTTI和收益。
    结果:在132,323次捐赠中,IDNAT筛选的HBsAg-/DNA+的得率(0.12%)显著高于MPNAT(0.058%,P<0.05)。此外,与MP-6NAT相比,IDNAT预防的预测输血传播HBV病例为1.25倍.通用HBsAg筛查的成本效益比,HBsAg加IDNAT和HBsAg加MPNAT分别为1:58、1:27和1:22。
    结论:通用HBsAgELISA筛查结合HBVIDNAT或MP-6NAT策略在中国具有很高的成本效益。进一步提高血液安全,在HBV流行地区/国家应考虑HBsAg加HBVDNAIDNAT筛查。
    BACKGROUND: Most Chinese blood centers have implemented mini pool (MP) HBV nucleic acid testing (NAT) together with HBsAg ELISA in routine blood donor screening for HBV infection since 2015, and a few centers upgraded MP to individual donation (ID) NAT screening recently, raising urgent need for cost-benefit analysis of different screening strategies. In an effort to prevent transfusion-transmitted infections (TTIs) for HBV, cost-benefit analyses of three different screening strategies: HBsAg alone, HBsAg plus MP NAT and HBsAg plus ID NAT were performed in blood donors from southern China where HBV infection was endemic.
    METHODS: MP-6 HBV NAT and ID NAT were adopted in parallel to screen blood donors for further comparative analysis. On the basis of screening data and the documented parameters, the number of window period (WP) infection, HBV acute infection, chronic hepatitis B infection (CHB) and occult hepatitis B infection (OBI) was evaluated, and the potential prevented HBV TTIs and benefits of these three strategies were predicted based on cost-benefit analysis by an estimation model.
    RESULTS: Of 132,323 donations, the yield rate for HBsAg-/DNA + screened by ID NAT (0.12%) was significantly higher than that by MP NAT (0.058%, P < 0.05). Furthermore, the predicted transfusion-transmitted HBV cases prevented was 1.25 times more by ID NAT compared to MP-6 NAT. The cost-benefit ratio of the universal HBsAg screening, HBsAg plus ID NAT and HBsAg plus MP NAT were 1:58, 1:27 and 1:22, respectively.
    CONCLUSIONS: Universal HBsAg ELISA screening in combination with HBV ID NAT or MP-6 NAT strategies was highly cost effective in China. To further improve blood safety, HBsAg plus HBV DNA ID NAT screening should be considered in HBV endemic regions/countries.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本分析旨在更好地反映新抗生素治疗策略的价值,从而告知临床抗生素的使用,中国的抗菌药物报销和/或医院处方集决策。
    方法:我们调整了已发布并经过验证的动态疾病传播和成本效益模型,以评估引入新抗生素的临床和经济结果。头孢他啶/阿维巴坦(CAZ-AVI)治疗浙江省耐药感染,中国。在10年的感染期内评估结果,年贴现率为5%。费用从医院的健康信息系统(HIS)中提取,并在数据清理后获得,聚合和贴现。
    方法:中国医疗体系视角。
    方法:2018年至2021年,中国三级医院的10905例患者患有三种常见感染(复杂性腹腔内感染(cIAI),医院获得性/呼吸机相关性肺炎(HAP/VAP)和治疗方案有限的感染(LTO)引起的三种常见耐药病原体(大肠杆菌,克雷伯菌属。和铜绿假单胞菌)。
    方法:(1)目前的治疗策略(哌拉西林他唑巴坦(pip/taz)和美罗培南);(2)三线CAZ-AVI;(3)二线CAZ-AVI;(4)一线CAZ-AVI;(5)一线CAZ/AVI,两条线多样化(即,第一行相等的pip/taz和CAZ-AVI;最后一行的美罗培南)和(6)CAZ/AVI第一行,全线多元化。
    方法:质量调整生命年(QALYs)损失,住院费用和增量净货币收益(INMB)用于评估成本效益.
