School of Population Health and Clinical Practice, The University of Adelaide , Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
J Med Econ. 2012;15(2):207-18. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2011.632797. Epub 2011 Nov 17.
A small but significant proportion of patients with peripheral neuropathic pain (NeP) are refractory to the typical treatments applied in clinical practice, including amitriptyline and gabapentin. Thus, they continue to suffer the debilitating effects of NeP. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pregabalin in comparison to usual care, in patients with refractory NeP, from a third party payer's perspective (NHS).
A stochastic simulation model was constructed, using clinical data from four non-randomized studies, to generate pain pathways of patients receiving usual care and pregabalin. Treatment effect (pain reduction) was converted to quality-of-life (QoL) data, using a regression analysis based on new utility data, collected from a survey of refractory NeP patients presenting to pain clinics in Cardiff, Wales. All relevant direct costs were estimated using resource use from the survey data (where available) and unit costs from the British National Formulary (BNF). The analysis was run over a 5-year time horizon, with costs and benefits discounted at 3.5%.
The use of non-randomized (observational) data to characterize the effectiveness of treatments for NeP. Exclusion of productivity costs and consequences from the analysis.
In the base case analysis, an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £10,803 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) was attained. This result was found to be reasonably insensitive to variations in the key input parameters, with ICERs ranging from £8505 to £22,845 per QALY gained.
The analysis shows that pregabalin is a cost-effective alternative to usual care in patients with refractory NeP, with an ICER well below the threshold typically adopted by UK health technology assessment groups, such as NICE.
一小部分患有周围神经性疼痛(NeP)的患者对临床实践中应用的典型治疗方法(包括阿米替林和加巴喷丁)有抗性,因此他们仍受到 NeP 的衰弱影响。本研究旨在从第三方支付者(NHS)的角度评估普瑞巴林相对于常规护理治疗难治性 NeP 的成本效益。
使用来自四项非随机研究的临床数据构建了一个随机模拟模型,以生成接受常规护理和普瑞巴林治疗的患者的疼痛路径。使用基于威尔士卡迪夫疼痛诊所就诊的难治性 NeP 患者新效用数据的回归分析,将治疗效果(疼痛减轻)转化为生活质量(QoL)数据。使用调查数据(如有)中的资源使用情况和英国国家处方集(BNF)中的单位成本来估算所有相关直接成本。该分析在 5 年时间内进行,成本和收益以 3.5%的贴现率贴现。
使用非随机(观察性)数据来描述 NeP 治疗的有效性。未将生产力成本和后果纳入分析。
在基础案例分析中,每获得一个质量调整生命年(QALY)的增量成本效益比(ICER)为 10803 英镑。该结果对关键输入参数的变化具有相当的敏感性,ICER 范围从每获得一个 QALY 的 8505 英镑到 22845 英镑不等。
该分析表明,对于难治性 NeP 患者,普瑞巴林是常规护理的一种具有成本效益的替代方案,其 ICER远低于英国健康技术评估小组(如 NICE)通常采用的阈值。