Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
-
To estimate the cost-effectiveness of cetuximab monotherapy, cetuximab plus irinotecan, and panitumumab monotherapy compared with best supportive care (BSC) for the third and subsequent lines of treatment of patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. ⋯ All three treatments are highly unlikely to be considered cost-effective in this patient population in the United Kingdom. We explain how the reader can adapt the model for other countries.
-
To assess the cost-effectiveness of early primary total hip replacement (THR) for functionally independent older adult patients with osteoarthritis (OA) versus 1) nonsurgical therapy followed by THR once the patient has progressed to a functionally dependent state ("delayed THR") and 2) nonsurgical therapy alone ('medical therapy'), from the Italian National Health Service perspective. ⋯ THR is cost-effective. Patients' HRQOL benefits forgone with delayed THR are worth more than the costs it saves to the Italian National Health Service. This analysis might help to explain women's consistently lower HRQOL by the time of primary operation.
-
Pigmented skin lesions are commonly presented in primary care. Appropriate diagnosis and management is challenging because the vast majority are benign. The MoleMate system is a handheld SIAscopy scanner integrated with a primary care diagnostic algorithm aimed at improving the management of pigmented skin lesions in primary care. ⋯ Given typical thresholds in the United Kingdom (£20,000-£30,000 per QALY), the MoleMate system may be cost-effective compared with best practice diagnosis alone in a primary care setting. However, there is considerable decision uncertainty, driven particularly by the sensitivity and specificity of MoleMate versus best practice, and the risk of disease progression in undiagnosed melanoma; future research should focus on reducing uncertainty in these parameters.
-
Economic evaluations of health interventions pose a particular challenge for reporting because substantial information must be conveyed to allow scrutiny of study findings. Despite a growth in published reports, existing reporting guidelines are not widely adopted. There is also a need to consolidate and update existing guidelines and promote their use in a user-friendly manner. A checklist is one way to help authors, editors, and peer reviewers use guidelines to improve reporting. ⋯ We hope that the ISPOR CHEERS statement and the accompanying task force report guidance will lead to more consistent and transparent reporting, and ultimately, better health decisions. To facilitate wider dissemination and uptake of this guidance, we are copublishing the CHEERS statement across 10 health economics and medical journals. We encourage other journals and groups to consider endorsing the CHEERS statement. The author team plans to review the checklist for an update in 5 years.
-
Comparative Study
The cost-effectiveness of duloxetine in chronic low back pain: a US private payer perspective.
To assess the cost-effectiveness of duloxetine in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) from a US private payer perspective. ⋯ Duloxetine appears to be a cost-effective post-first-line treatment for CLBP compared with all but generic NSAIDs. In subpopulations at risk of NSAID-related AEs, it is particularly cost-effective.