    结果:超过10年,在目前的治疗策略中引入CAZ-AVI导致降低了住院费用和所有五种治疗策略的更多QALY,获得了68284至78571QALY,同时每增加一次QALY可节省236.37美元。引入CAZ-AVI的INMB估计高达3550811878美元。
    结论:引入CAZ-AVI对治疗抗菌药物耐药性的临床和经济结果产生了积极影响,在治疗早期多样化使用抗生素可能会产生最佳益处。
    OBJECTIVE: This analysis aims to better reflect the value of new antibiotic treatment strategies, thereby informing clinical antibiotic use, antimicrobial reimbursement and/or hospital formulary decision-making in China.
    METHODS: We adapted a published and validated dynamic disease transmission and cost-effectiveness model to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes of introducing a new antibiotic, ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) for treating resistant infections in Zhejiang province, China. Outcomes were assessed over a 10-year infectious period and an annual discount rate of 5%. Costs were extracted from the hospital\'s Health Information System (HIS) and obtained after data cleaning, aggregation and discounting.
    METHODS: The Chinese healthcare system perspective.
    METHODS: 10 905 patients in a Chinese tier-3 hospital from 2018 to 2021 with any of the three common infections (complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP) and infections with limited treatment options (LTO)) caused by three common resistant pathogens (Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp. and Pseudomonas aeruginosa).
    METHODS: (1) Current treatment strategy (piperacillin-tazobactam (pip/taz) and meropenem); (2) CAZ-AVI at the third line; (3) CAZ-AVI at the second line; (4) CAZ-AVI at the first line; (5) CAZ/AVI first line, two lines diversified (i.e., equal pip/taz and CAZ-AVI at the first line; meropenem at the last line) and (6) CAZ/AVI first line, all-lines diversified.
    METHODS: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost, hospitalisation costs and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) were used to assess cost-effectiveness.
    RESULTS: Over 10 years, the introduction of CAZ-AVI to the current treatment strategy led to lower hospitalisation costs and more QALYs across all five treatment strategies, with between 68 284 and 78 571 QALYs gained whilst saving up to US$236.37 for each additional QALY gained. The INMB of introducing CAZ-AVI is estimated up to US$3 550 811 878.
    CONCLUSIONS: Introducing CAZ-AVI had a positive impact on clinical and economic outcomes for treating antimicrobial resistance, and diversifying the antibiotics use early in the treatment might yield the best benefits.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:与奥希替尼相比,一线奥希替尼联合化疗可显著延长EGFR突变的晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者的无进展生存期,根据FLAURA2试验。
    方法:我们建立了Markov模型,比较了奥希替尼联合化疗与奥希替尼单独化疗的成本-效果。临床数据来自FLAURA和FLAURA2试验,并从在线资源和出版物中提取了其他数据。进行敏感性分析以评估结果的稳健性。我们使用了每获得质量调整生命年(QALY)15万美元的支付意愿门槛。主要结果是QALY,总成本,增量成本效益比(ICER),净货币收益增量,和增加的净健康福利。根据患者的突变类型和中枢神经系统(CNS)转移状态进行亚组分析。
    结果:在20年的时间范围内,奥希替尼联合化疗与奥希替尼单独化疗的ICER为每QALY增加223,727.1美元.敏感性分析确定奥希替尼的成本和总生存期的风险比为前2个影响因素,奥希替尼联合化疗的成本效益为1.9%。亚组分析显示,L858R突变每QALY获得的ICER为132,614.1美元,224,449.8美元,201,464.1美元和130,159.7美元,外显子19缺失,CNS转移,没有中枢神经系统转移亚组,分别。
    结论:从美国医疗保健系统的角度来看,与奥希替尼单独治疗EGFR突变的晚期NSCLC患者相比,奥希替尼联合化疗的成本效益不高,但L858R突变患者和无基线CNS转移患者的成本-效果更有利.
    BACKGROUND: First-line osimertinib plus chemotherapy significantly prolonged progression-free survival of patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) compared to osimertinib, according to the FLAURA2 trial.
