1.Economic evaluation of oral ivermectin, alone or in combination with permethrin, versus permethrin, in the treatment of classic scabies in the Philippine setting.
Rowena F. GENUINO ; Mac Ardy J. GLORIA ; Clarence Pio Rey S. YACAPIN ; Maria Christina Filomena R. BATAC ; Fernando B. GARCIA JR. ; Francis R. CAPULE ; Mary Ann J. LADIA ; Malaya P. SANTOS ; Ailyn M. YABES ; Ma. Stephanie Fay S. CAGAYAN
Acta Medica Philippina 2025;59(1):18-40
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Oral ivermectin is recommended as an alternative to topical permethrin in Japanese, European, and CDC-STI guidelines for treating classic scabies. The combination of oral ivermectin and topical permethrin is also used in some settings. Partial economic evaluations conducted in India and Egypt have conflicting results, and no cost-effectiveness analysis in the Philippines has compared ivermectin-based regimens to permethrin for scabies treatment. We aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of oral ivermectin, alone or in combination with permethrin, compared to permethrin, in the treatment of Filipino adult patients with classic scabies.
METHODSWe used a decision tree model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of two regimens, oral ivermectin alone or in combination with permethrin, compared with permethrin to treat adults and children aged five years and older with classic scabies in the outpatient setting from the household perspective in the Philippines. We estimated total costs and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a one-month follow-up. Input parameters were obtained from secondary data, such as effect estimates for probabilities of clinical outcomes from a network meta-analysis, DALYs from the Global Burden of Disease 2019, and prevailing market cost in the Philippines (DPRI 2022 with recommended markup by DOH, and leading drugstores) as of August 2022. We computed for incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and net monetary benefit (NMB) to determine which of the interventions are cost-effective. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, and scenario analyses were conducted to assess the impact of parameter and structural uncertainty.
RESULTSIvermectin-based regimens are suggested to be likely cost-saving compared to permethrin in the Philippine outpatient setting. Base case analysis showed that oral ivermectin had higher cost-savings (change in cost, -1,039.31; change in DALYS, 0.00027), while combination oral ivermectin/permethrin had higher DALYs averted (change in cost, PhP -1,019.78; change in DALYs, 0.00045), compared to permethrin. Combination oral ivermectin/permethrin (56%) was the most cost-effective, followed by oral ivermectin (44%) compared to permethrin (0%) through probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Estimates for ivermectin were sensitive to risk of cure for ivermectin vs permethrin using 1-way deterministic sensitivity analysis. Oral ivermectin was favored over combination oral ivermectin/permethrin at all thresholds based on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve.
CONCLUSIONBoth ivermectin-based regimens seem to be cost-saving compared to permethrin in the treatment of classic scabies in the Philippine outpatient setting. Clinicians may consider oral ivermectin, alone or in combination with permethrin as an alternative first-line or second-line treatment depending on patient preference, adverse event risk profile, availability, and economic capacity. This needs to be confirmed using primary data from Filipino patients to enhance the robustness of the findings and support evidence-based local decision-making in different settings. Less uncertainty in modelled parameters can give greater confidence in the results, which can be adopted for budget impact analysis and allow more rational resource allocation. Value of information analysis can be done to determine whether the expense of future RCTs or surveys in Filipinos to collect primary data is worth it. The cost of reducing uncertainty, if deemed worth the cost of further studies, may facilitate population-level decision-making and budget planning. Findings may further inform practice guideline development, coverage decisions, and national control program planning by providing the most cost-effective scabies intervention.
Scabies ; Ivermectin ; Permethrin ; Cost-benefit Analysis ; Cost-effectiveness Analysis
2.Is non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging cost-effective for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma?
Genevieve Jingwen TAN ; Chau Hung LEE ; Yan SUN ; Cher Heng TAN
Singapore medical journal 2024;65(1):23-29
INTRODUCTION:
Ultrasonography (US) is the current standard of care for imaging surveillance in patients at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been explored as an alternative, given the higher sensitivity of MRI, although this comes at a higher cost. We performed a cost-effective analysis comparing US and dual-sequence non-contrast-enhanced MRI (NCEMRI) for HCC surveillance in the local setting.
METHODS:
Cost-effectiveness analysis of no surveillance, US surveillance and NCEMRI surveillance was performed using Markov modelling and microsimulation. At-risk patient cohort was simulated and followed up for 40 years to estimate the patients' disease status, direct medical costs and effectiveness. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated.
