Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Varenicline Versus Currently Funded Smoking Cessation Strategies in Brazil.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of varenicline in comparison to currently funded smoking cessation strategies in Brazil. METHODS: We modeled the lifetime direct costs and health-related quality of life of a hypothetical cohort of smokers with a single attempt to quit smoking using one of the following: (1) cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) without any pharmacological intervention, (2) varenicline, (3) bupropion, (4) nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) with transdermal patch, (5) bupropion in combination with NRT transdermal patch, and (6) combined NRT (oral plus transdermal). All drug alternatives were considered with concomitant CBT. The analysis relied on a Markov model based on the Benefits of Smoking Cessation and Outcomes study and used different age and sex categories in the consideration of relative risks and incidence rates of the diseases included in the model. The analysis was conducted from the healthcare system perspective, and a 3% discounting rate for costs and outcomes was applied. Model parameter values were sourced from published literature. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses assessed robustness. RESULTS: Among the smoking cessation alternatives available in Brazil, varenicline and combined NRT were estimated to have higher effectiveness; varenicline, however, was dominated due to its higher average cost. In the base-case analysis, combined NRT had an incremental gain of 0.25 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in comparison to the second-best option (bupropion in combination with NRT transdermal patch) and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of R$2173.47/QALY ($595.45/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Combination of oral and transdermal NRT (coupled with CBT) was the most effective smoking cessation option and was 100% cost-effective within a conservative willingness-to-pay threshold.

Patient Preferences for Breast Cancer Treatment Interventions: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding how patients value different characteristics of an intervention and make trade-offs in a therapy choice context with potential benefit and possible harm may result in decisions for which a better reflected value is delivered. This systematic review summarizes patient preferences for breast cancer treatments elicited by discrete choice experiments (DCE). METHODOLOGY: The electronic databases MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, and Web of Science were last searched on May 9, 2019 without restrictions regarding language and time of publication. Original studies reporting patient preferences related to breast cancer treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, endocrine therapy, chemotherapy or palliative care) elicited by DCE were eligible. A narrative synthesis of the relative importance and trade-offs of the treatment attributes of each study was reported. RESULTS: Five studies conducted in Japan, Thailand, USA and the Netherlands with 146-298 participants evaluated preferences regarding chemotherapy regimens for advanced/metastatic disease, and breast reconstruction after mastectomy. The attributes with major relative effects on preferences were greater survival, better aesthetic result of the surgery, and lower side effects and complication rates. Patients would trade a better aesthetic result to minimize complication rates, and, in advanced disease, the willingness to pay was greater for gains in survival and to avoid some severe adverse events. CONCLUSION: Despite the relative lack of evidence in this specific context, our review shows that breast cancer patients naturally value greater benefit and, in scenarios of advanced and metastatic disease, are willing to face risks of some side effects for gains in survival.