    METHODS: We established a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of osimertinib plus chemotherapy with that of osimertinib alone. Clinical data were obtained from the FLAURA and FLAURA2 trials, and additional data were extracted from online resources and publications. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the findings. We used A willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. The main outcomes were QALYs, overall costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net monetary benefit, and incremental net health benefit. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to patients\' mutation type and central nervous system (CNS) metastatic status.
    RESULTS: In a 20-year time horizon, the ICER of osimertinib plus chemotherapy versus osimertinib alone was $223,727.1 per QALY gained. The sensitivity analyses identified the cost of osimertinib and the hazard ratio for overall survival as the top 2 influential factors and a 1.9% probability of osimertinib plus chemotherapy to be cost-effective. The subgroup analyses revealed ICERs of $132,614.1, $224,449.8, $201,464.1, and $130,159.7 per QALY gained for L858R mutations, exon 19 deletions, CNS metastases, and no CNS metastases subgroups, respectively.
    CONCLUSIONS: From the perspective of the United States health care system, osimertinib plus chemotherapy is not cost-effective compared to osimertinib alone for treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, but more favorable cost-effectiveness occurs in patients with L858R mutations and patients without baseline CNS metastases.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:目前,预防带状疱疹的重组亚单位疫苗和减毒活疫苗已在中国批准上市。本研究旨在评估重组亚单位疫苗和减毒活疫苗在中国人群中的成本-效果。
    方法:使用决策树-马尔可夫分析模型来估计预期成本和质量调整寿命年(QALYs),比较疫苗接种与重组亚单位疫苗的终生成本效益(伦敦,英国,Shingrix,GSK)对减毒活疫苗(长春,中国,干威,长春Bcht)在中国人口中,主要结果指标是增量成本效益比(ICER)。
    结果:在基本案例分析中,重组亚单位疫苗的ICER按年龄划分,从每QALY3428美元到5743美元不等,而减毒活疫苗的ICER在每QALY4017美元至18,254美元之间,与没有接种疫苗相比。在所有年龄组中,60至69岁是最佳接种年龄.结果对带状疱疹发病率的变化最敏感,疫苗功效,和贴现率。即使重组亚单位疫苗的两剂依从率达到20%,疫苗接种仍然具有成本效益。与RZV相比,ZVL需要将成本降低至少12.2%才能具有成本效益优势。
    结论:重组亚单位疫苗和减毒活疫苗在中国人群中都具有成本效益,但是,相对而言,在50岁以上的所有年龄组中,重组亚单位疫苗在疾病预防和成本效益方面具有更大的优势.
    BACKGROUND: Currently, the recombinant subunit vaccine and live attenuated vaccine in the prevention of herpes zoster are approved for marketing in China. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the recombinant subunit vaccine and the live attenuated vaccine in the Chinese population.
    METHODS: A decision tree-Markov analysis model was utilized to estimate expected costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), comparing the lifetime cost-effectiveness of vaccination with the recombinant subunit vaccine (London, United Kingdom, Shingrix, GSK) to that of the live attenuated vaccine (Changchun, China, Ganwei, Changchun Bcht) in the Chinese population, with the primary outcome measure being the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
    RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, the ICERs for the recombinant subunit vaccine ranged by age from USD 3428 to USD 5743 per QALY, while the ICERs for the live attenuated vaccine ranged from USD 4017 to USD 18,254 per QALY, compared with no vaccination. Among all age groups, the category of 60 to 69 years was the optimal age for vaccination. The results were most sensitive to changes in herpes zoster incidence, vaccine efficacy, and discount rate. Even with a two-dose compliance rate of 20% for the recombinant subunit vaccine, vaccination remained cost-effective. ZVL would need to reduce costs by at least 12.2% compared to RZV to have a cost-effectiveness advantage.
