Department of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Osteoporos Int. 2019 Mar;30(3):649-658. doi: 10.1007/s00198-018-04821-7. Epub 2019 Jan 30.
The use of gastro-resistant risedronate, a convenient dosing regimen for oral bisphosphonate therapy, seems a cost-effective strategy compared with weekly alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in France.
Gastro-resistant (GR) risedronate tablets are associated with improved persistence compared to common oral bisphosphonates but are slightly more expensive. This study assessed its cost-effectiveness compared to weekly alendronate and generic risedronate for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in France.
A previously validated Markov microsimulation model was used to estimate the lifetime costs (expressed in €2017) per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) of GR risedronate compared with weekly alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment. Pooled efficacy data for bisphosphonates derived from a previous meta-analysis were used for all treatment options, and persistence data (up to 3 years) were obtained from a large Australian longitudinal study. Evaluation was done for high-risk women 60-80 years of age, with a bone mineral density (BMD) T-score ≤ - 2.5 and/or prevalent vertebral fractures.
In all of the simulated populations, GR risedronate was cost-effective compared to alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment at a threshold of €60,000 per QALY gained. In women with a BMD T-score ≤ - 2.5 and prevalent vertebral fractures, the cost per QALY gained of GR risedronate compared to alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment falls below €20,000 per QALY gained. In women aged 75 years and older, GR risedronate was even shown to be dominant (more QALYs, less costs) compared to alendronate, generic risedronate, and no treatment.
This study provides the first economic results about GR risedronate, suggesting that it represents a cost-effective strategy compared with weekly alendronate and generic risedronate for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in France.
与常用的口服双膦酸盐相比,使用方便的胃溶型利塞膦酸钠似乎是一种具有成本效益的策略,可用于治疗法国绝经后骨质疏松症女性。
胃溶型(GR)利塞膦酸钠片与常见的口服双膦酸盐相比,其持续性更好,但价格略高。本研究评估了其与每周使用阿伦膦酸钠和普通利塞膦酸钠相比,用于治疗法国绝经后骨质疏松症女性的成本效益。
使用先前验证的马尔可夫微模拟模型,根据质量调整生命年(QALY),评估胃溶型利塞膦酸钠相对于每周使用阿伦膦酸钠、普通利塞膦酸钠和不治疗的终生成本(以 2017 年欧元表示)。使用先前荟萃分析的汇总疗效数据评估所有治疗方案,使用一项大型澳大利亚纵向研究的持续性数据(最长 3 年)。对年龄 60-80 岁、骨密度(BMD)T 评分≤-2.5 和/或有椎体骨折的高危女性进行评估。
在所有模拟人群中,与阿伦膦酸钠、普通利塞膦酸钠和不治疗相比,GR 利塞膦酸钠的成本效益均较好,在获得每 QALY 成本效益的阈值为 60000 欧元。在 BMD T 评分≤-2.5 和有椎体骨折的女性中,GR 利塞膦酸钠相对于阿伦膦酸钠、普通利塞膦酸钠和不治疗的每 QALY 获得成本低于 20000 欧元。在 75 岁及以上的女性中,与阿伦膦酸钠、普通利塞膦酸钠和不治疗相比,GR 利塞膦酸钠甚至表现出优势(更多的 QALY,更低的成本)。
本研究首次提供了关于 GR 利塞膦酸钠的经济学结果,表明与每周使用阿伦膦酸钠和普通利塞膦酸钠相比,GR 利塞膦酸钠是一种具有成本效益的策略,可用于治疗法国绝经后骨质疏松症女性。