ABSTRACT
UNLABELLED: Prophylaxis in adults can be necessary and reasonable for clinical reasons. The aim was to evaluate from an economic viewpoint prophylactic factor VIII substitution in adult patients with haemophilia in Germany. PATIENTS, METHODS: A decision model (time frame: one year; perspective: statutory health insurance; reference patient (RP) and 2 patient profiles) was developed. Calculations are based on data from a structured literature search and a pharmacovigilance study: therapy switch on-demand/prophylaxis (OD/Proph). RESULTS: RP: 45 years, 20 bleeds p.a. OD, 16 bleeds avoided with 8.5 I.U./kg/d Proph, additional cost Euro 141,113 p.a.; profile 1: 50 years, 55 bleeds p.a. OD, factor consumption per bleed 20 I.U./kg higher than RP, 39 bleeds avoided with 8.5 I.U./kg/d Proph, additional cost Euro 19,134 p.a.; profile 2: 60 years, 35 bleeds p.a. OD, factor consumption per bleed 40-80 I.U./kg higher than RP, 34 bleeds avoided with 11 I.U./kg/d Proph, cost reduction Euro 660 p.a. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic factor VIII substitution in adult haemophilia patients is depending on the individual clinical situation not only clinically but also economically reasonable. To evaluate this effects in the future comprehensively, longitudinal real-life data from patient-centered care are needed including clinical outcomes, quality of life and adherence.
Subject(s)
Factor VIII/economics , Factor VIII/therapeutic use , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Hemophilia A/economics , Hemophilia A/prevention & control , Models, Economic , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Coagulants/economics , Coagulants/therapeutic use , European Union , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Hemophilia A/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Decision makers request increasingly for high levels of evidence when allocating resources in medical care. This is hardly feasible for rare diseases. The objective was to analyze clinical and economic aspects of different immune tolerance induction (ITI) strategies for children with severe haemophilia A and inhibitors. METHODS: A decision model, time frame 18 years (base case: 2 year old boy), was constructed from a German statutory health insurance (SHI) perspective. Compared were high-dose (HD) ITI, low-dose (LD) ITI, 'ITI with risk assessment', on-demand (OD) treatment with bypassing agents. Clinical data were derived from structured literature research and expert opinion. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for parameters with wide statistical ranges. RESULTS: Base case analysis: total costs for HD ITI amounted to 3.4 million with 40.9% ITI costs, 51 joint bleeds, 36 hospital days; LD ITI, 2.4 million with 21.4% ITI costs, 74 joint bleeds, 52 hospital days; 'ITI with risk assessment', 2.7 million with 27.6% ITI costs, 53 joint bleeds, 37 hospital days; OD treatment, 1.7 million, 146 joint bleeds, 104 hospital days. Incremental costs per bleed avoided with HD ITI decreased from 1 million to 0.15 million with increase of joint bleeds from 3 to 20 per year, when compared to 'ITI with risk assessment' in sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: 'ITI with risk assessment' is cost-saving with comparable outcomes to HD ITI. However, patient-related factors like bleeding frequency have to determine treatment decisions in individual patients. More clinical data is needed to increase the significance of model -calculations.
