Key considerations for modelling the long-term costs and benefits of treatments for ANCA-associated vasculitis.

OBJECTIVES: Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) is a group of severe and chronic autoimmune diseases. Patients undergo two treatment phases: inducing remission and maintaining remission to prevent organ damage. Immunosuppressants, including glucocorticoids (GCs) are used as first-line treatment, but long-term GC use is associated with toxic effects. Novel treatments reduce or replace the need for long-term GC, and therefore can reduce GC-related toxicity. The evolving treatment landscape has presented new challenges for health technology assessment (HTA) of new treatments in AAV and long-term modelling of costs and outcomes in this disease. METHODS: Using the appraisal of avacopan in England (NICE) as a case study, this paper aims to identify the key challenges involved in the economic evaluation of new treatments for AAV, with a particular focus on the long-term modelling of the treatment costs and benefits for the purpose of HTA. The outcome of this study is a set of recommendations for modelling the cost-effectiveness of new treatments for AAV from the HTA perspective. RESULTS: The discussion focuses on the appropriate model structure, approach to modelling end-stage renal disease (ESRD) as a key determinant of costeffectiveness, capturing the impact of GC-related adverse events, and estimation of short and long-term costs of AAV. CONCLUSIONS: Economic evaluation of new treatments for AAV needs to capture all relevant downstream effects. ESRD is a key driver of cost-effectiveness but is associated with major uncertainty. Future observational studies need to offer sufficient detail to allow for differentiation in event rates across treatment options.

Cost-effectiveness of Physical Therapy vs Intra-articular Glucocorticoid Injection for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Secondary Analysis From a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Physical therapy and glucocorticoid injections are initial treatment options for knee osteoarthritis, but available data indicate that most patients receive one or the other, suggesting they may be competing interventions. The initial cost difference for treatment can be substantial, with physical therapy often being more expensive at the outset, and cost-effectiveness analysis can aid patients and clinicians in making decisions. Objective: To investigate the incremental cost-effectiveness between physical therapy and intra-articular glucocorticoid injection as initial treatment strategies for knee osteoarthritis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation is a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial performed from October 1, 2012, to May 4, 2017. Health economists were blinded to study outcomes and treatment allocation. A randomized sample of patients seen in primary care and physical therapy clinics with a radiographically confirmed diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis were evaluated from the clinical trial with 96.2% follow-up at 1 year. Interventions: Physical therapy or glucocorticoid injection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness between 2 alternative treatments. Acceptability curves of bootstrapped incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to identify the proportion of ICERs under the specific willingness-to-pay level ($50 000-$100 000). Health care system costs (total and knee related) and health-related quality-of-life based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were obtained. Results: A total of 156 participants (mean [SD] age, 56.1 [8.7] years; 81 [51.9%] male) were randomized 1:1 and followed up for 1 year. Mean (SD) 1-year knee-related medical costs were $2113 ($4224) in the glucocorticoid injection group and $2131 ($1015) in the physical therapy group. The mean difference in QALY significantly favored physical therapy at 1 year (0.076; 95% CI, 0.02-0.126; P = .003). Physical therapy was the more cost-effective intervention, with an ICER of $8103 for knee-related medical costs, with a 99.2% probability that results fall below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000. Conclusions and Relevance: A course of physical therapy was cost-effective compared with a course of glucocorticoid injections for patients with knee osteoarthritis. These results suggest that, although the initial cost of delivering physical therapy may be higher than an initial course of glucocorticoid injections, 1-year total knee-related costs are equivalent, and greater improvement in QALYs may justify the initial higher costs. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01427153.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Self-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Adrenal Insufficiency.

CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted healthcare environment. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of the pandemic on self-reported outcomes in patients with adrenal insufficiency (AI). DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective longitudinal survey study at 2 tertiary centers. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with AI. INTERVENTION: Patient-centered questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21, Short Form-36, and AI self-management. RESULTS: Of 342 patients, 157 (46%) had primary AI, 109 (32%) had secondary AI, and 76 (22%) had glucocorticoid-induced AI. When compared to prepandemic, daily glucocorticoid dose and number of adrenal crises did not change. However, patients reported a higher financial impact from AI (34% vs 23%, P = 0.006) and difficulty accessing medical care (31% vs 7%, P < 0.0001) during the pandemic. A third of patients reported difficulty managing AI during the pandemic. After adjusting for duration and subtypes of AI, younger patients [odds ratio (OR) 2.3, CI 95% 1.3-4.1], women (OR 3.7, CI 95% 1.9-7.1), poor healthcare access(OR 4.2, CI 95% 2.3-7.7), lack of good insurance support (OR 2.8, CI 95% 1.3-5.9), and those with a higher financial impact (OR 2.3, CI 95% 1.3-4.3) reported greater difficulties managing AI. Patients were more likely to report a higher anxiety score (≥8) if they found managing AI challenging during the pandemic (OR 3.0, CI 95% 1.3-6.9), and had lower Physical Component Summary (OR 4.9, CI 95% 2.2-11.0) and Mental Component Summary (OR 4.1, CI 95% 1.8-9.5) scores prior to the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: A third of patients with AI reported difficulties with management of AI during the pandemic, particularly in younger patients, women, and those with poor healthcare access.

Variability in Practices of Compounding Budesonide for Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the use of compounded steroids for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). METHODS: We conducted a telephone survey of all compounding pharmacies in Michigan and queried about practices and costs of compounded budesonide for EoE. RESULTS: Of 68 Michigan pharmacies, 93% responded, and 20 (29%) offer compounded budesonide suspension for EoE. Formulations, dose, and instructions for use varied across pharmacies. The mean cost for a 30-day supply was $74.50. DISCUSSION: Although few compounding pharmacies offer budesonide suspension and there are substantial variations in formulations, this may be a significantly more affordable treatment option for many.

Cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone and triamcinolone for the treatment of diabetic macular oedema in Finland: A Markov-model.

PURPOSE: Diabetic macular oedema (DMO), a complication of diabetes, causes vision loss and blindness. Corticosteroids are usually used as a second-line treatment. The aim of this study was to analyse the cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone implants compared to cheaper and more frequently applied triamcinolone injections. METHODS: Markov-modelling, which incorporated both eyes, was used for economic evaluation. The model consisted of five health states based on visual acuity, illustrating the progression of DMO. A cycle length of five months was chosen for dexamethasone and four months for triamcinolone. Time horizons of two and five years were applied. Transition probabilities and health state utilities were sourced from previous studies. The perspective used in this analysis was the hospital perspective. The health care costs were acquired from Kuopio University Hospital in Finland. RESULTS: In this cost-effectiveness analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ICER with 3% discount rate was €56 591/QALY for a two-year follow-up and -€1 110 942/QALY for a five-year follow-up. In order to consider dexamethasone as cost-effective over a 2-year time horizon, the WTP needs to be around €55 000/QALY. Over the five-year follow-up, triamcinolone is clearly a dominant treatment. Sensitivity analyses support the cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone over a 2-year time horizon. CONCLUSIONS: Since the sensitivity analyses support the results, dexamethasone would be a cost-effective treatment during the first two years with WTP threshold around €55 000/QALY, and triamcinolone would be a convenient treatment after that. This recommendation is in line with the guidelines of EURETINA.

Cost-effectiveness of adrenocorticotropic hormone versus oral steroids for infantile spasms.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and oral steroids as first-line treatment for infantile spasm resolution, we performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and cost-effectiveness study. METHODS: A decision analysis model was populated with effectiveness data from a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature and cost data from publicly available prices. Effectiveness was defined as the probability of clinical spasm resolution 14 days after treatment initiation. RESULTS: We included 21 studies with a total of 968 patients. The effectiveness of ACTH was not statistically significantly different from that of oral steroids (.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = .60-.79 vs. .63, 95% CI = .56-.70; p = .28). Considering only the three available randomized trials with a total of 185 patients, the odds ratio of spasm resolution at 14 days with ACTH compared to high-dose prednisolone (4-8 mg/kg/day) was .92 (95% CI = .34-2.52, p = .87). Adjusting for potential publication bias, estimates became even more favorable to high-dose prednisolone. Using US prices, the more cost-effective treatment was high-dose prednisolone, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $333 per case of spasms resolved, followed by ACTH, with an ICER of $1 432 200 per case of spasms resolved. These results were robust to multiple sensitivity analyses and different assumptions. Prednisolone at 4-8 mg/kg/day was more cost-effective than ACTH under a wide range of assumptions. SIGNIFICANCE: For infantile spasm resolution 2 weeks after treatment initiation, current evidence does not support the preeminence of ACTH in terms of effectiveness and, especially, cost-effectiveness.