RESULTS:
Exactly 482,000 patients with an average age of 40 years were simulated and followed up for 40 years. The average total costs and QALYs for the three scenarios - no surveillance, US surveillance and NCEMRI surveillance - were SGD 1,193/7.460 QALYs, SGD 8,099/11.195 QALYs and SGD 9,720/11.366 QALYs, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Despite NCEMRI having a superior diagnostic accuracy, it is a less cost-effective strategy than US for HCC surveillance in the general at-risk population. Future local cost-effectiveness analyses should include stratifying surveillance methods with a variety of imaging techniques (US, NCEMRI, contrast-enhanced MRI) based on patients' risk profiles.
Humans
;
Adult
;
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/diagnostic imaging*
;
Liver Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging*
;
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
;
Cost-Benefit Analysis
;
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
;
Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods*
3.Economic evaluation of oral ivermectin, alone or in combination with permethrin, versus permethrin, in the treatment of classic scabies in the Philippine Setting
Rowena F. Genuino ; Mac Ardy J. Gloria ; Clarence Pio Rey S. Yacapin ; Maria Christina Filomena R. Batac ; Fernando B. Garcia Jr. ; Francis R. Capule ; Mary Ann J. Ladia ; Malaya P. Santos ; Ailyn M. Yabes ; Ma. Stephanie Fay S. Cagayan
Acta Medica Philippina 2024;58(Early Access 2024):1-23
Background and Objective:
Oral ivermectin is recommended as an alternative to topical permethrin in Japanese, European, and CDC-STI guidelines for treating classic scabies. The combination of oral ivermectin and topical permethrin is also used in some settings. Partial economic evaluations conducted in India and Egypt have conflicting results, and no cost-effectiveness analysis in the Philippines has compared ivermectin-based regimens to permethrin for scabies treatment. We aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of oral ivermectin, alone or in combination with permethrin, compared to permethrin, in the treatment of Filipino adult patients with classic scabies.
Methods:
We used a decision tree model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of two regimens, oral ivermectin alone or in combination with permethrin, compared with permethrin to treat adults and children aged five years and older with classic scabies in the outpatient setting from the household perspective in the Philippines. We estimated total costs and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a one-month follow-up. Input parameters were obtained from secondary data, such as effect estimates for probabilities of clinical outcomes from a network meta-analysis, DALYs from the Global Burden of Disease 2019, and prevailing market cost in the Philippines (DPRI 2022 with recommended markup by DOH, and leading drugstores) as of August 2022. We computed for incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and net monetary benefit (NMB) to determine which of the interventions are cost-effective. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, and scenario analyses were conducted to assess the impact of parameter and structural uncertainty.
Results:
Ivermectin-based regimens are suggested to be likely cost-saving compared to permethrin in the Philippine outpatient setting. Base case analysis showed that oral ivermectin had higher cost-savings (change in cost, -1,039.31; change in DALYS, 0.00027), while combination oral ivermectin/permethrin had higher DALYs averted (change in cost, PhP -1,019.78; change in DALYs, 0.00045), compared to permethrin. Combination oral ivermectin/permethrin (56%) was the most cost-effective, followed by oral ivermectin (44%) compared to permethrin (0%) through probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Estimates for ivermectin were sensitive to risk of cure for ivermectin vs permethrin using 1-way deterministic sensitivity analysis. Oral ivermectin was favored over combination oral ivermectin/permethrin at all thresholds based on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve.
Conclusion
Both ivermectin-based regimens seem to be cost-saving compared to permethrin in the treatment of classic scabies in the Philippine outpatient setting. Clinicians may consider oral ivermectin, alone or in combination with permethrin as an alternative first-line or second-line treatment depending on patient preference, adverse event risk profile, availability, and economic capacity. This needs to be confirmed using primary data from Filipino patients to enhance the robustness of the findings and support evidence-based local decision-making in different settings. Less uncertainty in modelled parameters can give greater confidence in the results, which can be adopted for budget impact analysis and allow more rational resource allocation. Value of information analysis can be done to determine whether the expense of future RCTs or surveys in Filipinos to collect primary data is worth it. The cost of reducing uncertainty, if deemed worth the cost of further studies, may facilitate population-level decision-making and budget planning. Findings may further inform practice guideline development, coverage decisions, and national control program planning by providing the most cost-effective scabies intervention.
