Value in health regional issues · 2021
Budget Impact of Emicizumab for Routine Prophylaxis of Bleeding Episodes in Patients With Hemophilia A With Inhibitors.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Watanabe Alexandre Hikiji, Lee Shaun Wen Huey, Chai-Adisaksopha Chatree, Lim Ming Y, Chaiyakunapruk Nathorn
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To examine the budget impact of emicizumab as prophylactic therapy in reducing the frequency of bleeding episodes in patients with hemophilia A with inhibitors in Malaysia.
METHODS: A budget impact model was built to assess the cost implication of introducing emicizumab for routine prophylaxis of bleeding episodes in people with hemophilia A with inhibitors. It was based on the public healthcare system in Malaysia over a 5-year duration. The primary analysis computed healthcare costs for emicizumab compared with no prophylactic regimen to calculate the budget needed to treat all patients with hemophilia A with inhibitors.
RESULTS: The introduction of emicizumab resulted in a total incremental budget of Malaysian Ringgit (RM) 20 356 897 ($4 917 125) during the first year. The total cost for the current situation (no prophylaxis) was RM13 425 941 ($3 242 981), whereas the total cost for the new situation (prophylaxis with emicizumab) was RM33 782 838 ($8 160 106). The 5-year cumulative incremental budget impact from 2021 to 2025 was RM97 205 459 ($23 479 579) with an uncertainty range from -RM4 869 886 (-$1 176 301) to RM138 035 597 ($33 341 932) and a total of 72 patients treated with emicizumab. In a sensitivity analysis, the use of emicizumab was cost saving if the annual bleeding rate was greater than 16 instead of 6 times per year.
CONCLUSION: The 5-year budget impact might be considered reasonable and possibly cost saving. The model and approach used in this study to obtain relevant parameters where scarce data exist may help other jurisdictions with future adaptation.
METHODS: A budget impact model was built to assess the cost implication of introducing emicizumab for routine prophylaxis of bleeding episodes in people with hemophilia A with inhibitors. It was based on the public healthcare system in Malaysia over a 5-year duration. The primary analysis computed healthcare costs for emicizumab compared with no prophylactic regimen to calculate the budget needed to treat all patients with hemophilia A with inhibitors.
RESULTS: The introduction of emicizumab resulted in a total incremental budget of Malaysian Ringgit (RM) 20 356 897 ($4 917 125) during the first year. The total cost for the current situation (no prophylaxis) was RM13 425 941 ($3 242 981), whereas the total cost for the new situation (prophylaxis with emicizumab) was RM33 782 838 ($8 160 106). The 5-year cumulative incremental budget impact from 2021 to 2025 was RM97 205 459 ($23 479 579) with an uncertainty range from -RM4 869 886 (-$1 176 301) to RM138 035 597 ($33 341 932) and a total of 72 patients treated with emicizumab. In a sensitivity analysis, the use of emicizumab was cost saving if the annual bleeding rate was greater than 16 instead of 6 times per year.
CONCLUSION: The 5-year budget impact might be considered reasonable and possibly cost saving. The model and approach used in this study to obtain relevant parameters where scarce data exist may help other jurisdictions with future adaptation.