Suppr超能文献

支气管热成形术、奥马珠单抗及标准疗法治疗中重度过敏性哮喘的成本效益分析

Cost-Effectiveness of Bronchial Thermoplasty, Omalizumab, and Standard Therapy for Moderate-to-Severe Allergic Asthma.

作者信息

Zafari Zafar, Sadatsafavi Mohsen, Marra Carlo A, Chen Wenjia, FitzGerald J Mark

机构信息

Institute for Heart and Lung Health (IHLH), Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Institute, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2016 Jan 11;11(1):e0146003. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146003. eCollection 2016.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Bronchial thermoplasty (BT) is a recently developed treatment for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. A few studies have suggested the clinical efficacy of this intervention. However, no study has evaluated the cost-effectiveness of BT compared to other alternative treatments for moderate-to-severe allergic asthma, which currently include omalizumab and standard therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of standard therapy, BT, and omalizumab for moderate-to-severe allergic asthma in the USA.

METHODS

A probabilistic Markov model with weekly cycles was developed to reflect the course of asthma progression over a 5-year time horizon. The study population was adults with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma whose asthma remained uncontrolled despite using high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS, with or without long-acting beta-agonists [LABA]). A perspective of the health-care system was adopted with asthma-related costs as well as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and exacerbations as the outcomes.

RESULTS

For standard therapy, BT, and omalizumab, the discounted 5-year costs and QALYs were $15,400 and 3.08, $28,100 and 3.24, and $117,000 and 3.26, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of BT versus standard therapy and omalizumab versus BT was $78,700/QALY and $3.86 million/QALY, respectively. At the willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $50,000/QALY and $100,000/QALY, the probability of BT being cost-effective was 9%, and 67%, respectively. The corresponding expected value of perfect information (EVPI) was $155 and $1,530 per individual at these thresholds. In sensitivity analyses, increasing the costs of BT from $14,900 to $30,000 increased its ICER relative to standard therapy to $178,000/QALY, and decreased the ICER of omalizumab relative to BT to $3.06 million/QALY. Reducing the costs of omalizumab by 25% decreased its ICER relative to BT by 29%.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, our study suggests that there is more than 60% chance that BT becomes cost-effective relative to omalizumab and standard therapy at the WTP of $100,000/QALY in patients with moderate-to-severe allergic asthma. However, there is a substantial uncertainty in the underlying evidence, indicating the need for future research towards reducing such uncertainty.

摘要

背景

支气管热成形术(BT)是一种最近开发的用于中重度哮喘患者的治疗方法。一些研究表明了这种干预措施的临床疗效。然而,尚无研究评估BT与中重度过敏性哮喘的其他替代治疗方法(目前包括奥马珠单抗和标准疗法)相比的成本效益。

目的

评估标准疗法、BT和奥马珠单抗在美国治疗中重度过敏性哮喘的成本效益。

方法

开发了一个每周循环的概率马尔可夫模型,以反映5年时间范围内哮喘进展的过程。研究人群为患有中重度过敏性哮喘的成年人,尽管使用了高剂量吸入性糖皮质激素(ICS,有或没有长效β受体激动剂[LABA]),但其哮喘仍未得到控制。采用医疗保健系统的视角,将与哮喘相关的成本以及质量调整生命年(QALY)和病情加重作为结果。

结果

对于标准疗法、BT和奥马珠单抗,5年的贴现成本和QALY分别为15400美元和3.08、28100美元和3.24,以及117000美元和3.26。BT与标准疗法相比以及奥马珠单抗与BT相比的增量成本效益比(ICER)分别为78700美元/QALY和386万美元/QALY。在支付意愿(WTP)为50000美元/QALY和100000美元/QALY时,BT具有成本效益的概率分别为9%和67%。在这些阈值下,每个个体的相应完美信息期望值(EVPI)分别为155美元和1530美元。在敏感性分析中,将BT的成本从14900美元增加到30000美元,其相对于标准疗法的ICER增加到178000美元/QALY,奥马珠单抗相对于BT的ICER降低到306万美元/QALY。将奥马珠单抗的成本降低25%,其相对于BT的ICER降低29%。

结论

根据现有证据,我们的研究表明,在支付意愿为100000美元/QALY的情况下,中重度过敏性哮喘患者中,BT相对于奥马珠单抗和标准疗法具有成本效益的可能性超过60%。然而,基础证据存在很大的不确定性,这表明需要未来的研究来减少这种不确定性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2e8b/4709059/c9922011259d/pone.0146003.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验