Cargando…

Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?

INTRODUCTION: Previous cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) reported that Drotrecogin alfa (DrotAA) is cost-effective based on a Phase III clinical trial (PROWESS). There is little evidence on whether DrotAA is cost-effective in routine clinical practice. We assessed whether DrotAA is cost-effective in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sadique, M Zia, Grieve, Richard, Harrison, David A, Cuthbertson, Brian H, Rowan, Kathryn M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3334774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21943177
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc10468
_version_ 1782230683714846720
author Sadique, M Zia
Grieve, Richard
Harrison, David A
Cuthbertson, Brian H
Rowan, Kathryn M
author_facet Sadique, M Zia
Grieve, Richard
Harrison, David A
Cuthbertson, Brian H
Rowan, Kathryn M
author_sort Sadique, M Zia
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Previous cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) reported that Drotrecogin alfa (DrotAA) is cost-effective based on a Phase III clinical trial (PROWESS). There is little evidence on whether DrotAA is cost-effective in routine clinical practice. We assessed whether DrotAA is cost-effective in routine practice for adult patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ systems failing. METHODS: This CEA used data from a prospective cohort study that compared DrotAA versus no DrotAA (control) for severe sepsis patients with multiple organ systems failing admitted to critical care units in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The cohort study used case-mix and mortality data from a national audit, linked with a separate audit of DrotAA infusions. Re-admissions to critical care and corresponding mortality were recorded for four years. Patients receiving DrotAA (n = 1,076) were matched to controls (n = 1,650) with a propensity score (Pscore), and Genetic Matching (GenMatch). The CEA projected long-term survival to report lifetime incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) overall, and for subgroups with two or three to five organ systems failing at baseline. RESULTS: The incremental costs per QALY for DrotAA were £30,000 overall, and £16,000 for the subgroups with three to five organ systems failing. For patients with two organ systems failing, DrotAA resulted in an average loss of one QALY at an incremental cost of £15,000. When the subgroup with two organ systems was restricted to patients receiving DrotAA within 24 hours, DrotAA led to a gain of 1.2 QALYs at a cost per QALY of £11,000. The results were robust to other assumptions including the approach taken to projecting long-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: DrotAA is cost-effective in routine practice for severe sepsis patients with three to five organ systems failing. For patients with two organ systems failing, this study could not provide unequivocal evidence on the cost-effectiveness of DrotAA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3334774
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33347742012-04-25 Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice? Sadique, M Zia Grieve, Richard Harrison, David A Cuthbertson, Brian H Rowan, Kathryn M Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: Previous cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) reported that Drotrecogin alfa (DrotAA) is cost-effective based on a Phase III clinical trial (PROWESS). There is little evidence on whether DrotAA is cost-effective in routine clinical practice. We assessed whether DrotAA is cost-effective in routine practice for adult patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ systems failing. METHODS: This CEA used data from a prospective cohort study that compared DrotAA versus no DrotAA (control) for severe sepsis patients with multiple organ systems failing admitted to critical care units in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The cohort study used case-mix and mortality data from a national audit, linked with a separate audit of DrotAA infusions. Re-admissions to critical care and corresponding mortality were recorded for four years. Patients receiving DrotAA (n = 1,076) were matched to controls (n = 1,650) with a propensity score (Pscore), and Genetic Matching (GenMatch). The CEA projected long-term survival to report lifetime incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) overall, and for subgroups with two or three to five organ systems failing at baseline. RESULTS: The incremental costs per QALY for DrotAA were £30,000 overall, and £16,000 for the subgroups with three to five organ systems failing. For patients with two organ systems failing, DrotAA resulted in an average loss of one QALY at an incremental cost of £15,000. When the subgroup with two organ systems was restricted to patients receiving DrotAA within 24 hours, DrotAA led to a gain of 1.2 QALYs at a cost per QALY of £11,000. The results were robust to other assumptions including the approach taken to projecting long-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: DrotAA is cost-effective in routine practice for severe sepsis patients with three to five organ systems failing. For patients with two organ systems failing, this study could not provide unequivocal evidence on the cost-effectiveness of DrotAA. BioMed Central 2011 2011-09-26 /pmc/articles/PMC3334774/ /pubmed/21943177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc10468 Text en Copyright ©2011 Sadique et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Sadique, M Zia
Grieve, Richard
Harrison, David A
Cuthbertson, Brian H
Rowan, Kathryn M
Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?
title Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?
title_full Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?
title_fullStr Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?
title_full_unstemmed Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?
title_short Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?
title_sort is drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3334774/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21943177
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc10468
work_keys_str_mv AT sadiquemzia isdrotrecoginalfaactivatedforadultswithseveresepsiscosteffectiveinroutineclinicalpractice
AT grieverichard isdrotrecoginalfaactivatedforadultswithseveresepsiscosteffectiveinroutineclinicalpractice
AT harrisondavida isdrotrecoginalfaactivatedforadultswithseveresepsiscosteffectiveinroutineclinicalpractice
AT cuthbertsonbrianh isdrotrecoginalfaactivatedforadultswithseveresepsiscosteffectiveinroutineclinicalpractice
AT rowankathrynm isdrotrecoginalfaactivatedforadultswithseveresepsiscosteffectiveinroutineclinicalpractice