    CONCLUSIONS: The recombinant subunit vaccine and the live attenuated vaccine were both cost-effective in the Chinese population, but, relatively, the recombinant subunit vaccine had a greater advantage in disease prevention and cost-effectiveness in all age groups above 50 years.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    流感感染可引起心力衰竭(HF)患者的心血管事件,通过疫苗接种降低潜在风险。本研究旨在评估中国HF患者流感疫苗接种的成本-效果。
    我们开发了一个3个月周期的马尔可夫模型,以模拟在3年内对HF患者施用流感疫苗的成本效益。模型中的患者接受了流感疫苗或安慰剂,除了标准的HF治疗。成本数据,来自《中国医疗保健统计年鉴》和其他公共记录,以及IVVE(流感疫苗预防HF不良血管事件)试验的有效性数据,被合并。具体来说,流感疫苗的费用为75元人民币(CNY)(11美元),心力衰竭(HHF)的住院费用为9,326元(1,386美元),肺炎的治疗费用为5,984元人民币(889美元)。这项研究的主要结果,增量成本效益比(ICER),量化每个增量质量调整寿命年(QALY)的增量成本(人民币和美元)。其他结果包括总成本,总效力,增量成本,和增量有效性。我们进行了单向和概率敏感性分析(PSA)来评估确定性和不确定性,分别。情景分析,考虑到各种情况,进行评估结果的稳健性。
    在基本情况分析中,流感疫苗,与安慰剂相比,在中国HF患者中,导致成本从21,004元(3,121美元)增加到21,062元(3,130美元),QALY从1.89增加到1.92(2.55寿命年与2.57生命年)每位患者。由此产生的ICER为每QALY2,331元人民币(346美元)[每生命年2,080元人民币(309美元)],低于基于人均GDP的支付意愿门槛。单因素敏感性分析显示,两组间HHF和心血管死亡率的差异对ICER的影响最为显著,而疫苗的成本产生了边际影响。PSA和情景分析共同肯定了我们研究结果的稳健性。
    这项研究表明,将流感疫苗添加到中国HF患者的标准治疗方案中可能是一种极具成本效益的选择。进一步的真实世界数据研究对于验证这些发现至关重要。
    UNASSIGNED: Influenza infection induces cardiovascular events in heart failure (HF) patients, with potential risk reduction through vaccination. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination for HF patients in China.
    UNASSIGNED: We developed a Markov model with a 3-month cycle to simulate the cost-effectiveness of administering the influenza vaccine to patients with HF over a 3-year period. Patients in the model received either the influenza vaccine or a placebo, in addition to standard HF treatment. Cost data, sourced from the China Healthcare Statistic Yearbook and other public records, and effectiveness data from the IVVE (Influenza Vaccine to Prevent Adverse Vascular Events in HF) trial, were incorporated. Specifically, the cost of the influenza vaccine was 75 Chinese Yuan (CNY) (11 USD), the cost of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) was 9,326 CNY (1,386 USD), and the cost of treatment for pneumonia was 5,984 CNY (889 USD). The study\'s primary outcome, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), quantifies the incremental cost (CNY and USD) per incremental quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Additional outcomes included total cost, total effectiveness, incremental cost, and incremental effectiveness. We conducted one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) to assess certainty and uncertainty, respectively. Scenario analysis, considering various situations, was performed to evaluate the robustness of the results.
    UNASSIGNED: In the base case analysis, influenza vaccine, compared to placebo, among Chinese HF patients, resulted in a cost increase from 21,004 CNY (3,121 USD) to 21,062 CNY (3,130 USD) and in QALYs from 1.89 to 1.92 (2.55 life years vs. 2.57 life years) per patient. The resulting ICER was 2,331 CNY (346 USD) per QALY [2,080 CNY (309 USD) per life year], falling below the willingness-to-pay threshold based on per capita GDP. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that disparities in HHF and cardiovascular death rates between groups had the most significant impact on the ICER, while the cost of vaccines had a marginal impact. PSA and scenario analysis collectively affirmed the robustness of our findings.
