Högy Barbara, Keinecke Heinz-Otto, Borte Michael
Aventis Behring GmbH, Marburg, Germany.
Eur J Health Econ. 2005 Mar;6(1):24-9. doi: 10.1007/s10198-004-0250-5.
Primary antibody deficiencies are the most common forms of primary immunodeficiencies. Substitution therapy with polyvalent immunoglobulins has been established as the standard therapy for antibody deficiencies for several decades. Until now mainly intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) have been used in Germany, and the majority of patients receive treatment in hospital outpatient clinics. In recent years subcutaneous administration of immunoglobulins (SCIG) has been developed which is administered as home self-infusion. Studies indicate no significant differences in immunoglobulin substitution therapy between SCIG and IVIG concerning outcome. We carried out a cost-minimization analysis to compare the two treatment alternatives in Germany. Under base case assumptions the treatment with SCIG is cost saving from the perspective of the German statutory health insurance. The main cost drivers are IVIG and SCIG; the incremental cost of SCIG compared to IVIG is most sensitive to changes in the immunoglobulin price and changes in the body weight of the patient.
原发性抗体缺陷是原发性免疫缺陷最常见的形式。几十年来,用多价免疫球蛋白进行替代疗法已成为抗体缺陷的标准疗法。到目前为止,德国主要使用静脉注射免疫球蛋白(IVIG),大多数患者在医院门诊接受治疗。近年来,已开发出皮下注射免疫球蛋白(SCIG),可在家中自行注射。研究表明,在免疫球蛋白替代疗法方面,SCIG和IVIG在治疗效果上无显著差异。我们进行了成本最小化分析,以比较德国的这两种治疗方案。在基本假设情况下,从德国法定医疗保险的角度来看,SCIG治疗具有成本节约优势。主要成本驱动因素是IVIG和SCIG;与IVIG相比,SCIG的增量成本对免疫球蛋白价格变化和患者体重变化最为敏感。