Cargando…

Cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus IVIg in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions

BACKGROUND: Plasma exchange (PLEX) is an effective treatment for antibody-mediated neurological disorders and has been shown to be equally efficacious to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) with comparable adverse event profiles. IVIg has traditionally been the preferred treatment option due to its ea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Klemencic Kozul, Tara, Yudina, Anna, Donovan, Carley, Pinto, Ashwin, Osman, Chinar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9277970/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35831856
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08210-z
_version_ 1784746099082264576
author Klemencic Kozul, Tara
Yudina, Anna
Donovan, Carley
Pinto, Ashwin
Osman, Chinar
author_facet Klemencic Kozul, Tara
Yudina, Anna
Donovan, Carley
Pinto, Ashwin
Osman, Chinar
author_sort Klemencic Kozul, Tara
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Plasma exchange (PLEX) is an effective treatment for antibody-mediated neurological disorders and has been shown to be equally efficacious to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) with comparable adverse event profiles. IVIg has traditionally been the preferred treatment option due to its ease of use. However, advancing technology has allowed PLEX to be performed with a centrifugal system via peripheral access as opposed to central access via a membrane filter. METHODS: We prospectively collected data from a cohort of patients who underwent PLEX at the Wessex Neurological Centre, UK, to perform a cost-minimisation analysis comparing PLEX to IVIg, the standard of care, between May 2019 and May 2020. Data obtained included indication, admission type (inpatient, daycase or intensive care), access (peripheral or central), number of PLEX cycles, exchange volume, patient weight, complications and clinical outcomes. The cost of PLEX delivered in an outpatient setting for an average 80kg person was calculated and compared to the equivalent cost of delivering IVIg by means of a cost-minimization model. RESULTS: The provision of PLEX was roughly half as costly when compared to what it would have been for IVIg (£886 per exchange vs £1778 per infusion or £4432 per cycle of 5 exchanges vs £8890 per cycle of 5 infusions). Our cohort included a total of 44 patients who received a total of 357 PLEX exchanges during the 12-month period (the majority of which were in a daycase setting). We calculated an annual cost saving for PLEX over IVIg of £318,589. The robustness of this result was confirmed by a one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis, showing the cost-effectiveness of PLEX. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that PLEX is more cost-effective than IVIg in this setting. Our study supports the economic case for development of plasma exchange centres in regional neurology units, a case made all the more relevant in the context of constrained supplies of IVIg. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08210-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9277970
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92779702022-07-14 Cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus IVIg in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions Klemencic Kozul, Tara Yudina, Anna Donovan, Carley Pinto, Ashwin Osman, Chinar BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: Plasma exchange (PLEX) is an effective treatment for antibody-mediated neurological disorders and has been shown to be equally efficacious to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) with comparable adverse event profiles. IVIg has traditionally been the preferred treatment option due to its ease of use. However, advancing technology has allowed PLEX to be performed with a centrifugal system via peripheral access as opposed to central access via a membrane filter. METHODS: We prospectively collected data from a cohort of patients who underwent PLEX at the Wessex Neurological Centre, UK, to perform a cost-minimisation analysis comparing PLEX to IVIg, the standard of care, between May 2019 and May 2020. Data obtained included indication, admission type (inpatient, daycase or intensive care), access (peripheral or central), number of PLEX cycles, exchange volume, patient weight, complications and clinical outcomes. The cost of PLEX delivered in an outpatient setting for an average 80kg person was calculated and compared to the equivalent cost of delivering IVIg by means of a cost-minimization model. RESULTS: The provision of PLEX was roughly half as costly when compared to what it would have been for IVIg (£886 per exchange vs £1778 per infusion or £4432 per cycle of 5 exchanges vs £8890 per cycle of 5 infusions). Our cohort included a total of 44 patients who received a total of 357 PLEX exchanges during the 12-month period (the majority of which were in a daycase setting). We calculated an annual cost saving for PLEX over IVIg of £318,589. The robustness of this result was confirmed by a one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis, showing the cost-effectiveness of PLEX. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that PLEX is more cost-effective than IVIg in this setting. Our study supports the economic case for development of plasma exchange centres in regional neurology units, a case made all the more relevant in the context of constrained supplies of IVIg. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08210-z. BioMed Central 2022-07-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9277970/ /pubmed/35831856 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08210-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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 licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence 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 licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Klemencic Kozul, Tara
Yudina, Anna
Donovan, Carley
Pinto, Ashwin
Osman, Chinar
Cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus IVIg in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions
title Cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus IVIg in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions
title_full Cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus IVIg in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions
title_fullStr Cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus IVIg in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions
title_full_unstemmed Cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus IVIg in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions
title_short Cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus IVIg in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions
title_sort cost-minimisation analysis of plasma exchange versus ivig in the treatment of autoimmune neurological conditions
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9277970/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35831856
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08210-z
work_keys_str_mv AT klemencickozultara costminimisationanalysisofplasmaexchangeversusiviginthetreatmentofautoimmuneneurologicalconditions
AT yudinaanna costminimisationanalysisofplasmaexchangeversusiviginthetreatmentofautoimmuneneurologicalconditions
AT donovancarley costminimisationanalysisofplasmaexchangeversusiviginthetreatmentofautoimmuneneurologicalconditions
AT pintoashwin costminimisationanalysisofplasmaexchangeversusiviginthetreatmentofautoimmuneneurologicalconditions
AT osmanchinar costminimisationanalysisofplasmaexchangeversusiviginthetreatmentofautoimmuneneurologicalconditions