    UNASSIGNED: This study suggests that adding the influenza vaccine to standard treatment regimens for Chinese patients with HF may represent a highly cost-effective option. Further real-world data studies are essential to validate these findings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本研究旨在评估在中国销售的常规护理(CC)和七种一线靶向疗法的长期成本效益,用于治疗强直性脊柱炎(AS)患者,即苏金单抗,ixekizumab,英夫利昔单抗,依那西普,阿达木单抗和戈利木单抗和托法替尼-从中国医疗保健系统的角度来看。
    方法:约克模型被构造为一个12周的决策树,导致两个马尔可夫模型。本研究将1年作为模型的循环周期和生命周期。主要模型结果包括人民币成本(人民币),在89,358日元(相当于2023年中国人均国内生产总值)的支付意愿阈值下,质量调整生命年(QALY)和增量成本效益比(ICER)的健康结果。York模型中的参数来自网络荟萃分析和文献,包括治疗反应,短期疾病进展,患者功能和长期结构性疾病进展。公用事业依赖于BASDAI评分等指标,BASFI评分,性别和年龄。在基本分析中,使用来自YAOZH网的中国市场中位数价格对药品价格进行了分析。成本和结果折扣为5.0%。我们进行了确定性和概率敏感性分析,以调查结果的稳健性。在情景分析中使用了原研药和仿制药的价格。
    结果:与CC相比,戈利木单抗的ICER为104,217.4日元/QALY,是人均GDP的1到3倍,而其他六种靶向疗法的ICER低于89,358日元/QALY。靶向治疗的具体经济等级如下:苏金单抗>ixekizumab>托法替尼>英夫利昔单抗>依那西普>阿达木单抗>戈利木单抗。治疗反应率,如BASDAI50,BASDAI/BASFI评分和折现率的变化是关键模型驱动因素。根据情景分析,当使用原药和仿制药时,IL-17抑制剂仍然是最经济的干预措施。
    结论:靶向治疗是AS的经济有效的治疗方法。总的来说,IL-17抑制剂是主要的治疗方法。全新价格或仿制药价格的选择会极大地影响经济。
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of conventional care (CC) and seven first-line targeted therapies marketed in China for the treatment of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS)-namely secukinumab, ixekizumab, infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab and golimumab and tofacitinib-from the perspective of the Chinese health care system.
    METHODS: The York model was structured as a 12-week decision tree leading into two Markov models. This study set 1 year as a recurring cycle and a lifetime timeframe for the model. Primary model outcomes included the costs in Chinese yuan (CNY), health outcomes in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) under a willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥89,358 (equal to the per capita gross domestic product in China in 2023) per QALY. Parameters in the York model were captured from network meta-analyses and literature including treatment response, short-term disease progression, patient functioning and long-term structural disease progression. Utilities are dependent on indicators such as the BASDAI score, the BASFI score, gender and age. Drug prices were analysed using the median price of the Chinese market from YAOZH net in the basic analysis. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 5.0%. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to investigate the robustness of the results. The prices of original drugs and generic drugs were used in the scenario analysis.
    RESULTS: Compared with CC, the ICER of golimumab was ¥104,217.4/QALY, which is between 1 and 3 times the GDP per capita, while the ICERs of the other six targeted therapies were less than ¥89,358/QALY. The specific economic rank of the targeted therapy was as follows: secukinumab > ixekizumab > tofacitinib > infliximab > etanercept > adalimumab > golimumab. Treatment response rates such as the BASDAI50, changes in the BASDAI/BASFI scores and the discounting rate were key model drivers. According to the scenario analysis, IL-17 inhibitors were still the most economical intervention when original drugs and generic drugs were used.