National trends in incidence, mortality, hospitalizations, and expenditures for pemphigus in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: Data on trends in epidemiological characteristics and economic burden of pemphigus are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To describe national trends in pemphigus' incidence, mortality, hospitalizations, and expenditures between 2003 and 2015 in Taiwan. METHODS: This nationwide study used the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database to identify pemphigus patients from 2003 to 2015. Annual incidence, prevalence, healthcare utilization, and expenditure trends were calculated and analyzed. RESULTS: Pemphigus' incidence increased significantly from 3.19 to 4.70 per million person-years in 2003-2010 but fluctuated in 2011-2015. Pemphigus patients had higher mortality and care costs. Medical utilization and expenditure declined for pemphigus inpatients and outpatients. Systemic corticosteroid use decreased, but mortality remained stable. CONCLUSION: The health expense reduction for pemphigus was mainly attributed to decreased utilization, length of stay, and inpatient costs. The persistently elevated mortality rate highlights an unmet need in pemphigus therapy.

Trigger Finger Treatment: Identifying Predictors of Nonadherence and Cost.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practices in medicine are linked with a higher quality of care and lower health care cost. For trigger finger, identifying patient factors associated with nonadherence to evidence-based practices will aid physicians in treatment decisions. The objectives were to (1) determine patient factors associated with treatment nonadherence, (2) examine the success rates of steroid injections, and (3) evaluate the economic consequences of nonadherence to treatment recommendations. METHODS: The authors used data from the Clinformatics DataMart database from 2010 to 2017 to conduct a population-based analysis of patients with single-digit trigger finger. The authors calculated rates of steroid injection success and examined associations between injection success and patient factors using chi-square tests. In addition, the authors analyzed differences in the cost to the insurer, the cost to the patient, and total cost. RESULTS: A total of 29,722 patients were included in this analysis. Injection success rates were similar for diabetic (72 percent) and nondiabetic patients (73 percent), women (73 percent), and men (73 percent). Nonetheless, diabetics (OR, 1.4; 95 percent CI, 1.4 to 1.5; p < 0.001) and women (OR, 1.2; 95 percent CI, 1.1 to 1.2; p < 0.001) were significantly more likely to receive nonadherent treatment. In total, $23 million (U.S. dollars) were spent on nonadherent trigger finger care. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetics and women have increased odds of having surgery without a prior steroid injection, despite similar success rates of steroid injections compared to nondiabetics and men. Because performing surgical release before any steroid injections may represent a higher cost treatment option, providers should provide steroid injections before surgery for all patients regardless of diabetes status or sex to minimize overtreatment. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Dexamethasone or prednisolone for asthma exacerbations in children: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Although a short course (ie, 3 to 5 days) of orally administered prednisolone is a common and widely accepted practice among clinicians for administering systemic corticosteroids in pediatric acute asthma, oral dexamethasone for 1 to 2 days is an attractive alternative to prednisolone due to its better palatability and compliance. However, a cost-effectiveness analysis regarding the use of dexamethasone compared to prednisolone is not sufficient, especially in lower- and middle-income countries. The objective of this study was to analyze the cost-effectiveness of prednisolone vs oral dexamethasone for treating pediatric asthma exacerbations. METHODS: Using a decision-analysis model, we analyzed the cost-effectiveness of prednisolone vs oral dexamethasone for treating acute pediatric asthma. Effectiveness parameters were derived from a systematic review of the published literature. Data for costs were acquired from hospital accounts and from an official national database, the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from a Colombian third-party payer perspective. The principal outcome of the model was the avoidance of hospitalization. RESULTS: The base-case analysis showed that compared to dexamethasone, administering prednisolone was associated with lower overall treatment costs (US$93.97 vs US$104.91 mean cost per patient) without a significant difference in the probability of hospitalization avoided (.9108 vs .9108). CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that in Colombia, a middle-income country, compared with oral dexamethasone, the use of prednisolone for treating acute pediatric asthma is cost-effective, yielding a similar probability of hospitalization at lesser overall costs.

