Cost-Effectiveness of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation in Portugal

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:Recently, three novel non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants received approval for reimbursement in Portugal for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). It is therefore important to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of these new oral anticoagulants in Portuguese AF patients. METHODS: A Markov model was used to analyze disease progression over a lifetime horizon. Relative efficacy data for stroke (ischemic and hemorrhagic), bleeding (intracranial, other major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding), myocardial infarction and treatment discontinuation were obtained by pairwise indirect comparisons between apixaban, dabigatran and rivaroxaban using warfarin as a common comparator. Data on resource use were obtained from the database of diagnosis-related groups and an expert panel. Model outputs included life years gained, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), direct healthcare costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS:Apixaban provided the most life years gained and QALYs. The ICERs of apixaban compared to warfarin and dabigatran were €5529/QALY and €9163/QALY, respectively. Apixaban was dominant over rivaroxaban (greater health gains and lower costs). The results were robust over a wide range of inputs in sensitivity analyses. Apixaban had a 70% probability of being cost-effective (at a threshold of €20 000/QALY) compared to all the other therapeutic options. CONCLUSIONS:Apixaban is a cost-effective alternative to warfarin and dabigatran and is dominant over rivaroxaban in AF patients from the perspective of the Portuguese national healthcare system. These conclusions are based on indirect comparisons, but despite this limitation, the information is useful for healthcare decision-makers.

Cost-Effectiveness of High, Moderate and Low-Dose Statins in the Prevention of Vascular Events in the Brazilian Public Health System

Background:Statins have proven efficacy in the reduction of cardiovascular events, but the financial impact of its widespread use can be substantial.Objective:To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of three statin dosing schemes in the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS) perspective.Methods:We developed a Markov model to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of low, intermediate and high intensity dose regimens in secondary and four primary scenarios (5%, 10%, 15% and 20% ten-year risk) of prevention of cardiovascular events. Regimens with expected low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction below 30% (e.g. simvastatin 10mg) were considered as low dose; between 30-40%, (atorvastatin 10mg, simvastatin 40mg), intermediate dose; and above 40% (atorvastatin 20-80mg, rosuvastatin 20mg), high-dose statins. Effectiveness data were obtained from a systematic review with 136,000 patients. National data were used to estimate utilities and costs (expressed as International Dollars - Int$). A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold equal to the Brazilian gross domestic product per capita (circa Int$11,770) was applied.Results:Low dose was dominated by extension in the primary prevention scenarios. In the five scenarios, the ICER of intermediate dose was below Int$10,000 per QALY. The ICER of the high versus intermediate dose comparison was above Int$27,000 per QALY in all scenarios. In the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, intermediate dose had a probability above 50% of being cost-effective with ICERs between Int$ 9,000-20,000 per QALY in all scenarios.Conclusions:Considering a reasonable WTP threshold, intermediate dose statin therapy is economically attractive, and should be a priority intervention in prevention of cardiovascular events in Brazil.

Comparing impact and cost-effectiveness of primary prevention strategies for lipid-lowering.

BACKGROUND: Lipid-lowering therapy is costly but effective at reducing coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness and public health impact of Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines and compare with a range of risk- and age-based alternative strategies. DESIGN: The CHD Policy Model, a Markov-type cost-effectiveness model. DATA SOURCES: National surveys (1999 to 2004), vital statistics (2000), the Framingham Heart Study (1948 to 2000), other published data, and a direct survey of statin costs (2008). TARGET POPULATION: U.S. population age 35 to 85 years. Time Horizon: 2010 to 2040. PERSPECTIVE: Health care system. INTERVENTION: Lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins). OUTCOME MEASURE: Incremental cost-effectiveness. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Full adherence to ATP III primary prevention guidelines would require starting (9.7 million) or intensifying (1.4 million) statin therapy for 11.1 million adults and would prevent 20,000 myocardial infarctions and 10,000 CHD deaths per year at an annual net cost of $3.6 billion ($42,000/QALY) if low-intensity statins cost $2.11 per pill. The ATP III guidelines would be preferred over alternative strategies if society is willing to pay $50,000/QALY and statins cost $1.54 to $2.21 per pill. At higher statin costs, ATP III is not cost-effective; at lower costs, more liberal statin-prescribing strategies would be preferred; and at costs less than $0.10 per pill, treating all persons with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels greater than 3.4 mmol/L (>130 mg/dL) would yield net cost savings. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Results are sensitive to the assumptions that LDL cholesterol becomes less important as a risk factor with increasing age and that little disutility results from taking a pill every day. LIMITATION: Randomized trial evidence for statin effectiveness is not available for all subgroups. CONCLUSION: The ATP III guidelines are relatively cost-effective and would have a large public health impact if implemented fully in the United States. Alternate strategies may be preferred, however, depending on the cost of statins and how much society is willing to pay for better health outcomes. FUNDING: Flight Attendants' Medical Research Institute and the Swanson Family Fund. The Framingham Heart Study and Framingham Offspring Study are conducted and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Cost-effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin for secondary prophylaxis of cancer-related venous thromboembolism.