    CONCLUSIONS: Targeted therapies are cost-effective treatments for AS. Overall, IL-17 inhibitors were the dominant treatment. The choice of the brand-new prices or generic drug prices can greatly affect economics.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:肝细胞癌(HCC)是全世界癌症相关死亡的主要原因之一,特别是在中国,带来了沉重的社会经济负担。几种免疫组合疗法在不可切除的HCC的一线治疗中显示出有希望的疗效,并在临床实践中广泛使用。然而,哪种组合是最实惠的,目前尚不清楚。我们的研究从中国付款人的角度评估了免疫组合作为不可切除的HCC患者的一线治疗的成本效益。
    方法:根据五个多中心建立马尔可夫模型,第三阶段,开放标签,随机试验(喜马拉雅,IMbrave150,ORIENT-32,CARES-310,LEAP-002)调查曲美木单抗加杜瓦单抗(STRIDE)的成本效益,阿替珠单抗加贝伐单抗(A+B),sintilimab加贝伐单抗生物仿制药(IBI305)(S+B),camrelizumab加rivoceranib(C+R),和派博利珠单抗加乐伐替尼(P+L)。包括三种疾病状态:无进展生存期(PFS),进行性疾病(PD)以及死亡。从华西医院搜索医疗费用,出版文献或红皮书。评估了成本效益比(CER)和增量成本效益比(ICER),以比较不同组合之间的成本。进行敏感性分析以评估模型的鲁棒性。
    结果:C+R的总成本和质量调整寿命年(QALYs),S+B,P+L,A+B和STRIDE分别为$12,109.27和0.91,$26,961.60和1.12,$55,382.53和0.83,$70,985.06和0.90,$84,589.01和0.73,导致C+R最具成本效益的策略,CER为每QALY13,306.89美元,其次是S+B,CER为每QALY24,072.86美元。与C+R相比,S+B策略的ICER为每QALY70,725.38美元,当愿意支付门槛超过73,500美元/质量时,这将成为最具成本效益的。在亚组分析中,随着亚洲结果在Leap-002试验中的应用,模型结果与全球数据相同。在敏感性分析中,随着参数的变化,结果是稳健的。
    结论:作为HCC一线全身治疗的有希望的免疫组合疗法之一,camrelizumab+rivoceranib被证明是最具成本效益的战略,这需要进一步的研究,以最好地告知现实世界的临床实践。
    OBJECTIVE: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death all over the world, and brings a heavy social economic burden especially in China. Several immuno-combination therapies have shown promising efficacy in the first-line treatment of unresectable HCC and are widely used in clinical practice. Nevertheless, which combination is the most affordable one is unknown. Our study assessed the cost-effectiveness of the immuno-combinations as first-line treatment for patients with unresectable HCC from the perspective of Chinese payers.
    METHODS: A Markov model was built according to five multicenter, phase III, open-label, randomized trials (Himalaya, IMbrave150, ORIENT-32, CARES-310, LEAP-002) to investigate the cost-effectiveness of tremelimumab plus durvalumab (STRIDE), atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A + B), sintilimab plus bevacizumab biosimilar (IBI305) (S + B), camrelizumab plus rivoceranib (C + R), and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib (P + L). Three disease states were included: progression free survival (PFS), progressive disease (PD) as well as death. Medical costs were searched from West China Hospital, published literatures or the Red Book. Cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were evaluated to compare costs among different combinations. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robust of the model.
    RESULTS: The total cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of C + R, S + B, P + L, A + B and STRIDE were $12,109.27 and 0.91, $26,961.60 and 1.12, $55,382.53 and 0.83, $70,985.06 and 0.90, $84,589.01 and 0.73, respectively, resulting in the most cost-effective strategy of C + R with CER of $13,306.89 per QALY followed by S + B with CER of $24,072.86 per QALY. Compared with C + R, the ICER of S + B strategy was $70,725.38 per QALY, which would become the most cost-effective when the willing-to-pay threshold exceeded $73,500/QALY. In the subgroup analysis, with the application of Asia results in Leap-002 trial, the model results were the same as global data. In the sensitivity analysis, with the variation of parameters, the results were robust.
