Cost-effectiveness of Denosumab for the Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in Malaysia.

From the perspective of Malaysian health care providers, denosumab was cost-effective in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, with an optimal outcome starting at age 60 years. Our results provide important insights into the value for money of anti-osteoporotic agents that can serve as a reference for other countries with comparable epidemiological data. INTRODUCTION: The study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of denosumab with alendronate and no treatment in the management of postmenopausal osteoporosis among the Malaysian population. METHODS: A well-validated Markov model was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of denosumab in a hypothetical cohort of postmenopausal osteoporotic women between 50 and 80 years old who had no history of fractures. A 10-year time horizon from the perspective of Malaysian health care providers was used in this analysis. The model parameters, including transition probabilities and costs, were based on Malaysian sources. Treatment efficacy data were obtained from a network meta-analysis. The study outcomes were presented as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analyses were performed to ensure the robustness of the results. A cost-effectiveness threshold was set at MYR 21,438 (USD 5175) per QALY. RESULTS: Denosumab was found to be a cost-effective option for postmenopausal osteoporotic women aged 60 and older. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for denosumab versus alendronate ranged from MYR 16,955 (USD 4093) per QALY at age 60 to MYR 4380 (USD 1057) per QALY at age 80. The cost-effectiveness of denosumab improved monotonically with increasing age. Denosumab was 72.8-92.7% likely to be cost-effective at the cost-effectiveness threshold. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the results were robust across all parameter variations, with the annual cost of denosumab being the most sensitive. CONCLUSIONS: From the perspective of the Malaysian health care provider, denosumab appears to be a cost-effective treatment choice for postmenopausal osteoporotic women over 60 years of age.

Economic burden of osteoporosis-related hip fracture in Asia: a systematic review.

This review analyzes the economic costs of HF in Asia. The availability and quality of studies on the burden of osteoporosis in Asia are very scarce. There is a need to encourage more quality cost of osteoporosis studies based on standardized methods to convince healthcare authorities in implementing appropriate strategies. INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis fractures, especially hip fractures, impose large economic costs to governments and societies. This review aimed to systematically analyze available evidence on healthcare costs associated with osteoporosis-related hip fractures (HF) in Asia. METHODS: Articles were systematically sought from databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and EBSCOHost between 2000 and 2015. Total costs associated with HF care, the cost components, and length of stays were retrieved and analyzed. Study designs were also qualitatively analyzed. RESULTS: The availability of published studies on economic burden of HF in Asia is severely lacking with only 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. Even among the included studies, only two studies reported comprehensive costs evaluating all costs including indirect or intangible costs. Most studies satisfactorily reported criteria for conducting economic evaluation, but large variations existed in the methodological design. Due to study design and other influencing factors, large variation in the cost of HF treatment from US$774 to US$14,198.90 (median S$2943), representing an average of 18.95% (range: 3.58-57.05%) of the countries' 2014 GDP/capita, was observed. This highlighted the heavy burden of managing HF in Asia with about 40% of the included studies reported using more than one third of GDP/capita. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of burden of illness studies of osteoporosis in the Asian region. For the few available studies, there was a lack of standardization in methodological approach in evaluating the economic burden of the disease. There is a need to encourage more quality burden of illness studies of osteoporosis to inform policymakers in healthcare planning.