Cost-effectiveness analysis of mirogabalin in treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain and post-herpetic neuralgia in China

Yao Wu, Libo Tao, Chang Liu, Fangxu Wang, Shuang Sun
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness analysis of mirogabalin in treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain and post-herpetic neuralgia in China","authors":"Yao Wu, Libo Tao, Chang Liu, Fangxu Wang, Shuang Sun","doi":"10.54844/hd.2024.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mirogabalin in treatment of Chinese patients with DPNP or PHN, and to discuss \nits reasonable pricing strategy. \nMethods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by constructing a three-state Markov model (mild, moderate, and \nsevere pain) to compare mirogabalin with placebo and pregabalin for DPNP or PHN patients from Chinese healthcare system \nperspective. The efficacy parameters were derived from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing mirogabalin with placebo in \nthe treatment of PHN or DPNP, as well as from network meta-analyses comparing mirogabalin/pregabalin with placebo RCTs. \nThe health utility values were obtained from published literatures. Cost parameters contained cost of pregabalin, supportive \ncare, and other medical resource utilization, were sourced from both published literature and public price database. Sensitivity \nanalysis was conducted on key parameters to verify the stability of the results. \nResults: With one-year time horizon, for PHN, the incremental quality-adjusted life years (ΔQALYs) of mirogabalin compared with \nplacebo and pregabalin were 0.048 and 0.025 respectively; For DPNP, the ΔQALYs of mirogabalin compared with placebo and \npregabalin were 0.021 and 0.017 respectively. Using the national volume-based procurement price of pregabalin as a reference, \nwith 1 and 3 times the per capita GDP in China (¥89,358, 2023) as thresholds, the daily cost of mirogabalin was found to be \ncost-effectiveness when it was within 1.64 times (DPNP) or 2.07 times (PHN), 2.47 times (DPNP) or 3.46 times (PHN) of the \ndaily cost of pregabalin. One-way sensitivity showed that, utility values of mild and moderate pain, costs of mirogabalin had the \nbiggest influence on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. \nConclusion: As a novel calcium channel modulator, the cost-effectiveness of mirogabalin is greatly influenced by the reference \ndrug. When pricing in China, it is essential to select appropriate comparator drugs and their prices as references. \nKey words: cost-effectiveness, mirogabalin, diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, postherpetic neuralgia","PeriodicalId":430023,"journal":{"name":"Health Decision","volume":"38 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Decision","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54844/hd.2024.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of mirogabalin in treatment of Chinese patients with DPNP or PHN, and to discuss its reasonable pricing strategy. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by constructing a three-state Markov model (mild, moderate, and severe pain) to compare mirogabalin with placebo and pregabalin for DPNP or PHN patients from Chinese healthcare system perspective. The efficacy parameters were derived from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing mirogabalin with placebo in the treatment of PHN or DPNP, as well as from network meta-analyses comparing mirogabalin/pregabalin with placebo RCTs. The health utility values were obtained from published literatures. Cost parameters contained cost of pregabalin, supportive care, and other medical resource utilization, were sourced from both published literature and public price database. Sensitivity analysis was conducted on key parameters to verify the stability of the results. Results: With one-year time horizon, for PHN, the incremental quality-adjusted life years (ΔQALYs) of mirogabalin compared with placebo and pregabalin were 0.048 and 0.025 respectively; For DPNP, the ΔQALYs of mirogabalin compared with placebo and pregabalin were 0.021 and 0.017 respectively. Using the national volume-based procurement price of pregabalin as a reference, with 1 and 3 times the per capita GDP in China (¥89,358, 2023) as thresholds, the daily cost of mirogabalin was found to be cost-effectiveness when it was within 1.64 times (DPNP) or 2.07 times (PHN), 2.47 times (DPNP) or 3.46 times (PHN) of the daily cost of pregabalin. One-way sensitivity showed that, utility values of mild and moderate pain, costs of mirogabalin had the biggest influence on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Conclusion: As a novel calcium channel modulator, the cost-effectiveness of mirogabalin is greatly influenced by the reference drug. When pricing in China, it is essential to select appropriate comparator drugs and their prices as references. Key words: cost-effectiveness, mirogabalin, diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, postherpetic neuralgia
米瑞巴林治疗中国糖尿病周围神经痛和带状疱疹后神经痛的成本效益分析
目的评估米瑞巴林治疗中国DPNP或PHN患者的成本效益,并探讨其合理定价策略。方法通过构建三态马尔可夫模型(轻度疼痛、中度疼痛和重度疼痛)进行成本效益分析,从中国医疗系统的角度比较米瑞巴林与安慰剂和普瑞巴林对 DPNP 或 PHN 患者的治疗效果。疗效参数来自米瑞巴林与安慰剂治疗 PHN 或 DPNP 的随机临床试验(RCT),以及米瑞巴林/普瑞巴林与安慰剂 RCT 的网络荟萃分析。健康效用值来自已发表的文献。成本参数包括普瑞巴林、支持性护理和其他医疗资源使用的成本,均来自公开发表的文献和公共价格数据库。对关键参数进行了敏感性分析,以验证结果的稳定性。结果在一年的时间跨度内,对于 PHN,与安慰剂和普瑞巴林相比,mirogabalin 的增量质量调整生命年(ΔQALYs)分别为 0.048 和 0.025;对于 DPNP,与安慰剂和普瑞巴林相比,mirogabalin 的增量质量调整生命年(ΔQALYs)分别为 0.021 和 0.017。以普瑞巴林的全国批量采购价为参考,以中国人均 GDP(89358 元,2023 年)的 1 倍和 3 倍为临界值,发现米格巴林的日成本在普瑞巴林日成本的 1.64 倍(DPNP)或 2.07 倍(PHN)、2.47 倍(DPNP)或 3.46 倍(PHN)以内时具有成本效益。单向敏感性显示,在轻度和中度疼痛的效用值中,米瑞巴林的成本对增量成本效益比的影响最大。结论作为一种新型钙通道调节剂,米瑞巴林的成本效益在很大程度上受参比药物的影响。在中国定价时,必须选择合适的参照药物及其价格作为参考。关键词:成本效益,米瑞巴林,糖尿病周围神经痛,带状疱疹后遗神经痛
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信