    CONCLUSIONS: As one of the promising immuno-combination therapies in the first-line systemic treatment of HCC, camrelizumab plus rivoceranib demonstrated the potential to be the most cost-effective strategy, which warranted further studies to best inform the real-world clinical practices.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    即时检测(POCT)糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)是一种方便,便宜,在欧洲地区和日本广泛使用的农村地区和社区环境中有效且易于使用的2型糖尿病筛查方法,但在中国还不普遍。该研究是第一个评估POCTHbA1c成本效益的研究,空腹毛细血管葡萄糖(FCG),和静脉血HbA1c筛查中国城乡2型糖尿病,并确定最佳的社会经济利益筛查策略。
    基于中国的城乡,从社会角度构建2型糖尿病筛查的经济模型.这项研究的受试者是18-80岁的未诊断为2型糖尿病的成年人。针对静脉血HbA1c建立了三种筛查策略,FCG和POCTHbA1c,并通过马尔可夫模型进行成本效益分析。对模型的所有参数进行了单向敏感性分析和概率敏感性分析,以验证结果的稳定性。
    与FCG相比,POCTHbA1c具有成本效益,城市地区的增量成本效用比(ICUR)为500.06美元/质量调整生命年(QALY),农村地区的ICUR为185.10美元/QALY,在支付意愿门槛内(WTP=37,653美元)。与城市和农村地区的静脉血HbA1c相比,POCTHbA1c具有较低的成本效益和较高的实用性。在静脉血HbA1c和FCG的比较中,静脉血HbA1c在城市地区具有成本效益(ICUR=$20,833/QALY),而在农村地区则不具有成本效益(ICUR=$41,858/QALY).敏感性分析表明,研究结果稳定可靠。
    POCTHbA1c在中国城市和农村地区的2型糖尿病筛查中具有成本效益,这可以考虑在中国未来的临床实践。地理位置等因素,在选择静脉血HbA1c或FCG时,需要考虑当地的财务状况和居民的依从性。
    UNASSIGNED: Point-of-care Testing (POCT) glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is a convenient, cheap, effective and accessible screening method for type 2 diabetes in rural areas and community settings that is widely used in the European region and Japan, but not yet widespread in China. The study is the first to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of POCT HbA1c, fasting capillary glucose (FCG), and venous blood HbA1c to screen for type 2 diabetes in urban and rural areas of China, and to identify the best socio-economically beneficial screening strategy.
    UNASSIGNED: Based on urban and rural areas in China, economic models for type 2 diabetes screening were constructed from a social perspective. The subjects of this study were adults aged 18-80 years with undiagnosed type 2 diabetes. Three screening strategies were established for venous blood HbA1c, FCG and POCT HbA1c, and cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by Markov models. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed on all parameters of the model to verify the stability of the results.
    UNASSIGNED: Compared with FCG, POCT HbA1c was cost-effective with an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of $500.06/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in urban areas and an ICUR of $185.10/QALY in rural areas, within the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP = $37,653). POCT HbA1c was cost-effective with lower cost and higher utility compared with venous blood HbA1c in both urban and rural areas. In the comparison of venous blood HbA1c and FCG, venous blood HbA1c was cost-effective (ICUR = $20,833/QALY) in urban areas but not in rural areas (ICUR = $41,858/QALY). Sensitivity analyses showed that the results of the study were stable and credible.
    UNASSIGNED: POCT HbA1c was cost-effective for type 2 diabetes screening in both urban and rural areas of China, which could be considered for future clinical practice in China. Factors such as geographic location, local financial situation and resident compliance needed to be considered when making the choice of venous blood HbA1c or FCG.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这项研究的重点是从中国医疗保健系统的角度评估合并toripalimab和化疗治疗转移性三阴性乳腺癌患者的成本效益。
    构建分区生存模型以模拟mTNBC患者一生中的成本和健康结果。关于总生存率的临床数据,无进展生存期,与治疗相关的不良事件来自TORCHLIGHT临床试验.增量成本效益比(ICER)是根据质量调整生命年(QALY)的收益计算的。支付意愿(WTP)门槛定义为每QALY39,855.79美元。此外,进行了敏感性分析,以检验模型的稳健性。
    接受toripalimab的组的总费用为38,040.62美元,而安慰剂加化疗为26,102.07美元。与安慰剂加化疗组相比,toripalimab方案的使用导致了0.74QALY的增加和11,938.55美元的增加成本。ICER为$16,133.18/QALY,表明根据WTP阈值,托里帕利马联合化疗是一种具有成本效益的策略。敏感性分析证实了结果的稳健性。
    这项研究表明,在mTNBC的化疗中添加托里帕利马单抗是一种具有成本效益的策略。研究结果为指导中国mTNBC患者的治疗选择提供了有价值的证据。
    UNASSIGNED: This study focuses on assessing the cost-effectiveness of incorporating toripalimab alongside chemotherapy for the treatment of patients diagnosed with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.
