Cargando…
The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator Once Monthly versus Epoetin Thrice Weekly for Anaemia Management in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients
Introduction. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (CERA) once monthly to epoetin beta (EpoB) thrice weekly to maintain haemoglobin (Hb) within the range 10.5–12 g/dL. Methods. Prospective cohort study and cost-effectiveness anal...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4710935/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26843983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/189404 |
_version_ | 1782409884722003968 |
---|---|
author | Maoujoud, Omar Ahid, Samir Dkhissi, Hocein Oualim, Zouhair Cherrah, Yahia |
author_facet | Maoujoud, Omar Ahid, Samir Dkhissi, Hocein Oualim, Zouhair Cherrah, Yahia |
author_sort | Maoujoud, Omar |
collection | PubMed |
description | Introduction. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (CERA) once monthly to epoetin beta (EpoB) thrice weekly to maintain haemoglobin (Hb) within the range 10.5–12 g/dL. Methods. Prospective cohort study and cost-effectiveness analysis. Chronic haemodialysis patients (CHP), being treated with EpoB, were selected for two periods of follow-up: period 1, maintaining prior treatment with EpoB, and period 2, conversion to CERA once monthly. Hb concentrations and costs were measured monthly. Health care payer perspective for one year was adopted. Results. 75 CHP completed the study, with a mean age of 52.9 ± 14.3 years. Baseline Hb was 11.14 ± 1.18 g/dL in EpoB phase and 11.46 ± 0.79 g/dL in CERA phase; we observed a significant increase in the proportion of patients successfully treated (Hb within the recommended range), 65.3% versus 70.7%, p: 0.008, and in the average effectiveness by 4% (0.55 versus 0.59). Average cost-effectiveness ratios were 6013.86 and 5173.64$, with an ICER CERA to EpoB at −6457.5$. Conclusion. Our health economic evaluation of ESA use in haemodialysis patients suggests that the use of CERA is cost-effective compared with EpoB. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4710935 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47109352016-02-03 The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator Once Monthly versus Epoetin Thrice Weekly for Anaemia Management in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients Maoujoud, Omar Ahid, Samir Dkhissi, Hocein Oualim, Zouhair Cherrah, Yahia Anemia Research Article Introduction. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (CERA) once monthly to epoetin beta (EpoB) thrice weekly to maintain haemoglobin (Hb) within the range 10.5–12 g/dL. Methods. Prospective cohort study and cost-effectiveness analysis. Chronic haemodialysis patients (CHP), being treated with EpoB, were selected for two periods of follow-up: period 1, maintaining prior treatment with EpoB, and period 2, conversion to CERA once monthly. Hb concentrations and costs were measured monthly. Health care payer perspective for one year was adopted. Results. 75 CHP completed the study, with a mean age of 52.9 ± 14.3 years. Baseline Hb was 11.14 ± 1.18 g/dL in EpoB phase and 11.46 ± 0.79 g/dL in CERA phase; we observed a significant increase in the proportion of patients successfully treated (Hb within the recommended range), 65.3% versus 70.7%, p: 0.008, and in the average effectiveness by 4% (0.55 versus 0.59). Average cost-effectiveness ratios were 6013.86 and 5173.64$, with an ICER CERA to EpoB at −6457.5$. Conclusion. Our health economic evaluation of ESA use in haemodialysis patients suggests that the use of CERA is cost-effective compared with EpoB. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015 2015-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC4710935/ /pubmed/26843983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/189404 Text en Copyright © 2015 Omar Maoujoud et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Maoujoud, Omar Ahid, Samir Dkhissi, Hocein Oualim, Zouhair Cherrah, Yahia The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator Once Monthly versus Epoetin Thrice Weekly for Anaemia Management in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients |
title | The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator Once Monthly versus Epoetin Thrice Weekly for Anaemia Management in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients |
title_full | The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator Once Monthly versus Epoetin Thrice Weekly for Anaemia Management in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients |
title_fullStr | The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator Once Monthly versus Epoetin Thrice Weekly for Anaemia Management in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients |
title_full_unstemmed | The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator Once Monthly versus Epoetin Thrice Weekly for Anaemia Management in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients |
title_short | The Cost-Effectiveness of Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator Once Monthly versus Epoetin Thrice Weekly for Anaemia Management in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness of continuous erythropoiesis receptor activator once monthly versus epoetin thrice weekly for anaemia management in chronic haemodialysis patients |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4710935/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26843983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/189404 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT maoujoudomar thecosteffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT ahidsamir thecosteffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT dkhissihocein thecosteffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT oualimzouhair thecosteffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT cherrahyahia thecosteffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT maoujoudomar costeffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT ahidsamir costeffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT dkhissihocein costeffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT oualimzouhair costeffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients AT cherrahyahia costeffectivenessofcontinuouserythropoiesisreceptoractivatoroncemonthlyversusepoetinthriceweeklyforanaemiamanagementinchronichaemodialysispatients |