Although extended secondary prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin was recently shown to be more effective than warfarin for cancer-related venous thromboembolism, its cost-effectiveness compared to traditional prophylaxis with warfarin is uncertain. We built a decision analytic model to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes of a 6-month course of low-molecular-weight heparin or warfarin therapy in 65-year-old patients with cancer-related venous thromboembolism. We used probability estimates and utilities reported in the literature and published cost data. Using a US societal perspective, we compared strategies based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lifetime costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of low-molecular-weight heparin compared with warfarin was 149,865 dollars/QALY. Low-molecular-weight heparin yielded a quality-adjusted life expectancy of 1.097 QALYs at the cost of 15,329 dollars. Overall, 46% (7108 dollars) of the total costs associated with low-molecular-weight heparin were attributable to pharmacy costs. Although the low-molecular-weigh heparin strategy achieved a higher incremental quality-adjusted life expectancy than the warfarin strategy (difference of 0.051 QALYs), this clinical benefit was offset by a substantial cost increment of 7,609 dollars. Cost-effectiveness results were sensitive to variation of the early mortality risks associated with low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin and the pharmacy costs for low-molecular-weight heparin. Based on the best available evidence, secondary prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin is more effective than warfarin for cancer-related venous thromboembolism. However, because of the substantial pharmacy costs of extended low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis in the US, this treatment is relatively expensive compared with warfarin.

The cost-effectiveness and public health benefit of nalmefene added to psychosocial support for the reduction of alcohol consumption in alcohol-dependent patients with high/very high drinking risk levels: a Markov model.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether nalmefene combined with psychosocial support is cost-effective compared with psychosocial support alone for reducing alcohol consumption in alcohol-dependent patients with high/very high drinking risk levels (DRLs) as defined by the WHO, and to evaluate the public health benefit of reducing harmful alcohol-attributable diseases, injuries and deaths. DESIGN: Decision modelling using Markov chains compared costs and effects over 5 years. SETTING: The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: The model considered the licensed population for nalmefene, specifically adults with both alcohol dependence and high/very high DRLs, who do not require immediate detoxification and who continue to have high/very high DRLs after initial assessment. DATA SOURCES: We modelled treatment effect using data from three clinical trials for nalmefene (ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720), ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461) and SENSE (NCT00811941)). Baseline characteristics of the model population, treatment resource utilisation and utilities were from these trials. We estimated the number of alcohol-attributable events occurring at different levels of alcohol consumption based on published epidemiological risk-relation studies. Health-related costs were from UK sources. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and number of alcohol-attributable harmful events avoided. RESULTS: Nalmefene in combination with psychosocial support had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £5204 per QALY gained, and was therefore cost-effective at the £20,000 per QALY gained decision threshold. Sensitivity analyses showed that the conclusion was robust. Nalmefene plus psychosocial support led to the avoidance of 7179 alcohol-attributable diseases/injuries and 309 deaths per 100,000 patients compared to psychosocial support alone over the course of 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Nalmefene can be seen as a cost-effective treatment for alcohol dependence, with substantial public health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: This cost-effectiveness analysis was developed based on data from three randomised clinical trials: ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720), ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461) and SENSE (NCT00811941).

Cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapies for nicotine dependence in primary care settings: a multinational comparison.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of the first-line pharmacotherapies (nicotine gum, patch, spray, inhaler, and bupropion) for smoking cessation across six Western countries-Canada, France, Spain, Switzerland, the United States, and the United Kingdom. DESIGN AND STUDY POPULATION: A Markov-chain cohort model to simulate two cohorts of smokers: (1) a reference cohort given brief cessation counselling by a general practitioner (GP); (2) a treatment cohort given counselling plus pharmacotherapy. Effectiveness expressed as odds ratios for quitting associated with pharmacotherapies. Costs based on the additional physician time required and retail prices of the medications. INTERVENTIONS: Addition of each first-line pharmacotherapy to GP cessation counselling. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per life-year saved associated with pharmacotherapies. RESULTS: The cost per life-year saved for counselling only ranged from US190 dollars in Spain to 773 dollars in the UK for men, and from 288 dollars in Spain to 1168 dollars in the UK for women. The incremental cost per life-year saved for gum ranged from 2230 dollars for men in Spain to 7643 dollars for women in the US; for patch from 1758 dollars for men in Spain to 5131 dollars for women in the UK; for spray from 1935 dollars for men in Spain to 7969 dollars for women in the US; for inhaler from 3480 dollars for men in Switzerland to 8700 dollars for women in France; and for bupropion from 792 dollars for men in Canada to 2922 dollars for women in the US. In sensitivity analysis, changes in discount rate, treatment effectiveness, and natural quit rate had the strongest influences on cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness of the pharmacotherapies varied significantly across the six study countries, however, in each case, the results would be considered favourable as compared to other common preventive pharmacotherapies.

Cost-effectiveness of an exercise intervention program in perimenopausal women: the Fitness League Against MENopause COst (FLAMENCO) randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND The high prevalence of women that do not reach the recommended level of physical activity is worrisome. A sedentary lifestyle has negative consequences on health status and increases health care costs. The main objective of this project is to assess the cost-effectiveness of a primary care-based exercise intervention in perimenopausal women. METHODS/DESIGN The present study is a Randomized Controlled Trial. A total of 150 eligible women will be recruited and randomly assigned to either a 16-week exercise intervention (3 sessions/week), or to usual care (control) group. The primary outcome measure is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The secondary outcome measures are: i) socio-demographic and clinical information; ii) body composition; iii) dietary patterns; iv) glycaemic and lipid profile; v) physical fitness; vi) physical activity and sedentary behaviour; vii) sleep quality; viii) quality of life, mental health and positive health; ix) menopause symptoms. All outcomes will be assessed at baseline and post intervention. The data will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis and per protocol. In addition, we will conduct a cost effectiveness analysis from a health system perspective. DISCUSSION The intervention designed is feasible and if it proves to be clinically and cost effective, it can be easily transferred to other similar contexts. Consequently, the findings of this project might help the Health Systems to identify strategies for primary prevention and health promotion as well as to reduce health care requirements and costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02358109 . Date of registration: 05/02/2015.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the first-line therapies for nicotine dependence.

BACKGROUND: Nicotine dependence is the major obstacle for smokers who want to quit. Guidelines have identified five effective first-line therapies, four nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs)--gum, patch, nasal spray and inhaler--and bupropion. Studying the extent to which these various treatments are cost-effective requires additional research. OBJECTIVES: To determine cost-effectiveness (CE) ratios of pharmacotherapies for nicotine dependence provided by general practitioners (GPs) during routine visits as an adjunct to cessation counselling. METHODS: We used a Markov model to generate two cohorts of one-pack-a-day smokers: (1) the reference cohort received only cessation counselling from a GP during routine office visits; (2) the second cohort received the same counselling plus an offer to use a pharmacological treatment to help them quit smoking. The effectiveness of adjunctive therapy was expressed in terms of the resultant differential in mortality rate between the two cohorts. Data on the effectiveness of therapies came from meta-analyses, and we used odds ratio for quitting as the measure of effectiveness. The costs of pharmacotherapies were based on the cost of the additional time spent by GPs offering, prescribing and following-up treatment, and on the retail prices of the therapies. We used the third-party-payer perspective. Results are expressed as the incremental cost per life-year saved. RESULTS: The cost per life-year saved for only counselling ranged from Euro 385 to Euro 622 for men and from Euro 468 to Euro 796 for women. The CE ratios for the five pharmacological treatments varied from Euro 1768 to Euro 6879 for men, and from Euro 2146 to Euro 8799 for women. Significant variations in CE ratios among the five treatments were primarily due to differences in retail prices. The most cost-effective treatments were bupropion and the patch, and, then, in descending order, the spray, the inhaler and, lastly, gum. Differences in CE between men and women across treatments were due to the shape of their respective mortality curve. The lowest CE ratio in men was for the 45- to 49-year-old group and for women in the 50- to 54-year-old group. Sensitivity analysis showed that changes in treatment efficacy produced effects only for less-well proven treatments (spray, inhaler, and bupropion) and revealed a strong influence of the discount rate and natural quit rate on the CE of pharmacological treatments. CONCLUSION: The CE of first-line treatments for nicotine dependence varied widely with age and sex and was sensitive to the assumption for the natural quit rate. Bupropion and the nicotine patch were the two most cost-effective treatments.

Cost-effectiveness of temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme: a report from the EORTC 26981/22981 NCI-C CE3 Intergroup Study.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme versus initial radiotherapy alone from a public health care perspective. METHODS: The economic evaluation was performed alongside a randomized, multicenter, phase 3 trial. The primary endpoint of the trial was overall survival. Costs included all direct medical costs. Economic data were collected prospectively for a subgroup of 219 patients (38%). Unit costs for drugs, procedures, laboratory and imaging, radiotherapy, and hospital costs per day were collected from the official national reimbursement lists based on 2004. For the cost-effectiveness analysis, survival was expressed as 2.5 years restricted mean estimates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was constructed. Confidence intervals for the ICER were calculated using the Fieller method and bootstrapping. RESULTS: The difference in 2.5 years restricted mean survival between the treatment arms was 0.25 life-years and the ICER was euro37,361 per life-year gained with a 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from euro19,544 to euro123,616. The area between the survival curves of the treatment arms suggests an increase of the overall survival gain for a longer follow-up. An extrapolation of the overall survival per treatment arm and imputation of costs for the extrapolated survival showed a substantial reduction in ICER. CONCLUSIONS: The ICER of euro37,361 per life-year gained is a conservative estimate. We concluded that despite the high TMZ acquisition costs, the costs per life-year gained are comparable to accepted first-line treatment with chemotherapy in patients with cancer.

Should we await IFN-free regimens to treat HCV genotype 1 treatment-naive patients? A cost-effectiveness analysis (ANRS 95141).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In treatment-naive patients mono-infected with genotype 1 chronic HCV, treatments with telaprevir/boceprevir (TVR/BOC)-based triple therapy are standard-of-care. However, more efficacious direct-acting antivirals (IFN-based new DAAs) are available and interferon-free (IFN-free) regimens are imminent (2015). METHODS: A mathematical model estimated quality-adjusted life years, cost and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of (i) IFN-based new DAAs vs. TVR/BOC-based triple therapy; and (ii) IFN-based new DAAs initiation strategies, given that IFN-free regimens are imminent. The sustained virological response in F3-4/F0-2 was 71/89% with IFN-based new DAAs, 85/95% with IFN-free regimens, vs. 64/80% with TVR/BOC-based triple therapy. Serious adverse events leading to discontinuation were taken as: 0-0.6% with IFN-based new DAAs, 0% with IFN-free regimens, vs. 1-10% with TVR/BOC-based triple therapy. Costs were euro60,000 for 12weeks of IFN-based new DAAs and two times higher for IFN-free regimens. RESULTS: Treatment with IFN-based new DAAs when fibrosis stage ⩾F2 is cost-effective compared to TVR/BOC-based triple therapy (euro37,900/QALY gained), but not at F0-1 (euro103,500/QALY gained). Awaiting the IFN-free regimens is more effective, except in F4 patients, but not cost-effective compared to IFN-based new DAAs. If we decrease the cost of IFN-free regimens close to that of IFN-based new DAAs, then awaiting the IFN-free regimen becomes cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with IFN-based new DAAs at stage ⩾F2 is both effective and cost-effective compared to TVR/BOC triple therapy. Awaiting IFN-free regimens and then treating regardless of fibrosis is more efficacious, except in F4 patients; however, the cost-effectiveness of this strategy is highly dependent on its cost.

Cost-effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin for treatment of pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) appears to be safe and effective for treating pulmonary embolism (PE), but its cost-effectiveness has not been assessed. METHODS: We built a Markov state-transition model to evaluate the medical and economic outcomes of a 6-day course with fixed-dose LMWH or adjusted-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH) in a hypothetical cohort of 60-year-old patients with acute submassive PE. Probabilities for clinical outcomes were obtained from a meta-analysis of clinical trials. Cost estimates were derived from Medicare reimbursement data and other sources. The base-case analysis used an inpatient setting, whereas secondary analyses examined early discharge and outpatient treatment with LMWH. Using a societal perspective, strategies were compared based on lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: Inpatient treatment costs were higher for LMWH treatment than for UFH (dollar 13,001 vs dollar 12,780), but LMWH yielded a greater number of QALYs than did UFH (7.677 QALYs vs 7.493 QALYs). The incremental costs of dollar 221 and the corresponding incremental effectiveness of 0.184 QALYs resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dollar 1,209/QALY. Our results were highly robust in sensitivity analyses. LMWH became cost-saving if the daily pharmacy costs for LMWH were < dollar 51, if > or = 8% of patients were eligible for early discharge, or if > or = 5% of patients could be treated entirely as outpatients. CONCLUSION: For inpatient treatment of PE, the use of LMWH is cost-effective compared to UFH. Early discharge or outpatient treatment in suitable patients with PE would lead to substantial cost savings.

Cost effectiveness and cost utility of risedronate for osteoporosis treatment and fracture prevention in women: a Swiss perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of risedronate compared to no intervention in postmenopausal osteoporotic women in a Swiss perspective. METHODS: A previously validated Markov model was populated with epidemiological and cost data specific to Switzerland and published utility values, and run on a population of 1,000 women of 70 years with established osteoporosis and previous vertebral fracture, treated over 5 years with risedronate 35 mg weekly or no intervention (base case), and five cohorts (according to age at therapy start) with eight risk factor distributions and three lengths of residual effects. RESULTS: In the base case population, the ICER of averting a hip fracture and the ICUR per quality-adjusted life year gained were both dominant. In the presence of a previous vertebral fracture, the ICUR was below euro45,000 (pound30,000) in all the scenarios. For all osteoporotic women>or=70 years of age with at least one risk factor, the ICUR was below euro45,000 or the intervention may even be cost saving. Age at the start of therapy and the fracture risk profile had a significant impact on results. CONCLUSION: Assuming a 2-year residual effect, that ICUR of risedronate in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis is below accepted thresholds from the age of 65 and even cost saving above the age of 70 with at least one risk factor.

Cost-effectiveness of temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme.

AIM: To perform a systematic review on the costs and cost-effectiveness of concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide with radiotherapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma compared with initial radiotherapy alone. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for relevant publications on costs and cost-effectiveness until October 2008. RESULTS: We found four relevant clinical trials, one cost study and two economic models. The mean survival benefit in the radiotherapy plus temozolomide group varied between 0.21 and 0.25 life-years. Treatment costs were between 27,365 euros and 39,092 euros. The costs of temozolomide amounted to approximately 40% of the total treatment costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found in the literature were 37,361 euros per life-year gained and 42,912 euros per quality-adjusted life-year gained. However, the models are not comparable because different outcomes are used (i.e., life-years and quality-adjusted life-years). CONCLUSION: Although the models are not comparable according to outcome, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios found are within acceptable ranges. We concluded that despite the high temozolomide acquisition costs, the costs per life-year gained and the costs per quality-adjusted life-year gained are comparable with other accepted first-line treatments with chemotherapy in patients with cancer.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a European primary-care physician training in smoking cessation counseling.

BACKGROUND: Physician training in smoking cessation counseling has been shown to be effective as a means to increase quit success. We assessed the cost-effectiveness ratio of a smoking cessation counseling training programme. Its effectiveness was previously demonstrated in a cluster randomized, control trial performed in two Swiss university outpatients clinics, in which residents were randomized to receive training in smoking interventions or a control educational intervention. DESIGN AND METHODS: We used a Markov simulation model for effectiveness analysis. This model incorporates the intervention efficacy, the natural quit rate, and the lifetime probability of relapse after 1-year abstinence. We used previously published results in addition to hospital service and outpatient clinic cost data. The time horizon was 1 year, and we opted for a third-party payer perspective. RESULTS: The incremental cost of the intervention amounted to US$2.58 per consultation by a smoker, translating into a cost per life-year saved of US$25.4 for men and 35.2 for women. One-way sensitivity analyses yielded a range of US$4.0-107.1 in men and US$9.7-148.6 in women. Variations in the quit rate of the control intervention, the length of training effectiveness, and the discount rate yielded moderately large effects on the outcome. Variations in the natural cessation rate, the lifetime probability of relapse, the cost of physician training, the counseling time, the cost per hour of physician time, and the cost of the booklets had little effect on the cost-effectiveness ratio. CONCLUSIONS: Training residents in smoking cessation counseling is a very cost-effective intervention and may be more efficient than currently accepted tobacco control interventions.

Cost-utility analysis of a three-month exercise programme vs usual care following multidisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic low back pain.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-utility of an exercise programme vs usual care after functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN: Cost-utility analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: A total of 105 patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: Chronic low back pain patients completing a 3-week functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation were randomized to either a 3-month exercise programme (n = 56) or usual care (n = 49). The exercise programme consisted of 24 training sessions during 12 weeks. At the end of functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation and at 1-year follow-up quality of life was measured with the SF-36 questionnaire, converted into utilities and transformed into quality--adjusted life years. Direct and indirect monthly costs were measured using cost diaries. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated as the incremental cost of the exercise programme divided by the difference in quality-adjusted life years between both groups. RESULTS: Quality of life improved significantly at 1-year follow-up in both groups. Similarly, both groups significantly reduced total monthly costs over time. No significant difference was observed between groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 79,270 euros. CONCLUSION: Adding an exercise programme after functional multidisciplinary rehabilitation compared with usual care does not offer significant long-term benefits in quality of life and direct and indirect costs.