Cost-effectiveness analysis of universal childhood hepatitis A vaccination in Brazil: Regional analyses according to the endemic context

Objective: To To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of a universal childhood hepatitis A vaccination program in Brazil. Methods: An age and time-dependent dynamic model was developed to estimate the incidence of hepatitis A for 24 years. The analysis was run separately according to the pattern of regional endemicity, one for South + Southeast (low endemicity) and one for the North + Northeast + Midwest (intermediate endemicity). The decision analysis model compared universal childhood vaccination with current program of vaccinating high risk individuals. Epidemiologic and cost estimates were based on data from a nationwide seroprevalence survey of viral hepatitis, primary data collection, National Health Information Systems and literature. The analysis was conducted from both the health system and societal perspectives. Costs are expressed in 2008 Brazilian currency (Real). Results: A universal immunization program would have a significant impact on disease epidemiology in all regions, resulting in 64% reduction in the number of cases of icteric hepatitis, 59% reduction in deaths for the disease and a 62% decrease of life years lost, in a national perspective. With a vaccine price of R$16.89 (US$7.23) per dose, vaccination against hepatitis A was a cost-saving strategy in the low and intermediate endemicity regions and in Brazil as a whole from both health system and society perspective. Results were most sensitive to the frequency of icteric hepatitis, ambulatory care and vaccine costs. Conclusions: Universal childhood vaccination program against hepatitis A could be a cost-saving strategy in all regions of Brazil. These results are useful for the Brazilian government for vaccine related decisions and for monitoring population impact if the vaccine is included in the National Immunization Program. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Surgical, Angioplasty, or Medical Therapeutics for Coronary Artery Disease 5-Year Follow-Up of Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS) II Trial

Background-The Second Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II) included patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and normal systolic ventricular function. Patients underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG, n = 203), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI, n = 205), or medical treatment alone (MT, n = 203). This investigation compares the economic outcome at 5-year follow-up of the 3 therapeutic strategies. Methods and Results-We analyzed cumulative costs during a 5-year follow-up period. To analyze the cost-effectiveness, adjustment was made on the cumulative costs for average event-free time and angina-free proportion. Respectively, for event-free survival and event plus angina-free survival, MT presented 3.79 quality-adjusted life-years and 2.07 quality-adjusted life-years; PCI presented 3.59 and 2.77 quality-adjusted life-years; and CABG demonstrated 4.4 and 2.81 quality-adjusted life-years. The event-free costs were $9071.00 for MT; $19 967.00 for PCI; and $18 263.00 for CABG. The paired comparison of the event-free costs showed that there was a significant difference favoring MT versus PCI (P<0.01) and versus CABG (P<0.01) and CABG versus PCI (P<0.01). The event-free plus angina-free costs were $16 553.00, $25 831.00, and $24 614.00, respectively. The paired comparison of the event-free plus angina-free costs showed that there was a significant difference favoring MT versus PCI (P=0.04), and versus CABG (P<0.001); there was no difference between CABG and PCI (P>0.05). Conclusions-In the long-term economic analysis, for the prevention of a composite primary end point, MT was more cost effective than CABG, and CABG was more cost-effective than PCI.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of saxagliptine as additional therapy to metformin for the treatment of diabetes mellitus type 2 in the Brazilian private health system

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of saxagliptine as additional therapy to metformin for the treatment of diabetes mellitus type 2 in the Brazilian private health system Objectives: To compare costs and clinical benefits of three additional therapies to metformin (MF) for patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2). Methods: A discrete event simulation model seas built to estimate the cost-utility ratio (cost per quality-adjusted life years [QALY)) of saxagliptine as an additional therapy to MF when compared to rosiglitazone or pioglitazone. A budget impact model (BIM) was built to simulate the economic impact of saxagliptine use in the context of the Brazilian private health system. Results: The acquiring medication costs for the hypothetical patient group analyzed in a time frame of three years, were R$ 10,850,185, R$ 14,836,265 and R$ 14,679,099 for saxagliptine, pioglitazone and rosiglitazone, respectively. Saxagliptine showed lower costs and greater effectiveness in both comparisons, with projected savings for the first three years of R$ 3,874 and R$ 3,996, respectively. The BIM estimated cumulative savings of R$ 417,958 with the repayment of saxagliptine in three years from the perspective of a health plan with 1,000,000 covered individuals. Conclusion: From the perspective of private paying source, the projection is that adding saxagliptine with MF save costs when compared with the addition of rosiglitazone or pioglitazone in patients with DM2 that have not reached the HbA1c goal with metformin monotherapy. The BIM of including saxagliptine in the reimbursement lists of health plans indicated significant savings on the three-year horizon.

Contributions from the systematic review of economic evaluations: the case of childhood hepatitis A vaccination in Brazil

The aim of this study was to present the contributions of the systematic review of economic evaluations to the development of a national study on childhood hepatitis A vaccination. A literature review was performed in EMBASE, MEDLINE, WOPEC, HealthSTAR, SciELO and LILACS from 1995 to 2010. Most of the studies (8 of 10) showed favorable cost-effectiveness results. Sensitivity analysis indicated that the most important parameters for the results were cost of the vaccine, hepatitis A incidence, and medical costs of the disease. Variability was observed in methodological characteristics and estimates of key variables among the 10 studies reviewed. It is not possible to generalize results or transfer epidemiological estimates of resource utilization and costs associated with hepatitis A to the local context. Systematic review of economic evaluation studies of hepatitis A vaccine demonstrated the need for a national analysis and provided input for the development of a new decision-making model for Brazil.