Cargando…

UK cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class II obesity

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a minimally invasive procedure that has been demonstrated in the MERIT randomised, controlled trial to result in substantial and durable additional weight loss in adults with obesity compared with lifestyle modification (LM) alone. We sought to con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kelly, Jamie, Menon, Vinod, O’Neill, Frank, Elliot, Laura, Combe, Emily, Drinkwater, Will, Abbott, Sally, Hayee, BuHussain
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10599990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37674032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41366-023-01374-6
_version_ 1785125888590872576
author Kelly, Jamie
Menon, Vinod
O’Neill, Frank
Elliot, Laura
Combe, Emily
Drinkwater, Will
Abbott, Sally
Hayee, BuHussain
author_facet Kelly, Jamie
Menon, Vinod
O’Neill, Frank
Elliot, Laura
Combe, Emily
Drinkwater, Will
Abbott, Sally
Hayee, BuHussain
author_sort Kelly, Jamie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a minimally invasive procedure that has been demonstrated in the MERIT randomised, controlled trial to result in substantial and durable additional weight loss in adults with obesity compared with lifestyle modification (LM) alone. We sought to conduct the first cost-effectiveness analysis of ESG versus LM alone in adults with class II obesity (BMI 35.0–39.9 kg/m(2)) from a national healthcare system perspective in England based on results from this study. METHODS: A 6-state Markov model was developed comprising 5 BMI-based health states and an absorbing death state. Baseline characteristics, utilities, and transition probabilities were informed by patient-level data from the subset of patients with class II obesity in MERIT. Adverse events (AEs) were based on the MERIT safety population. Mortality was estimated by applying BMI-specific hazard ratios from the published literature to UK general population mortality rates. Utilities for the healthy weight and overweight health states were informed from the literature; disutility associated with increasing BMI in the class I-III obesity health states was estimated using MERIT utility data. Disutility due to AEs and the prevalence of obesity-related comorbidities were based on the literature. Costs included intervention costs, AE costs, and comorbidity costs. RESULTS: ESG resulted in higher overall costs than LM alone but led to an increase in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for ESG vs LM alone was £2453/QALY gained. ESG was consistently cost effective across a wide range of sensitivity analyses, with no ICER estimate exceeding £10,000/QALY gained. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the mean ICER was £2502/QALY gained and ESG remained cost effective in 98.25% of iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that ESG is highly cost effective versus LM alone for the treatment of adults with class II obesity in England.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10599990
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105999902023-10-27 UK cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class II obesity Kelly, Jamie Menon, Vinod O’Neill, Frank Elliot, Laura Combe, Emily Drinkwater, Will Abbott, Sally Hayee, BuHussain Int J Obes (Lond) Article BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a minimally invasive procedure that has been demonstrated in the MERIT randomised, controlled trial to result in substantial and durable additional weight loss in adults with obesity compared with lifestyle modification (LM) alone. We sought to conduct the first cost-effectiveness analysis of ESG versus LM alone in adults with class II obesity (BMI 35.0–39.9 kg/m(2)) from a national healthcare system perspective in England based on results from this study. METHODS: A 6-state Markov model was developed comprising 5 BMI-based health states and an absorbing death state. Baseline characteristics, utilities, and transition probabilities were informed by patient-level data from the subset of patients with class II obesity in MERIT. Adverse events (AEs) were based on the MERIT safety population. Mortality was estimated by applying BMI-specific hazard ratios from the published literature to UK general population mortality rates. Utilities for the healthy weight and overweight health states were informed from the literature; disutility associated with increasing BMI in the class I-III obesity health states was estimated using MERIT utility data. Disutility due to AEs and the prevalence of obesity-related comorbidities were based on the literature. Costs included intervention costs, AE costs, and comorbidity costs. RESULTS: ESG resulted in higher overall costs than LM alone but led to an increase in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for ESG vs LM alone was £2453/QALY gained. ESG was consistently cost effective across a wide range of sensitivity analyses, with no ICER estimate exceeding £10,000/QALY gained. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the mean ICER was £2502/QALY gained and ESG remained cost effective in 98.25% of iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that ESG is highly cost effective versus LM alone for the treatment of adults with class II obesity in England. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-09-06 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10599990/ /pubmed/37674032 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41366-023-01374-6 Text en © Crown 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Kelly, Jamie
Menon, Vinod
O’Neill, Frank
Elliot, Laura
Combe, Emily
Drinkwater, Will
Abbott, Sally
Hayee, BuHussain
UK cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class II obesity
title UK cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class II obesity
title_full UK cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class II obesity
title_fullStr UK cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class II obesity
title_full_unstemmed UK cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class II obesity
title_short UK cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class II obesity
title_sort uk cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus lifestyle modification alone for adults with class ii obesity
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10599990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37674032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41366-023-01374-6
work_keys_str_mv AT kellyjamie ukcosteffectivenessanalysisofendoscopicsleevegastroplastyversuslifestylemodificationaloneforadultswithclassiiobesity
AT menonvinod ukcosteffectivenessanalysisofendoscopicsleevegastroplastyversuslifestylemodificationaloneforadultswithclassiiobesity
AT oneillfrank ukcosteffectivenessanalysisofendoscopicsleevegastroplastyversuslifestylemodificationaloneforadultswithclassiiobesity
AT elliotlaura ukcosteffectivenessanalysisofendoscopicsleevegastroplastyversuslifestylemodificationaloneforadultswithclassiiobesity
AT combeemily ukcosteffectivenessanalysisofendoscopicsleevegastroplastyversuslifestylemodificationaloneforadultswithclassiiobesity
AT drinkwaterwill ukcosteffectivenessanalysisofendoscopicsleevegastroplastyversuslifestylemodificationaloneforadultswithclassiiobesity
AT abbottsally ukcosteffectivenessanalysisofendoscopicsleevegastroplastyversuslifestylemodificationaloneforadultswithclassiiobesity
AT hayeebuhussain ukcosteffectivenessanalysisofendoscopicsleevegastroplastyversuslifestylemodificationaloneforadultswithclassiiobesity