Cost-effectiveness of combination therapy (Mechanical Diagnosis and Treatment and Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections) among patients with an indication for a Lumbar Herniated Disc surgery: Protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The general consensus is that surgical treatment is advised when conservative methods fail in patients with lumbosacral radicular syndrome (LRS). Preliminary evidence from our pilot study indicates that combination therapy (mechanical diagnosis therapy and transforaminal epidural injections) can prevent surgical treatment in patients on the waiting list for surgery. The pilot study lacked a control group, and therefore, firm conclusions pertaining to effects could not be made. This study aims to determine if combination therapy, performed while being on the waiting list for lumbar herniated disc surgery, is effective and cost-effective compared with usual care (i.e., no intervention while being on the waiting list) among patients with a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-confirmed indication for a lumbar herniated disc surgery. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial will be conducted with an economic evaluation. Patients aged 18 and above with incapacitating LRS, with leg pain and an MRI confirmed indication for lumbar disc hernia surgery, will be recruited from seven Dutch hospitals. While being on the waiting list for lumbar herniated disc surgery, patients will be randomized to either the combination therapy or usual care group. The primary outcome measure is the number of patients undergoing lumbar disc surgery during 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include back and leg pain intensity (numeric pain rating scale), physical functioning (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaires-23), self-perceived recovery (global perceived effect), and health-related quality of life (EuroQol Five Dimensions Health Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12)). For the economic evaluation, societal and health care costs will be measured. Measurements moments are baseline, 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, and 12 months. Data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. CONCLUSION: No randomized controlled trials have evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of combination therapy compared with usual care in patients with an indication for lumbar herniated disc surgery, which emphasizes the importance of this study.

Advantage of inhaled corticosteroids as additional therapy to systemic corticosteroids for pediatric acute asthma exacerbations: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Objective: Although the efficacy of systemic corticosteroids (SCs) in acute asthma exacerbations is well established, the fact that many children still require admission to hospital and that SCs have a slow onset of action are cause of concern. For this reason, the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as a therapy added to SCs has been explored, with no clarity about its cost-effectiveness. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ICS in addition to SCs (ICS + SCs) compared to standard therapy with SCs for treating pediatric asthma exacerbations.Methods: A decision-analysis model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of SCs compared to ICS + SCs for treating pediatric patients with acute asthma exacerbations. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Cost data obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia. The main outcome of the model was avoidance of hospital admission.Results: For the base-case analysis, the model showed that compared to SCs, therapy with ICS + SCs was associated with lower total costs (US$88.76 vs.US$97.71 average cost per patient) and a lower probability of hospital admission (0.9060 vs. 0.9000), thus showing dominance.Conclusions: This study shows that compared with standard therapy with SCs, ICS + SCs for treating pediatric patients with acute asthma exacerbations is the preferred strategy because it was associated with a lower probability of hospital admission, at lower total treatment costs.

Antenatal corticosteroid administration in late-preterm gestations: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Objective: To evaluate whether administration of antenatal late-preterm betamethasone is cost-effective in the immediate neonatal period.Study design: Cost-effectiveness analysis of late-preterm betamethasone administration with a time horizon of 7.5 days was conducted using a health-system perspective. Data for neonatal outcomes, including respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), transient tachypnea of the newborn (TTN), and hypoglycemia, were from the Antenatal Betamethasone for Women at Risk for Late-Preterm Delivery trial. Cost data were derived from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project from the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality, and utilities of neonatal outcomes were from the literature. Outcomes were total costs in 2017 United States dollars and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each individual infant as well as for a theoretical cohort of the 270 000 late-preterm infants born in 2015 in the USA.Results: For an individual patient, compared to withholding betamethasone, administering betamethasone incurred a higher total cost ($6592 versus $6265) and marginally lower QALYs (0.02002 QALYS versus 0.02006 QALYs) within the studied time horizon. For the theoretical cohort of 270 000 patients, administration of betamethasone was $88 million more expensive ($1780 million versus $1692 million) with lower QALYs (5402 QALYs versus 5416 QALYs), compared to withholding betamethasone. For administration of betamethasone to be cost-effective, the rate of hypoglycemia, RDS, or TTN among late-preterm infants receiving betamethasone would need to be less than 20.0, 4.5, and 2.4%, respectively.Conclusion: Administration of betamethasone in the late-preterm period is likely not cost-effective in the short-term.

Economic Evaluation of Damage Accrual in an International Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Inception Cohort Using a Multistate Model Approach.

