Cargando…
Cost-Utility Analysis of four Chelation Regimens for β-thalassemia Major: a Chinese Perspective
OBJECTIVE: The Iron chelation is essential to prevent iron overload damage of vital organs, like heart, liver, and endocrine glands, in patients with transfusion-dependent thalassemia. The most common chelation regimens for β-thalassemia major (β-TM) patients used in China are a combination therapy...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7202351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395218 http://dx.doi.org/10.4084/MJHID.2020.029 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: The Iron chelation is essential to prevent iron overload damage of vital organs, like heart, liver, and endocrine glands, in patients with transfusion-dependent thalassemia. The most common chelation regimens for β-thalassemia major (β-TM) patients used in China are a combination therapy of deferoxamine and deferiprone (DFO+DFP), deferoxamine (DFO) monotherapy, deferiprone (DFP) monotherapy and deferasirox (DFX) monotherapy. Such patients use iron chelators their whole lives, resulting in enormous treatment costs. This study analyses the cost-utility of these four regimens from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. METHODS: A Markov decision model was used over a 5-year time horizon and was populated using clinical data from a systematic literature review. We obtained utility data from local and previous research. Costs were estimated using Chinese national sources. RESULTS: From the base-case analysis results, DFP was the most cost-effective chelation regimen, followed by DFO, DFX, and DFO+DFP. DFP had 97.32%, 99.43%, and 58.04% likelihood of being cost-effective versus DFX, DFO+DFP, and DFO, respectively, at a payment threshold of 193,932.00 CNY/QALY (QALY, quality-adjusted life-year). CONCLUSIONS: DFP was the most cost-effective chelation regimen for β-TM patients, followed by DFO, DFX, and DFO+DFP. Using DFP as the primary treatment regimen may potentially result in cost-savings and QALY gains for the Chinese healthcare system. To increase these benefits, the Chinese government should take measures to lower DFX and DFO drug costs, and Chinese clinicians should choose the cheaper DFX and DFO, increase the utility of DFO+DFP and reduce mortality and morbidity of DFP. Changes in influential parameters easily affect the results of DFX versus DFO+DFP and of DFP versus DFO; clinicians should focus on such parameters and adjust the regimens accordingly. |
---|