Scabies
;
Ivermectin
;
Permethrin
;
Cost-Benefit Analysis
4.A cost effectiveness analysis of intravitreal injections of bevacizumab, ranibizumab, and aflibercept for the treatment of diabetic macular edema
Rochele V. Pilones ; Camille Elaine Zabala
Philippine Journal of Ophthalmology 2024;49(2):115-121
OBJECTIVE
This study determined which of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factors (anti-VEGF) agents is the most cost-effective in treating patients with diabetic macular edema (DME).
METHODSThis study was a cost-effectiveness analysis. A decision-analytic Markov cohort model of the natural history and treatment of DME was developed. Data was obtained from a meta-analysis by Virgili et al. on anti-VEGFs for DME in which intravitreal injections of bevacizumab given monthly, 6-weekly, and 12-weekly; ranibizumab given monthly, bimonthly, and as necessary; aflibercept given monthly, bimonthly, and as necessary; and macular laser therapy were evaluated for efficacy and safety in 4,413 eyes. Costs were obtained from local standard retail price at a tertiary government institution and assumed an out-of-pocket expenditure. The study measured and compared gains in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental costeffectiveness ratios (ICERs) for each treatment regimen.
RESULTSQuarterly bevacizumab, monthly ranibizumab (3.82 QALY), and bimonthly ranibizumab injections were the three most beneficial dosing schedules in terms of clinical effectiveness at 3.81, 3.82, and 3.89 QALY, respectively. However, in terms of cost, bevacizumab was substantially most affordable. Quarterly dosing of bevacizumab provided the best value for money, with an ICER of PhP 9,661.70 per QALY gained.
CONCLUSIONQuarterly intravitreal injections of bevacizumab were identified as the most cost-effective treatment regimen for DME. To be considered cost-effective alternatives, ranibizumab requires an 85% price reduction, while aflibercept needs a price reduction exceeding 95%. We recommend quarterly bevacizumab injections be included in the national insurance coverage package, given their cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy in the treatment of DME.
Cost-benefit Analysis ; Intravitreal Injections
5.How to conduct a health economic analysis.
Endrik H. SY ; Djhoanna AGUIRRE-PEDRO ; Noel L. ESPALLARDO
The Filipino Family Physician 2024;62(2):348-352
Health economic analyses are comparative analysis of healthcare technologies or health strategies and their alternative options in terms of their costs and consequences.1 By doing health economic analysis, we can obtain incremental cost-outcome ratios, the relation of the estimated additional costs, and the estimated additional outcomes saved or lost using alternative healthcare technology.2 They can provide useful data to doctors, patients, policymakers, and the public about choices that can affect health, especially the use of resources.
In essence, economic evaluation aims to characterize the efficiency of healthcare interventions. It provides a structured approach to measuring and comparing the health outcomes and costs of competing alternative interventions over time and across populations.
Cost-benefit Analysis ; Costs And Cost Analysis
6.Application of discrete event simulation model in analysis on cost-effectiveness of epidemiology screening.
Jia Min WANG ; Qiu Ping LIU ; Chao GONG ; Ming Lu ZHANG ; Pei GAO ; Xun TANG ; Yong Hua HU
Chinese Journal of Epidemiology 2023;44(3):463-469
Discrete event simulation (DES) model is based on individual data, by which discrete events over time are simulated to reflect disease progression. The effects of individual characteristics on disease progression could be considered in the DES model. Moreover, unlike state-transition models, DES model without setting of fixed cycle can contribute to more accurate estimation of event time, especially in the evaluation of the long-term effectiveness of screening strategies for complex diseases in which time dimension needs to be considered. This article introduces the general principles, construction steps, analytic methods and other relevant issues of the DES model. Based on a research case of estimating the cost-effectiveness of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms in women aged 65 years and above in the United Kingdom, key points in applications of the DES model in analysis on effectiveness of complex disease screening are discussed in detail, including model construction and analysis and interpretation of the results. DES model can predict occurring time of discrete events accurately by establishing the distribution function of their occurring time and is increasingly used to evaluate the screening strategies for complex diseases in which time dimension needs to be considered. In the construction of DES model, it is necessary to pay close attention to the clear presentation of model structure and simulation process and follow the relevant reporting specification to conduct cost-effectiveness analysis to ensure the transparency and repeatability of the research.
Humans
;
Female
;
Cost-Benefit Analysis
;
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
;
Disease Progression
7.Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Combined Chemotherapy Regimen Containing Bedaquiline in the Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis in China.