OBJECTIVE: There is a paucity of data regarding health care costs associated with damage accrual in systemic lupus erythematosus. The present study was undertaken to describe costs associated with damage states across the disease course using multistate modeling. METHODS: Patients from 33 centers in 11 countries were enrolled in the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) inception cohort within 15 months of diagnosis. Annual data on demographics, disease activity, damage (SLICC/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index [SDI]), hospitalizations, medications, dialysis, and selected procedures were collected. Ten-year cumulative costs (Canadian dollars) were estimated by multiplying annual costs associated with each SDI state by the expected state duration using a multistate model. RESULTS: A total of 1,687 patients participated; 88.7% were female, 49.0% were white, mean ± SD age at diagnosis was 34.6 ± 13.3 years, and mean time to follow-up was 8.9 years (range 0.6-18.5 years). Mean annual costs were higher for those with higher SDI scores as follows: $22,006 (Canadian) (95% confidence interval [95% CI] $16,662, $27,350) for SDI scores ≥5 versus $1,833 (95% CI $1,134, $2,532) for SDI scores of 0. Similarly, 10-year cumulative costs were higher for those with higher SDI scores at the beginning of the 10-year interval as follows: $189,073 (Canadian) (95% CI $142,318, $235,827) for SDI scores ≥5 versus $21,713 (95% CI $13,639, $29,788) for SDI scores of 0. CONCLUSION: Patients with the highest SDI scores incur 10-year cumulative costs that are ~9-fold higher than those with the lowest SDI scores. By estimating the damage trajectory and incorporating annual costs, data on damage can be used to estimate future costs, which is critical knowledge for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of novel therapies.

Cost analysis of COPD exacerbations and cardiovascular events in SUMMIT.

OBJECTIVES: The Study to Understand Mortality and Morbidity in COPD (SUMMIT) trial compared the efficacy of once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) with placebo, FF monotherapy, and VI monotherapy on mortality in patients with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a history/increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease. We conducted a post hoc economic analysis using data from SUMMIT to evaluate the economic benefits of treating these patients with COPD and CV risk. STUDY DESIGN: Patients (aged 40-80 years, with ≥10 pack-years' smoking history and a risk of CV events) were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive placebo, FF 100 mcg, VI 25 mcg, or FF/VI 100 mcg/25 mcg. METHODS: This was a post hoc economic analysis to assess the rates and associated costs of the composite end point (acute COPD exacerbations and revascularization/CV composite events) in the SUMMIT trial from a US healthcare payer perspective. RESULTS: Overall, 16,485 patients were evaluated; of these, 5246 (31.8%) experienced an on-treatment composite end point event (28.5% experienced a COPD exacerbation, 4.2% experienced a CV event, and 2.0% underwent a revascularization procedure). The mean estimated 1-year on-treatment combined end point cost was highest for placebo and lowest for FF/VI ($4220 vs $3482, respectively). The reductions in cost versus placebo were significant for all active treatments (P <.0001). The likelihood of experiencing an on-treatment combined end point event was lower for patients treated with FF/VI versus placebo (hazard ratio, 0.81; P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: One-year combined end point event costs were significantly lower for all active treatments versus placebo. Clinicians and payers may be able decrease costs by effectively managing patients' COPD in those with CV risk.

Medication Burden for Patients With Bacterial Keratitis.

PURPOSE: To understand medication use and patient burden for treatment of bacterial keratitis (BK). METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted examining medical records of adult patients with BK in an academic cornea practice. Data collected included medications used in the treatment of BK, dosing of medications, and the number and total duration of clinical encounters. Costs of medications were estimated using the average wholesale pharmacy price. Linear regression analysis was used to investigate associations of medication use with patient demographics and corneal culture results and reported with beta estimates (ß) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients with BK (56% female) were studied. Patients were treated for a median of 54 days with 10 visits, 5 unique medications, 587 drops, and 7 prescriptions. The estimated median medication cost was $933 (interquartile range: $457-$1422) US dollars. Positive bacterial growth was significantly associated with more visits (ß: 6.16, 95% CI: 1.75-10.6, P = 0.007), more days of treatment (ß: 86.8, 95% CI: 10.8-163, P = 0.026), more prescribed medications (ß: 2.86, 95% CI: 1.04-4.67, P = 0.003), and more doses of medications (ß: 796, 95% CI: 818-1412, P = 0.012) compared with patients who did not undergo corneal scraping. Patients were prescribed 132 more drops of medication for every 10 years of older age (ß: 132, 95% CI: 18.2-246, P = 0.024). Sex and income were not associated with medication burden or treatment length. CONCLUSIONS: Older patients and those with positive cultures incur the most medication burden in treatment of BK. Providers should be aware of medication usage and cost burden as it may affect compliance with treatment.

