Noyes Katia, Dick Andrew W, Holloway Robert G
Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, New York 14620, USA.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(12):1257-70. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200523120-00009.
In chronic disease, treatment effects and costs accumulate over time; hence, the choice of time horizon in cost-effectiveness analysis can be particularly important. In this article we analyse the dynamic changes in cumulative costs, effects and incremental cost effectiveness of two competing drug strategies in patients with early Parkinson's disease (PD).
Three hundred and one subjects with PD were randomised to initial pramipexole or levodopa and followed every 3 months over a 4-year period. Healthcare resource use was recorded in patient diaries and valued using a variety of sources at year 2002 US dollar values. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was measured using the EuroQoL EQ-5D. The study was conducted from a US societal perspective. Missing data were imputed using a multivariate fixed-effects model. Additional quality adjusted life years (QALY) gained by using pramipexole compared with levodopa were estimated as the area between the normalised treatment HRQoL profiles. The QALYs and costs for each treatment arm were calculated for various study horizons.The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and the net monetary benefit (NB) [using 50,000 US dollars, 100,000 US dollars and 150,000 US dollars as the value of a QALY] were estimated, and were bootstrapped to calculate the standard errors. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEAC) were built to estimate the probability that pramipexole was cost effective given different societal values of QALY, for various study horizons.We conducted sensitivity analyses on the ICER and the NB to test their robustness to various assumptions about missing data, for various subpopulations and under changes in the drug prices.
Under the base-case assumptions, the ICER for pramipexole was 42,989 US dollars per QALY. Using the CEAC approach, the probability that pramipexole was cost effective relative to levodopa over the first 4 years was 0.57, 0.77 and 0.82 when a QALY was valued at 50,000 US dollars, 100,000 US dollars, and 150,000 US dollars, respectively. Over time, the ICER for pramipexole improved and uncertainty around the ICER decreased. If, after treatment withdrawal, HRQoL improved in pramipexole subjects and declined in levodopa subjects (best-case scenario for pramipexole), the probability of pramipexole being cost effective increased to 0.88, 0.96 and 0.98, respectively. Factors that improved the ICER of pramipexole were a decrease in the relative price of pramipexole and having low HRQoL or depression at baseline.
The cost effectiveness of pramipexole compared with levodopa in the treatment of early PD increased as the time horizon of the clinical trial extended from 2 to 4 years. Our results suggest that pramipexole is more cost effective for patients with depression and low baseline HRQoL than in other patient subgroups.
在慢性病中,治疗效果和成本会随时间累积;因此,成本效益分析中时间范围的选择可能尤为重要。在本文中,我们分析了两种相互竞争的药物策略在早期帕金森病(PD)患者中的累积成本、效果和增量成本效益的动态变化。
301名PD患者被随机分配至初始使用普拉克索或左旋多巴治疗,并在4年期间每3个月随访一次。医疗资源使用情况记录在患者日记中,并按照2002年美元价值通过多种来源进行估值。使用欧洲五维健康量表(EQ-5D)测量健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)。该研究从美国社会视角进行。使用多变量固定效应模型对缺失数据进行插补。与左旋多巴相比,使用普拉克索获得的额外质量调整生命年(QALY)估计为标准化治疗HRQoL曲线之间的面积。针对不同的研究时间范围,计算每个治疗组的QALY和成本。估计增量成本效益比(ICER)和净货币效益(NB)[分别使用50000美元、100000美元和150000美元作为一个QALY的价值],并通过自抽样计算标准误差。构建成本效益可接受性曲线(CEAC),以估计在不同的社会QALY价值下,普拉克索在不同研究时间范围内具有成本效益的概率。我们对ICER和NB进行敏感性分析,以测试它们在关于缺失数据的各种假设、不同亚组以及药物价格变化情况下的稳健性。
在基线假设下,普拉克索的ICER为每QALY 42989美元。使用CEAC方法,当一个QALY价值分别为50000美元、100000美元和150000美元时,普拉克索在最初4年相对于左旋多巴具有成本效益的概率分别为0.57、0.77和0.82。随着时间推移,普拉克索的ICER有所改善,且ICER周围的不确定性降低。如果在停药后,普拉克索组患者的HRQoL改善而左旋多巴组患者的HRQoL下降(普拉克索的最佳情况),普拉克索具有成本效益的概率分别增至0.88、0.96和0.98。改善普拉克索ICER的因素包括普拉克索相对价格下降以及基线时HRQoL较低或患有抑郁症。
随着临床试验时间范围从2年延长至4年,普拉克索与左旋多巴相比在治疗早期PD中的成本效益有所增加。我们的结果表明,对于患有抑郁症和基线HRQoL较低的患者,普拉克索比其他患者亚组更具成本效益。