Pieralessandro Lasalvia, Eliana C Vásquez M, Jose Javier Arango Álvarez, Paola Garcia-Padilla
{"title":"在哥伦比亚,达帕格列净加用标准疗法与标准疗法治疗慢性肾病的成本效益比较。","authors":"Pieralessandro Lasalvia, Eliana C Vásquez M, Jose Javier Arango Álvarez, Paola Garcia-Padilla","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2024.2382976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The DAPA-CKD study showed that dapagliflozin added to standard treatment reduced the risk of chronic kidney disease progression, and death from renal or cardiovascular causes compared to placebo.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assess the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin and standard treatment versus standard treatment alone for chronic kidney disease within the Colombian health system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We employed a Markov model based on the DAPA-CKD study, tailored to the Colombian scenario. The model forecasted hospitalizations for heart failure, overall and cardiovascular mortality, and chronic kidney disease progression over a 10-year horizon with a 5% discount rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Dapagliflozin combined with standard treatment is a cost-effective intervention in treating stage 2-4 CKD. In the base case, the ICER was US $5,366, below 1 GDP (US $6.558) per capita. This was consistent in the sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study showed that dapagliflozin, when combined with standard treatment, is cost-effective against standard treatment alone, aligning with Colombia's willingness-to-pay threshold.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin plus standard treatment compared to standard therapy for the management of chronic kidney disease in Colombia.\",\"authors\":\"Pieralessandro Lasalvia, Eliana C Vásquez M, Jose Javier Arango Álvarez, Paola Garcia-Padilla\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14737167.2024.2382976\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The DAPA-CKD study showed that dapagliflozin added to standard treatment reduced the risk of chronic kidney disease progression, and death from renal or cardiovascular causes compared to placebo.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assess the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin and standard treatment versus standard treatment alone for chronic kidney disease within the Colombian health system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We employed a Markov model based on the DAPA-CKD study, tailored to the Colombian scenario. The model forecasted hospitalizations for heart failure, overall and cardiovascular mortality, and chronic kidney disease progression over a 10-year horizon with a 5% discount rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Dapagliflozin combined with standard treatment is a cost-effective intervention in treating stage 2-4 CKD. In the base case, the ICER was US $5,366, below 1 GDP (US $6.558) per capita. This was consistent in the sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study showed that dapagliflozin, when combined with standard treatment, is cost-effective against standard treatment alone, aligning with Colombia's willingness-to-pay threshold.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2382976\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2382976","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin plus standard treatment compared to standard therapy for the management of chronic kidney disease in Colombia.
Background: The DAPA-CKD study showed that dapagliflozin added to standard treatment reduced the risk of chronic kidney disease progression, and death from renal or cardiovascular causes compared to placebo.
Objective: Assess the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin and standard treatment versus standard treatment alone for chronic kidney disease within the Colombian health system.
Methods: We employed a Markov model based on the DAPA-CKD study, tailored to the Colombian scenario. The model forecasted hospitalizations for heart failure, overall and cardiovascular mortality, and chronic kidney disease progression over a 10-year horizon with a 5% discount rate.
Results: Dapagliflozin combined with standard treatment is a cost-effective intervention in treating stage 2-4 CKD. In the base case, the ICER was US $5,366, below 1 GDP (US $6.558) per capita. This was consistent in the sensitivity analyses.
Conclusion: Our study showed that dapagliflozin, when combined with standard treatment, is cost-effective against standard treatment alone, aligning with Colombia's willingness-to-pay threshold.
期刊介绍:
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review.
The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections:
Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results
Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.