Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Cad. Saúde Pública (Online) ; 35(8): e00108218, 2019. tab, graf
Article in Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-1019622

ABSTRACT

Resumo: O câncer renal é a 13ª neoplasia mais frequente no mundo. Entre 2012 e 2016, representou 1,48% das mortes por câncer no Brasil. A terapia de escolha para o tratamento de câncer renal metastático são os inibidores de tirosina quinase (ITK), sunitinibe e pazopanibe. Este artigo avalia o custo-efetividade do pazopanibe comparado ao sunitinibe no tratamento de câncer renal metastático. Foi realizada uma análise de custo-efetividade sob a perspectiva de um hospital federal do Sistema Único de Saúde. No modelo de árvore de decisão foram aplicados os desfechos de efetividade e segurança dos ITK. Os dados clínicos foram extraídos de prontuários e os custos diretos consultados em fontes oficiais do Ministério da Saúde. O custo de 10 meses de tratamento, englobando o valor dos ITK, procedimentos e manejo de eventos adversos, foi de R$ 98.677,19 para o pazopanibe e R$ 155.227,11 para o sunitinibe. Os medicamentos apresentaram efetividade estatisticamente equivalente e diferença estatisticamente significativa para o desfecho de segurança, no qual o pazopanibe obteve o melhor resultado. O pazopanibe, nesse contexto, é a tecnologia dominante quando os custos de tratamento são associados aos de manejo de eventos adversos.


Abstract: Renal cancer is the 13th most frequent neoplasm in the world. From 2010 to 2014, renal cancer accounted for 1.43% of cancer deaths in Brazil. The treatment of choice for metastatic renal cancer is tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) sunitinib and pazopanib. This article assesses cost-effectiveness between pazopanib and sunitinib in the treatment of metastatic renal cancer. A cost-effectiveness study was performed from the perspective of a federal hospital under the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). TKI effectiveness and safety outcomes were applied to the decision tree model. Clinical data were extracted from patient charts, and direct costs were consulted from official Ministry of Health sources. The cost of 10 months of treatment, including the costs of the TKI, procedures and management of adverse events, was BRL 98,677.19 for pazopanib and BRL 155,227.11 for sunitinib. The drugs displayed statistically equivalent effectiveness and statistically different safety outcomes, with pazopanib displaying better results. In this setting, pazopanib is the dominant technology when the treatment costs are analyzed together with the costs of managing adverse events.


Resumen: El cáncer renal es la 13ª neoplasia más frecuente en el mundo. Entre 2010 y 2014, representó un 1,43% de las muertes por cáncer en Brasil. La terapia de elección para el tratamiento de cáncer renal metastásico son los inhibidores de tirosina quinasa (ITK), sunitinib y pazopanib. Este artículo evalúa el costo-efectividad entre pazopanib y sunitinib en el tratamiento de cáncer renal metastásico. Se realizó un análisis de costo-efectividad desde la perspectiva de un hospital federal del Sistema Único de Salud. En el modelo de árbol de decisión se aplicaron los desenlaces de efectividad y seguridad de los ITK. Los datos clínicos se extrajeron de registros médicos, y los costos directos consultados en fuentes oficiales del Ministerio de Salud. El costo de 10 meses de tratamiento, englobando el valor de los ITK, procedimientos y gestión de eventos adversos, fue de BRL 98.677,19 con el pazopanib y BRL 155.227,11 con el sunitinib. Los medicamentos presentaron efectividad estadísticamente equivalente y diferencia estadísticamente significativa para el desenlace de seguridad, en el que el pazopanib obtuvo el mejor resultado. El pazopanib, en este contexto, es la tecnología dominante cuando los costes de tratamiento están asociados a los de la gestión de eventos adversos.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Aged , Pyrimidines/economics , Sulfonamides/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/economics , Sunitinib/economics , Kidney Neoplasms/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Agents/economics , Pyrimidines/administration & dosage , Sulfonamides/administration & dosage , Treatment Outcome , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Sunitinib/administration & dosage , Indazoles , Middle Aged , National Health Programs , Neoplasm Metastasis , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage
2.
Arq. bras. cardiol ; 104(1): 32-44, 01/2015. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-741128

