Search

Comparative cost analysis of using amantadine intervention to that of oseltamivir postexposure prohylaxis, a neuroaminidase inhibitor or no prophylaxis treatment during influenza outbreaks in elderly persons in long term care facilities is evaluated. Results demonstrate that oseltamivir is more cost effective than amantadine treatment.

AbstractObjective:To assess the cost-utility of celecoxib in three treatment strategies for arthritis in Quebec, considering both upper gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular (CV) events.Methods:A Markov analytic framework was used to model patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis at low/average and high risk of GI and CV toxicity over 5 years with monthly cycles. Treatment strategies were modelled in line with Canadian clinical practice. In first-line treatment, patients started on celecoxib; second-line, patients started on a non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and switched to celecoxib after a first GI event; third-line, patients started on a non-selective NSAID, added a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) after a first GI event, and switched to celecoxib after a second GI event (while maintaining the PPI). Model inputs were determined through comprehensive literature searches (MEDLINE and EMBASE) from 1995 to 2006. Included studies evaluated GI (dyspepsia, uncomplicated and complicated ulcers, death) and CV (myocardial infarction, stroke, death) events. Drug and procedure costs were derived from Canadian published sources (Can2005).Results:Total costs per patient for celecoxib first-, second-, and third-line treatment were Can4,790, 3,390, and 3,466, and total quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) were 3.251, 3.231, and 3.230, respectively. In all risk categories, celecoxib second-line was less costly and as effective as celecoxib third-line, producing savings to the healthcare system. Although celecoxib first-line generated incremental expenditures versus celecoxib second-line, it was also more effective. The resulting cost-utility ratio for the high-risk population was Can54,696/QALY. Based on this analytical approach, a treatment strategy where celecoxib is used before the combination of a non-selective NSAID plus a PPI possesses cost advantages for the Quebec provincial drug programme. One-way sensitivity analysis (varying GI and CV event rates, utilities, and cost) generally showed second-line treatment with celecoxib as the dominant strategy compared with third-line treatment with celecoxib.Conclusion:Although effectiveness of second- and third-line celecoxib use is similar, total cost is lower for second-line. These results suggest that the use of celecoxib before the combination of a non-selective NSAID plus a PPI is relatively cost-effective in the treatment of arthritis pain and support the full benefit listing of celecoxib in Quebec's drug programme.

Background: The randomized CCTG LY.12 trial demonstrated that gemcitabine, cisplatin and dexamethasone (GDP) was non-inferior to dexamethasone, cytarabine, cisplatin (DHAP), with or without rituximab, in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) [ Crump JCO 2014]. A cost-utility analysis also proved GDP to be associated with both lower direct costs and similar quality-adjusted outcomes, and as such, is the preferred salvage regimen in this patient population [ Cheung JNCI 2015]. We conducted an analysis of such costs (lost productivity, paid and unpaid caregiver time) based on the trial data.

Since the introduction of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART), the incidence rates of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) have declined; however, less is known about the rates of other hematologic malignancies such as Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and multiple myeloma (MM). We aimed to study changes in the incidence and outcomes of hematologic malignancies (HMs) in the pre- and post-cART eras.A retrospective analysis of The Ontario HIV Treatment Network Cohort Study (OCS) was performed. The OCS is an ongoing prospective study of HIV-infected adults from 11 sites throughout Ontario, Canada. Incidence rates of HMs were calculated for the pre- (<1997) and post-cART (≥ 1997) eras and compared using Poisson regression analysis. Median survival for each HM was calculated using Kaplan Meier techniques and compared using the logrank test. Predictors of NHL and death from NHL including age, sex, CD4 count, viral load, previous AIDS-defining illness, cART era and duration of HIV infection were evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models. All variables except sex were considered time dependent variables.The OCS database included 4118 individuals with 41978 person-years of follow up over 28 years (1980-2008). There was no significant difference in the incidence of HM in the pre- and post-cART eras (3.6 versus 4.1 cases per 1000 person-years, p-value=0.49) although incidence of PCNSL trended downward (0.8 versus 0.4 cases per 1000 person-years, p-value=0.13) and incidence of HL trended upward (0.1 versus 0.4 cases per 1000 person-years, p-value=0.08). Those with HL had the longest median survival, followed by NHL and PCNSL (63, 39 and 4 months respectively). Predictors of NHL development included low CD4 count, high viral load and pre-cART era. Predictors of death following NHL diagnosis were low CD4 count, previous AIDS-defining illness and longer duration of HIV infection.Since the introduction of cART, the overall incidence of HM has not significantly changed in this cohort. However, as fewer individuals in the cART era develop low CD4 counts, high viral loads and AIDS-defining illnesses, reduced incidence of NHL in this cohort and improved survival following NHL may become apparent.No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.