Cost minimisation analysis for darbepoetin alpha vs epoetin alpha in chronic kidney disease patients on haemodialysis

C. Cuesta Grueso, J.L. Poveda Andrés, J. Garcia Pellicer, E. Romá Sánchez
{"title":"Cost minimisation analysis for darbepoetin alpha vs epoetin alpha in chronic kidney disease patients on haemodialysis","authors":"C. Cuesta Grueso,&nbsp;J.L. Poveda Andrés,&nbsp;J. Garcia Pellicer,&nbsp;E. Romá Sánchez","doi":"10.1016/S2173-5085(10)70002-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Multiple studies have shown that epoetin alpha (r-HuEpo) and darbepoetin alpha (NESP) are similarly effective and safe for maintaining haemoglobin levels in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Nevertheless, there is some debate over their cost-effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to carry out a cost-minimisation analysis including a comparison of the costs to the hospital arising from treatment with r-HuEpo vs NESP.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Prospective observational study. We included CKD patients on haemodialysis with no iron, vitamin B12 or folate deficiencies, treated with stable doses of IV r-HuEpo. Follow-up was performed over three periods: the first during six months, maintaining prior treatment with r-HuEpo; the second for eight months, after changing to NESP, and the third, during the final eight months, following resuming r-HuEpo treatment. For converting both treatments, the conversion factor established on technical sheet 1:200 was used.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifty five patients completed the study and were valid for analysis. Their mean age was 68.3 years, and 18 were women (35.3%). The mean weekly doses at the end of each period were 8,058.8 (SD 3,911.1) IU for the EPO 1 period, 39.4 (SD 21.6) mg for NESP and 7,882.4 (SD 4,594.1) IU for EPO 2. The weekly costs for each treatment showed significant differences between NESP and r-HuEpo: the cost of NESP was higher.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In our study, we found that r-HuEpo and NESP were similarly effective in patients with CKD on haemodialysis, but that there was a significant cost increase associated with NESP treatment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100521,"journal":{"name":"Farmacia Hospitalaria (English Edition)","volume":"34 2","pages":"Pages 68-75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S2173-5085(10)70002-2","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Farmacia Hospitalaria (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173508510700022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Introduction

Multiple studies have shown that epoetin alpha (r-HuEpo) and darbepoetin alpha (NESP) are similarly effective and safe for maintaining haemoglobin levels in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Nevertheless, there is some debate over their cost-effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to carry out a cost-minimisation analysis including a comparison of the costs to the hospital arising from treatment with r-HuEpo vs NESP.

Methods

Prospective observational study. We included CKD patients on haemodialysis with no iron, vitamin B12 or folate deficiencies, treated with stable doses of IV r-HuEpo. Follow-up was performed over three periods: the first during six months, maintaining prior treatment with r-HuEpo; the second for eight months, after changing to NESP, and the third, during the final eight months, following resuming r-HuEpo treatment. For converting both treatments, the conversion factor established on technical sheet 1:200 was used.

Results

Fifty five patients completed the study and were valid for analysis. Their mean age was 68.3 years, and 18 were women (35.3%). The mean weekly doses at the end of each period were 8,058.8 (SD 3,911.1) IU for the EPO 1 period, 39.4 (SD 21.6) mg for NESP and 7,882.4 (SD 4,594.1) IU for EPO 2. The weekly costs for each treatment showed significant differences between NESP and r-HuEpo: the cost of NESP was higher.

Conclusion

In our study, we found that r-HuEpo and NESP were similarly effective in patients with CKD on haemodialysis, but that there was a significant cost increase associated with NESP treatment.

慢性肾病血液透析患者使用达贝泊丁与依贝泊丁的成本最小化分析
多项研究表明,促生成素α (r-HuEpo)和达贝泊汀α (NESP)在维持慢性肾病(CKD)患者血红蛋白水平方面同样有效和安全。然而,对于它们的成本效益存在一些争论。本研究的目的是进行成本最小化分析,包括比较r-HuEpo与NESP治疗对医院产生的成本。方法前瞻性观察研究。我们纳入了没有铁、维生素B12或叶酸缺乏的血液透析的CKD患者,用稳定剂量的IV r-HuEpo治疗。随访分三个时期进行:第一个时期为6个月,维持先前的r-HuEpo治疗;第二次是在改为NESP后8个月,第三次是在恢复r-HuEpo治疗后的最后8个月。对这两种处理的转化,采用技术表上确定的1:20 00的转化系数。结果55例患者完成研究,有效分析。平均年龄68.3岁,女性18人(35.3%)。每期结束时EPO 1的平均周剂量为8058.8 (SD 3911.1) IU, NESP为39.4 (SD 21.6) mg, EPO 2为7882.4 (SD 4594.1) IU。NESP和r-HuEpo的每周治疗费用有显著差异:NESP的费用更高。在我们的研究中,我们发现r-HuEpo和NESP对CKD血液透析患者同样有效,但NESP治疗的成本显著增加。
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