Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Macitentan in Comparison With Bosentan in the Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in Iran.

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a chronic and progressive disease that, if left untreated, shortens the life expectancy of patients. Endothelin receptor antagonists, such as macitentan and bosentan, play an essential role in improving the patient's symptoms, quality of life, and life expectancy. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of macitentan compared with bosentan in treating PAH from the health system perspective in Iran. METHODS: For evaluating the cost-effectiveness of macitentan, a Markov model consisting of 5 states, functional class (FC) I, FC II, FC III, FC IV, and death, was designed using the TreeAge software. The lifetime time horizon and a 3-month cycle length were set. Patients entered the model from FC II or FC III states based on the initial probabilities. Costs were measured in US dollars (USD), and outcomes were measured in terms of quality quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Consequently, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. In addition, sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the robustness of the model by examining the possible effects of uncertainties on the final result. RESULTS: The costs of treatment with macitentan and bosentan in PAH in Iran were calculated at 19 429 and 17 246 USD, and the outcomes were 4.02 and 3.04 QALYs, respectively. Therefore, ICER was calculated at 2233.46 USD/QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrates that the model is robust; nevertheless, it is most sensitive to the price of macitentan and bosentan. CONCLUSION: Treatment with macitentan was associated with both higher costs and QALYs than bosentan. Nevertheless, it is considered the cost-effective treatment strategy in Iran given that the calculated ICER falls below the willingness to pay threshold.

Cost-Effectiveness of Dulaglutide Versus Liraglutide for Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Iran.

OBJECTIVES: Diabetes mellitus (DM), as one of the most common metabolic diseases, is the ninth leading cause of death globally and imposes heavy costs on the health systems including both costs of treatment and management of secondary complications. This study intended to investigate the cost-effectiveness of dulaglutide compared with liraglutide in the management of patients with type 2 DM in Iran. METHOD: We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a 5-state Markov model from the health system perspective, over a 10-year time horizon, in 2018 in Iran. Sensitivity of the model has been evaluated through tornado diagram and using one-way sensitivity analysis. In addition, probabilistic sensitivity analysis has been accomplished using Monte Carlo simulation. RESULTS: The average costs of treatment of patients with type 2 DM using the dulaglutide and liraglutide treatment regimens are 17 577.09 and 18 517.54 US dollars per patient, respectively, over a 10-year time horizon. In terms of effectiveness, the average discounted quality-adjusted life-year rates are estimated at 5.560 and 5.403 for the dulaglutide and liraglutide treatment regimens, respectively. The model is mostly sensitive to the price of dulaglutide and liraglutide, the hemoglobin A1c reduction of liraglutide, and the utility resulting from less injection frequency of dulaglutide, respectively. CONCLUSION: Dulaglutide, in addition to being more effective, providing 0.156 more quality-adjusted life-years for the patients, reduces costs by 940.45 US dollars per patient over a 10-year time horizon. Therefore, due to the greater effectiveness and lower cost, it is concludable that dulaglutide is the cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = -6028.52) treatment alternative from the health system perspective.