University of Chicago Medical Center, 5841 S. Maryland Avenue, MC 4076, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Feb;7(2):103-9. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2009.232.
The past decade has been marked by the introduction and expanding use of biologic therapies for the induction and maintenance of response in patients with IBD. Although widely heralded for their efficacy, these agents have also stirred controversy over the potential economic impact that they will have upon the world's health-care systems. Traditional cost analyses had shown that IBD medication costs contributed minimally towards the overall costs associated with the disease; however, these studies were all conducted before the introduction of biologic therapies. At that time, a small minority of patients accounted for a disproportionately large percentage of the overall costs, suggesting that cost-savings could be realized if interventions decreased the utilization of health-care resources and associated costs. More recent studies have been heterogeneous in their design and findings-some have suggested that cost-savings realized due to a decrease in the utilization of health-care services may offset the higher costs of biologic agents. Incorporation of data on indirect cost-savings and quality of life improvements into ongoing and future analyses is required to allow for more accurate analyses of overall costs and cost-savings.
过去十年的标志是引入和扩大使用生物疗法来诱导和维持 IBD 患者的反应。尽管这些药物因其疗效而广受赞誉，但它们也引发了关于它们对世界卫生保健系统可能产生的潜在经济影响的争议。传统的成本分析表明，IBD 药物治疗费用对与该疾病相关的总体成本的贡献最小；然而，这些研究都是在引入生物疗法之前进行的。当时，少数患者占总体成本的不成比例的大比例，这表明如果干预措施减少了对卫生保健资源的利用和相关成本，就可以实现成本节约。最近的研究在设计和研究结果上存在差异-一些研究表明，由于卫生保健服务利用率的降低而实现的成本节约可能会抵消生物制剂更高的成本。需要将间接成本节约和生活质量改善的数据纳入正在进行和未来的分析中，以便更准确地分析总体成本和成本节约。