Cai Hong XU ; Ying Peng QIU ; Zi Long HE ; Dong Mei HU ; Xiao YUE ; Zhong Dan CHEN ; Yuan Yuan XU ; Yan Lin ZHAO
Biomedical and Environmental Sciences 2023;36(6):501-509
OBJECTIVE:
This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the combined chemotherapy regimen containing Bedaquiline (BR) and the conventional treatment regimen (CR, not containing Bedaquiline) for the treatment of adults with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in China.
METHODS:
A combination of a decision tree and a Markov model was developed to estimate the cost and effects of MDR patients in BR and CR within ten years. The model parameter data were synthesized from the literature, the national TB surveillance information system, and consultation with experts. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of BR vs. CR was determined.
RESULTS:
BR ( vs. CR) had a higher sputum culture conversion rate and cure rate and prevented many premature deaths (decreased by 12.8%), thereby obtaining more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (increased by 2.31 years). The per capita cost in BR was as high as 138,000 yuan, roughly double that of CR. The ICER for BR was 33,700 yuan/QALY, which was lower than China's 1× per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2020 (72,400 yuan).
CONCLUSION
BR is shown to be cost effective. When the unit price of Bedaquiline reaches or falls below 57.21 yuan per unit, BR is expected to be the dominant strategy in China over CR.
Adult
;
Humans
;
Antitubercular Agents/therapeutic use*
;
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
;
Cost-Benefit Analysis
;
Tuberculosis, Multidrug-Resistant/drug therapy*
;
China/epidemiology*
9.Interpretation of Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022.
Li Yuan TAO ; Ge GAN ; Jue LIU
Chinese Journal of Epidemiology 2023;44(4):667-672
The number of studies related to health economics evaluation is increasing. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) contains 28 items. Based on CHEERS 2013, CHEERS 2022 adds a health economic analysis plan, model sharing, and community, patient, public, and other relevant stakeholders' participation in the statement, taking into account the future development direction of health economics evaluation. It provides a useful review tool for peer reviewers, editors, and readers and supports health technology assessment agencies in establishing standard reporting standards for health economics evaluations. In this study, we briefly introduced and interpreted the CHEERS 2022 statement and analyzed an example of health economics evaluation in infectious disease epidemiology to provide a reference for researchers to report studies regarding health economics evaluation standardly.
Humans
;
Cost-Benefit Analysis
;
Checklist
;
Economics, Medical
;
Reference Standards
;
Research Report
10.A systematic review in health economics research on the expansion of human papilloma virus vaccination population to men.
Ying SU ; Han Qing HE ; Yang ZHOU ; Xuan DENG
Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine 2023;57(11):1869-1877
Objective: To systematically collect and evaluate the health economics research of Human papilloma virus(HPV) vaccination population expansion to men, and to provide evidence for optimizing HPV vaccine immunization strategies. Methods: Health economics research studies on male HPV vaccination published in databases including PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang Database from January 2010 to September 2022 were collected according to the systematic evaluation research design. The quality of the studies was assessed using the health economics evaluation reporting standards (2022 edition) (CHEERS 2022), with full score of 28. The results of the studies were reviewed and analyzed systematically. Results: A total of 21 studies complies with the criteria were included, all of which was foreign research. The average CHEERS score of the literatures was 25.71 points, range from 23 to 28 points. 85.71% (12/14) studies of the gender-neutral population showed that including male in HPV vaccination were more consistent with the cost effectiveness than female vaccination alone under certain conditions (target at adolescents of 10 to 15 years old or adults under 26 years old). 80.00% (4/5) of the studies target at ordinary men only were proved that male vaccination with HPV vaccine was in line with the cost-effectiveness. 2 studies targeting men who have sex with men (MSM) were both concluded that it met the cost-effectiveness. In addition, the results of 2 gender-neutral population studies and 1 study on men alone showed that extending HPV vaccination to men did not conform to cost effectiveness. The main reasons for the non-cost-effectiveness included the high price of vaccines and the age of vaccination. Conclusion: The quality of the health economics evaluation studies on expanding HPV vaccination to the male population is high. Vaccination targeting adolescents and young men as well as special groups (such as MSM) are likely to be cost-effective, and vaccinations for other groups are still need further evaluated. It is recommended that relevant research should be conducted to provide evidence for expanding the scope of HPV vaccination to men in China.
Adult
;
Adolescent
;
Humans
;
Male
;
Female
;
Child
;
Human Papillomavirus Viruses
;
Homosexuality, Male
;
Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control*
;
Sexual and Gender Minorities
;
Cost-Benefit Analysis
;
Vaccination
;
Immunization
;
Papillomavirus Vaccines


Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail