Cargando…

The cost-effectiveness of growth hormone replacement therapy (Genotropin®) in hypopituitary adults in Sweden

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of growth hormone (GH) treatment (Genotropin®) compared with no GH treatment in adults with GH deficiency in a Swedish societal setting. METHODS: A Markov-type cost-utility simulation model was constructed and used to simulate, for men and women, morbid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bolin, Kristian, Sandin, Rickard, Koltowska-Häggström, Maria, Loftus, Jane, Prütz, Christin, Jonsson, Björn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3850881/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24079522
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-11-24
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of growth hormone (GH) treatment (Genotropin®) compared with no GH treatment in adults with GH deficiency in a Swedish societal setting. METHODS: A Markov-type cost-utility simulation model was constructed and used to simulate, for men and women, morbidity and mortality for GH-treated and -untreated individuals over a 20-year period. The calculations were performed using current available prices concerning morbidity-related healthcare costs and costs for Genotropin®. All costs and treatment effects were discounted at 3%. Costs were expressed in Euro (1€ = 9.03 SEK). GH-treated Swedish patients (n = 434) were identified from the KIMS database (Pfizer International Metabolic Database) and untreated patients (n = 2135) from the Swedish Cancer Registry and the Hospital Discharge Registry. RESULTS: The results are reported as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, including both direct and indirect costs for GH-treated versus untreated patients. The weighted sum of all subgroup incremental cost per QALY was €15,975 and €20,241 for men and women, respectively. Including indirect cost resulted in lower cost per QALY gained: €11,173 and €10,753 for men and women, respectively. Key drivers of the results were improvement in quality of life, increased survival, and intervention cost. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental cost per QALY gained is moderate when compared with informal thresholds applied in Sweden. The simulations suggest that GH-treatment is cost-effective for both men and women at the €55,371 (SEK 500,000 – the informal Swedish cost-effectiveness threshold) per QALY threshold.