Long term tapering versus standard prednisolone treatment for first episode of childhood nephrotic syndrome: phase III randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether extending initial prednisolone treatment from eight to 16 weeks in children with idiopathic steroid sensitive nephrotic syndrome improves the pattern of disease relapse. DESIGN: Double blind, parallel group, phase III randomised placebo controlled trial, including a cost effectiveness analysis. SETTING: 125 UK National Health Service district general hospitals and tertiary paediatric nephrology centres. PARTICIPANTS: 237 children aged 1-14 years with a first episode of steroid sensitive nephrotic syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: Children were randomised to receive an extended 16 week course of prednisolone (total dose 3150 mg/m2) or a standard eight week course of prednisolone (total dose 2240 mg/m2). The drug was supplied as 5 mg tablets alongside matching placebo so that participants in both groups received the same number of tablets at any time point in the study. A minimisation algorithm ensured balanced treatment allocation by ethnicity (South Asian, white, or other) and age (5 years or less, 6 years or more). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was time to first relapse over a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Secondary outcome measures were relapse rate, incidence of frequently relapsing nephrotic syndrome and steroid dependent nephrotic syndrome, use of alternative immunosuppressive treatment, rates of adverse events, behavioural change using the Achenbach child behaviour checklist, quality adjusted life years, and cost effectiveness from a healthcare perspective. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in time to first relapse (hazard ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.17, log rank P=0.28) or in the incidence of frequently relapsing nephrotic syndrome (extended course 60/114 (53%) v standard course 55/109 (50%), P=0.75), steroid dependent nephrotic syndrome (48/114 (42%) v 48/109 (44%), P=0.77), or requirement for alternative immunosuppressive treatment (62/114 (54%) v 61/109 (56%), P=0.81). Total prednisolone dose after completion of the trial drug was 6674 mg for the extended course versus 5475 mg for the standard course (P=0.07). There were no statistically significant differences in serious adverse event rates (extended course 19/114 (17%) v standard course 27/109 (25%), P=0.13) or adverse event rates, with the exception of behaviour, which was poorer in the standard course group. Scores on the Achenbach child behaviour checklist did not, however, differ. Extended course treatment was associated with a mean increase in generic quality of life (0.0162 additional quality adjusted life years, 95% confidence interval -0.005 to 0.037) and cost savings (difference -£1673 ($2160; €1930), 95% confidence interval -£3455 to £109). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes did not improve when the initial course of prednisolone treatment was extended from eight to 16 weeks in UK children with steroid sensitive nephrotic syndrome. However, evidence was found of a short term health economic benefit through reduced resource use and increased quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN16645249; EudraCT 2010-022489-29.

Comparative analysis of medical expenditure with nebulized budesonide versus systemic corticosteroids in hospitalized patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in China.

Purpose: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by persistent respiratory symptoms and is a leading cause of disability in China. Acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) are a leading cause of hospitalizations, and account for a substantial proportion of medical expenditure. Corticosteroids are commonly used to manage AECOPD in hospitalized patients, so our objective was to analyze the total medical expenditure associated with nebulized budesonide (nBUD) vs. systemic corticosteroids (SCS) in this population. Patients and methods: A post-hoc analysis was carried out in 1,577 and 973 patients diagnosed with COPD who had received "any" nBUD or SCS regimen for AECOPD during hospitalization, respectively. Regimens included monotherapy, sequential therapy, and sequential-combination therapy. Comparative total medical expenditure was analyzed using a generalized linear model controlling for age, gender, comorbidities, smoking history, and respiratory failure or pneumonia on admission. Results: The total medical expenditure per capita with any nBUD or SCS regimen was CN¥11,814 (US$1,922) and CN¥12,153 (US$1,977), respectively. Any nBUD regimen was associated with a significant saving of 5.1% in expenditure compared with any SCS regimen (P=0.0341). Comorbidities, Type II respiratory failure, or pneumonia were patient factors associated with higher total medical expenditure (P<0.0001). In a subgroup analysis of the patients who received monotherapy, total medical expenditure was CN¥10,900 (US$1,773) for nBUD and CN¥11,581 (US$1,884) for SCS; nBUD was associated with a significant saving of 8.7% in expenditure compared with SCS (P=0.0013). Similarly, in patients with respiratory failure, treatment with any nBUD regimen was associated with a 10.6% saving in expenditure over any SCS regimen (P=0.0239); however, the same comparison was not significant in patients without respiratory failure (3.4%; P=0.2299). Conclusion: AECOPD is a leading cause of hospitalization in China, which places substantial burden on the healthcare system. This post-hoc analysis suggests that nBUD regimens are associated with lower medical expenditure than SCS regimens in hospitalized patients with AECOPD, and may reduce the financial burden of COPD. However, prospective studies evaluating the effectiveness of nBUD therapies are warranted.

