RESUMEN
Objective@#This study estimated nationally representative medical expenditures of gynecologic cancers, described treatment patterns and assessed key risk factors associated with the economic burden in the United States. @*Methods@#A retrospective repeated measures design was used to estimate the effect of gynecologic cancers on medical expenditures and utilization among women. Data were extracted from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (weighted sample of 609,787 US adults) from 2007 to 2014. Using the behavioral model of health services utilization, characteristics of cancer patients were examined and compared among uterine, cervical, and ovarian cancer patients. Multivariable linear regression models were conducted on medical expenditure with a prior logarithmic transformation. @*Results@#The estimated annual medical expenditure attributed to gynecologic cancers was $3.8 billion, with an average cost of $6,293 per patient. The highest annual cost per person was ovarian cancer ($13,566), followed by uterine cancer ($6,852), and cervical cancer ($2,312). The major components of medical costs were hospital inpatient stays (53%, $2.03 billion), followed by office-based visits (15%, $559 million), and outpatient visits (13%, $487 million). Two key prescription expenditures were antineoplastic hormones (10.3%) and analgesics (9.2%). High expenditures were significantly associated with being a married woman (p<0.001), having private health insurance (p<0.001), being from a low- and middleincome family (p<0.001), or living in the Midwest or the South (p<0.001). @*Conclusion@#The key risk factors and components were well described for the economic burden of gynecologic cancers. With a growing population of cancer patients, efforts to reduce the burden of gynecologic cancers are warranted.
RESUMEN
Objective@#This study estimated nationally representative medical expenditures of gynecologic cancers, described treatment patterns and assessed key risk factors associated with the economic burden in the United States. @*Methods@#A retrospective repeated measures design was used to estimate the effect of gynecologic cancers on medical expenditures and utilization among women. Data were extracted from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (weighted sample of 609,787 US adults) from 2007 to 2014. Using the behavioral model of health services utilization, characteristics of cancer patients were examined and compared among uterine, cervical, and ovarian cancer patients. Multivariable linear regression models were conducted on medical expenditure with a prior logarithmic transformation. @*Results@#The estimated annual medical expenditure attributed to gynecologic cancers was $3.8 billion, with an average cost of $6,293 per patient. The highest annual cost per person was ovarian cancer ($13,566), followed by uterine cancer ($6,852), and cervical cancer ($2,312). The major components of medical costs were hospital inpatient stays (53%, $2.03 billion), followed by office-based visits (15%, $559 million), and outpatient visits (13%, $487 million). Two key prescription expenditures were antineoplastic hormones (10.3%) and analgesics (9.2%). High expenditures were significantly associated with being a married woman (p<0.001), having private health insurance (p<0.001), being from a low- and middleincome family (p<0.001), or living in the Midwest or the South (p<0.001). @*Conclusion@#The key risk factors and components were well described for the economic burden of gynecologic cancers. With a growing population of cancer patients, efforts to reduce the burden of gynecologic cancers are warranted.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE:To systematically review the cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec(IDeg)in the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus(T1DM)and type 2 diabetes mellitus(T2DM). METHODS:A systematic review of literatures was conducted via PubMed,EMBase,The Cochrane Library,CNKI,Wanfang Data,VIP,IDF,ISPOR,ADA and EASD from the inception to Janu-ary 2016,to identify pharmacoeconomics evaluation literatures and non-economic studies related to IDeg in the treatment of T1DM and T2DM,compared with other basic insulin [insulin glargine(IGlar),insulin detemir(IDet),neutral protamine hagedom insulin (NPH)]. RESULTS:A total of 8 studies were included and all of them were carried out in European countries. In the short-term (one year),IDeg was more economical when compared with other basic insulin in patients with T1DM. The studies related to the long-term treatment of T1DM demonstrated different conclusions,but most of studies came to a conclusion that IDeg had good cost-effectiveness. For patients with T2DM,all of the studies demonstrated that IDeg was cost-effectiveness compared with IGlar. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with other basic insulin,IDeg can improve therapeutic efficacy and the quality of life,as well as re-duce the cost of ADR as hypoglycaemia. IDeg is a dominant or cost-effective treatment opinion.