    UNASSIGNED: A partitioned survival model was constructed to simulate the costs and health outcomes over the lifetime of patients with mTNBC. Clinical data regarding overall survival, progression-free survival, and treatment-related adverse events were derived from the TORCHLIGHT clinical trials. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated based on the gains in quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was defined as $39,855.79 per QALY. Additionally, sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of the model.
    UNASSIGNED: The total cost incurred by the group receiving toripalimab was $38,040.62, while the placebo plus chemotherapy was $26,102.07. The utilization of the toripalimab regimen resulted in an increase of 0.74 QALYs and an incremental cost of $11,938.55 compared to the placebo plus chemotherapy group. The ICER was $16,133.18/QALY, indicating that toripalimab plus chemotherapy is a cost-effective strategy according to the WTP threshold. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results.
    UNASSIGNED: This study suggests that the addition of toripalimab to chemotherapy for the treatment of mTNBC is a cost-effective strategy. The findings provide valuable evidence to guide decision-making regarding treatment selection for patients with mTNBC in China.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    一项多中心非随机对照研究证明了中国多学科联合管理治疗髋部骨折患者的临床有效性。本研究旨在评估共同管理护理的成本效益。
    该研究基于中国的多中心临床试验(n=2071)。我们开发了一种状态过渡微观模拟模型,以从医疗保健系统的角度评估与常规护理相比,共同管理的护理对髋部骨折患者的成本效益。纳入模型的费用包括住院费用,出院后费用,和二次骨折治疗费用。使用质量调整生命年(QALYs)衡量有效性。成本和效果每年折价5%。采用了1年的模拟周期长度和生命周期。成本效益阈值定为37,118美元。为了解决不确定性,进行了单向确定性敏感性分析和概率敏感性分析.
    在基本情况分析中,共同管理的护理小组的终生成本为31,571美元,并实现了3.22QALY的有效性,而常规护理组的费用为27,878美元,获得了2.85QALY。增量成本效益比为每QALY获得9981美元;因此,共同管理的护理模式具有成本效益。干预组的成本效益对髋部骨折的年龄和住院费用敏感。
    髋部骨折患者的共同管理护理物有所值,并应扩大规模并优先考虑在中国的资金。
    该研究得到了Capital的健康改善和研究基金(2022-1-2071,2018-1-2071)的支持。
    UNASSIGNED: The clinical effectiveness of multidisciplinary co-managed care for hip fracture patients in China has been demonstrated in a multicenter non-randomized controlled study. This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the co-managed care.
    UNASSIGNED: The study is based on a multicenter clinical trial (n = 2071) in China. We developed a state transition microsimulation model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the co-managed care compared with usual care for hip fracture patients from healthcare system perspective. The costs incorporated into the model included hospitalization costs, post-discharge expenses, and secondary fracture therapy costs. Effectiveness was measured using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs and effects were discounted at 5% annually. A simulation cycle length of 1-year and a lifetime horizon were employed. The cost-effectiveness threshold was established at USD 37,118. To address uncertainties, one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted.
    UNASSIGNED: In the base case analysis, the co-managed care group had a lifetime cost of USD 31,571 and achieved an effectiveness of 3.22 QALYs, whereas the usual care group incurred a cost of USD 27,878 and gained 2.85 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was USD 9981 per QALY gained; thus the co-managed care model was cost-effective. The cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the age of having hip fractures and hospitalization costs in the intervention group.
    UNASSIGNED: The co-managed care in hip fracture patients represents value for money, and should be scaled up and prioritized for funding in China.
    UNASSIGNED: The study is supported by Capital\'s Funds for Health Improvement and Research (2022-1-2071, 2018-1-2071).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号