Cooled radiofrequency ablation of the genicular nerves for chronic pain due to osteoarthritis of the knee: a cost-effectiveness analysis based on trial data.

BACKGROUND: For patients with painful knee osteoarthritis, long-term symptomatic relief may improve quality of life. Cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) has demonstrated significant improvements in pain, physical function and health-related quality of life compared with conservative therapy with intra-articular steroid (IAS) injections. This study aimed to establish the cost-effectiveness of CRFA compared with IAS for managing moderate to severe osteoarthritis-related knee pain, from the US Medicare system perspective. METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis utilizing efficacy data (Oxford Knee Scores) from a randomized, crossover trial on CRFA (NCT02343003), which compared CRFA with IAS out to 6 and 12 months, and with IAS patients who subsequently crossed over to receive CRFA after 6 months. Outcomes included health benefits (quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]), costs and cost-effectiveness (expressed as cost per QALY gained). QALYs were estimated by mapping Oxford Knee Scores to the EQ-5D generic utility measure using a validated algorithm. Secondary analyses explored differences in the settings of care and procedures used in-trial versus real-world clinical practice. RESULTS: CRFA resulted in an incremental QALY gain of 0.091 at an incremental cost of $1711, equating to a cost of US$18,773 per QALY gained over a 6-month time horizon versus IAS. Over a 12-month time horizon, the incremental QALY gain was 0.229 at the same incremental cost, equating to a cost of US$7462 per QALY gained versus IAS. Real-world cost assumptions resulted in modest increases in the cost per QALY gained to a maximum of US$21,166 and US$8296 at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that findings were robust to variations in efficacy and cost parameters. CONCLUSIONS: CRFA is a highly cost-effective treatment option for patients with osteoarthritis-related knee pain, compared with the US$100,000/QALY threshold typically used in the US.

Long-term cost and utility consequences of short-term clinically important deterioration in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from the TORCH study.

Purpose: Clinically important deterioration (CID) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a novel composite endpoint that assesses disease stability. The association between short-term CID and future economic and quality of life (QoL) outcomes has not been previously assessed. This analysis considers 3-year data from the TOwards a Revolution in COPD Health (TORCH) study, to examine this question. Patients and methods: This post hoc analysis of TORCH (NCT00268216) compared costs and utilities at 3 years among patients without CID (CID-) and with CID (CID+) at 24 weeks. A positive CID status was defined as either: a deterioration in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) of ≥100 mL from baseline; or a ≥4-unit increase from baseline in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score; or the incidence of a moderate/severe exacerbation. Patients from all treatment arms were included. Utility change was based on the EQ-5D utility index. Costs were based on healthcare resource utilization from 24 weeks to end of follow-up combined with unit costs for the UK (2016 GBP), and reported as per patient per year (PPPY). Adjusted estimates were generated controlling for baseline characteristics, treatment assignment, and number of CID criteria met. Results: Overall, 3,769 patients completed the study and were included in the analysis (stable CID- patients, n=1,832; unstable CID+ patients, n=1,937). At the end of follow-up, CID- patients had higher mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) utility scores than CID+ patients (0.752 [0.738, 0.765] vs 0.697 [0.685, 0.71]; difference +0.054; P<0.001), and lower costs PPPY (£538 vs £916; difference: £378 [95% CI: £244, £521]; P<0.001). The cost differential was primarily driven by the difference in general hospital ward days (P=0.003). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that achieving early stability in COPD by preventing short-term CID is associated with better preservation of future QoL alongside reduced healthcare service costs.