ABSTRACT

Background: Statins have proven efficacy in the reduction of cardiovascular events, but the financial impact of its widespread use can be substantial. Objective: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of three statin dosing schemes in the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS) perspective. Methods: We developed a Markov model to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of low, intermediate and high intensity dose regimens in secondary and four primary scenarios (5%, 10%, 15% and 20% ten-year risk) of prevention of cardiovascular events. Regimens with expected low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction below 30% (e.g. simvastatin 10mg) were considered as low dose; between 30-40%, (atorvastatin 10mg, simvastatin 40mg), intermediate dose; and above 40% (atorvastatin 20-80mg, rosuvastatin 20mg), high-dose statins. Effectiveness data were obtained from a systematic review with 136,000 patients. National data were used to estimate utilities and costs (expressed as International Dollars - Int$). A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold equal to the Brazilian gross domestic product per capita (circa Int$11,770) was applied. Results: Low dose was dominated by extension in the primary prevention scenarios. In the five scenarios, the ICER of intermediate dose was below Int$10,000 per QALY. The ICER of the high versus intermediate dose comparison was above Int$27,000 per QALY in all scenarios. In the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, intermediate dose had a probability above 50% of being cost-effective with ICERs between Int$ 9,000-20,000 per QALY in all scenarios. Conclusions: Considering a reasonable WTP threshold, intermediate dose statin therapy is economically attractive, and should be a priority intervention in prevention of cardiovascular events in Brazil. .


Fundamento: Estatinas tem eficácia comprovada na redução de eventos cardiovasculares, mas o impacto financeiro de seu uso disseminado pode ser substancial. Objetivo: Conduzir análise de custo-efetividade de três esquemas de doses de estatinas na perspectiva do SUS. Métodos: Foi desenvolvido modelo de Markov para avaliar a razão de custo-efetividade incremental (RCEI) de regimes de dose baixa, intermediária e alta, em prevenção secundária e quatro cenários de prevenção primária (risco em 10 anos de 5%, 10%, 15% e 20%). Regimes com redução de LDL abaixo de 30% (ex: sinvastatina 10mg) foram considerados dose baixa; entre 30-40% (atorvastatina 10mg, sinvastatina 40mg), dose intermediária; e acima de 40% (atorvastatina 20-80 mg, rosuvastatina 20 mg), dose alta. Dados de efetividade foram obtidos de revisão sistemática com aproximadamente 136.000 pacientes. Dados nacionais foram usados para estimar utilidades e custos (expressos em dólares internacionais - Int$). Um limiar de disposição a pagar (LDP) igual ao produto interno bruto per capita nacional (aproximadamente Int$11.770) foi utilizado. Resultados: A dose baixa foi dominada por extensão nos cenários de prevenção primária. Nos cinco cenários, a RCEI da dose intermediária ficou abaixo de Int$10.000 por QALY. A RCEI de dose alta ficou acima de Int$27.000 por QALY em todos os cenários. Nas curvas de aceitabilidade de custo-efetividade, dose intermediária teve probabilidade de ser custo-efetiva acima de 50% com RCEIs entre Int$9.000-20.000 por QALY em todos os cenários. Conclusões: Considerando um LDP razoável, uso de estatinas em doses intermediárias é economicamente atrativo, e deveria ser intervenção prioritária na redução de eventos cardiovasculares no Brasil. .


Subject(s)
Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cardiovascular Diseases/economics , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/economics , National Health Programs/economics , Atorvastatin , Brazil , Fluorobenzenes/administration & dosage , Fluorobenzenes/economics , Heptanoic Acids/administration & dosage , Heptanoic Acids/economics , Models, Economic , Primary Prevention/economics , Pyrimidines/administration & dosage , Pyrimidines/economics , Pyrroles/administration & dosage , Pyrroles/economics , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Rosuvastatin Calcium , Secondary Prevention/economics , Simvastatin/administration & dosage , Simvastatin/economics , Sulfonamides/administration & dosage , Sulfonamides/economics
3.
Medwave ; 12(4)mayo 2012. ilus, tab
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: lil-715810

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: Basados en una evaluación económica de costo-efectividad del dasatinib primera línea en el tratamiento de la leucemia mieloide crónica (LMC) realizada por el Consorcio de York, y previo análisis de transferibilidad de datos, se realizó una adaptación de ésta a Colombia y Venezuela. Se compararon los costos y la relación de costo-efectividad del uso de la dosis de 100 mg/día de dasatinib versus 400 mg/día de imatinib y 600 mg/día de nilotinib para cada fase de la enfermedad, como tratamientos de primera línea, con incrementos a 140 mg/día de dasatinib, 800 mg/día de imatinib y 800 mg/día de nilotinib en una segunda línea de tratamiento. Métodos: El modelo original consideró aquellos pacientes con diagnóstico de LMC que no hubieran recibido tratamiento previo. Para realizar la adaptación de la evaluación económica se asumieron las probabilidades de cambio, para lo cual se consideraron tres fases, crónica, acelerada y muerte, a lo largo de toda la vida y con una tasa de descuento del 3,5 por ciento para los costos y beneficios. Los resultados del modelo incluyeron los costos de cada alternativa de tratamiento con dasatinib, nilotinib o imatinib y los años de vida ajustados a calidad ganada. Los costos se expresan en pesos colombianos y bolívares fuertes del año 2011. Resultados: El dasatinib produjo la mayor cantidad de años de vida ajustados a calidad, tanto para Colombia como para Venezuela con 10,67 y 10,53 QALYs respectivamente, en comparación con 10,10 y 9,97 QALYs en cada caso para el imatinib y 10,50 y 10,36 QALYs para el nilotinib. Los costos esperados por QALY en Colombia fueron de $ 108.174.020 para el dasatinib, $ 80.826.556 para el imatinib y $ 134.747.281 para el nilotinib. En Venezuela fueron de BsF 222.970 para el dasatinib, BsF 213.142 para el imatinib y BsF 269.193 para el nilotinib. El dasatinib fue dominante sobre el nilotinib en ambos países. Conclusiones: El dasatinib fue más efectivo...


Objective: To adapt an economic model of frontline dasatinib treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia developed by the York Consortium to the health care settings in Colombia and Venezuela. Methods: The original model considered treatment of naïve patients with CML and a Markov's model with probabilities of change between chronic, accelerated phases and death, over a patient’s lifetime. The applied discount rate is 3.5 percent for both costs and benefits. Direct medical and treatment costs, and mortality rates were taken from the local published data and WHO life tables. Costs are expressed in 2011 Colombian pesos and Venezuelan strong bolivars. Results: Dasatinib 100 mg/day as frontline treatment for CML produced the greatest number of QALYs, both in Colombia and Venezuela with 10.67 and 10.53 QALYs respectively, compared with 10.10 and 9.97 QALYs for imatinib and 10.50 and 10.36 QALYs for nilotinib. The expected cost per QALY in Colombia was $ 108.174.020 for dasatinib, $ 80.826.556 for imatinib and $ 134.747.281 for nilotinib. The expected cost per QALY in Venezuela was BsF 222.970 for dasatinib, BsF 213.142 for imatinib and BsF 269.193 for nilotinib. Dasatinib was dominant to nilotinib in both countries. Conclusions: In the frontline treatment for CML in Colombia and Venezuela, dasatinib had greater QALYs than both imatinib and nilotinib, and demonstrated cost-effectiveness relative to nilotinib. There was an increase in overall costs, due to the increase in life years gained and thus a greater use of overall health care resources.


Subject(s)
Humans , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Leukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL Positive/drug therapy , Models, Economic , Piperazines/therapeutic use , Pyrimidines/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Benzamides , Colombia , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/economics , Mortality , Piperazines/economics , Pyrimidines/economics , Quality Control , Thiazoles , Venezuela
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL