使用别嘌呤醇治疗痛风时低剂量秋水仙碱预防的成本效益:来自一项非劣效性随机双盲安慰剂对照试验的证据

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Yana Pryymachenko, Ross Wilson, Nicola Dalbeth, J Haxby Abbott, Lisa Stamp
{"title":"使用别嘌呤醇治疗痛风时低剂量秋水仙碱预防的成本效益:来自一项非劣效性随机双盲安慰剂对照试验的证据","authors":"Yana Pryymachenko, Ross Wilson, Nicola Dalbeth, J Haxby Abbott, Lisa Stamp","doi":"10.1002/acr.25631","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of low-dose colchicine prophylaxis for preventing gout flares when starting allopurinol using the \"start-low go-slow\" approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants with gout, fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology recommendations for starting urate-lowering therapy and with serum urate ≥0.36 mmol/L (6mg/dL), were randomly allocated (1:1) to either colchicine (0.5 mg daily) or placebo for six months with a further six-month follow-up. All participants received allopurinol, with monthly increase in dose to achieve target urate <0.36 mmol/L. The primary outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness at 6-month and 1-year follow-up from the health system perspective, measured by incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) at a willingness-to-pay threshold equivalent to gross domestic product per capita.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred participants were randomized to either colchicine (n=100) or placebo (n=100). Mean costs were higher in the colchicine group over both 6 months and 1 year (adjusted mean difference $1 848 [95%CI -321 to 4 017] and $2 282 [95%CI -173 to 4 737], respectively). Quality-adjusted life years were slightly higher in the colchicine group over 6 months (adjusted mean difference 0.008 [95%CI -0.020 to 0.035]), but lower over 1 year (-0.015, [95%CI -0.039 to 0.010]). Treatment with colchicine was not found to be cost-effective at either 6-months or 12-months (INMB -$1 373 (95%CI -4 287 to 1 542) and -$3 191 (95%CI -6 274 to -107), probability of cost-effectiveness 17.7% and 1.5%, respectively). Similar results were obtained from a societal perspective.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Six months of low-dose colchicine prophylaxis when starting allopurinol using the \"start-low go-slow\" approach is unlikely to be cost-effective over 12 months.</p>","PeriodicalId":8406,"journal":{"name":"Arthritis Care & Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-effectiveness of low dose colchicine prophylaxis when starting allopurinol using the \\\"start-low go-slow\\\" approach for gout: evidence from a non-inferiority randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Yana Pryymachenko, Ross Wilson, Nicola Dalbeth, J Haxby Abbott, Lisa Stamp\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acr.25631\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of low-dose colchicine prophylaxis for preventing gout flares when starting allopurinol using the \\\"start-low go-slow\\\" approach.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants with gout, fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology recommendations for starting urate-lowering therapy and with serum urate ≥0.36 mmol/L (6mg/dL), were randomly allocated (1:1) to either colchicine (0.5 mg daily) or placebo for six months with a further six-month follow-up. All participants received allopurinol, with monthly increase in dose to achieve target urate <0.36 mmol/L. The primary outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness at 6-month and 1-year follow-up from the health system perspective, measured by incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) at a willingness-to-pay threshold equivalent to gross domestic product per capita.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred participants were randomized to either colchicine (n=100) or placebo (n=100). Mean costs were higher in the colchicine group over both 6 months and 1 year (adjusted mean difference $1 848 [95%CI -321 to 4 017] and $2 282 [95%CI -173 to 4 737], respectively). Quality-adjusted life years were slightly higher in the colchicine group over 6 months (adjusted mean difference 0.008 [95%CI -0.020 to 0.035]), but lower over 1 year (-0.015, [95%CI -0.039 to 0.010]). Treatment with colchicine was not found to be cost-effective at either 6-months or 12-months (INMB -$1 373 (95%CI -4 287 to 1 542) and -$3 191 (95%CI -6 274 to -107), probability of cost-effectiveness 17.7% and 1.5%, respectively). Similar results were obtained from a societal perspective.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Six months of low-dose colchicine prophylaxis when starting allopurinol using the \\\"start-low go-slow\\\" approach is unlikely to be cost-effective over 12 months.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25631\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthritis Care & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25631","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是调查低剂量秋水仙碱预防使用别嘌呤醇“低开始-慢”方法预防痛风发作的成本效益。方法:满足美国风湿病学会推荐的开始降尿酸治疗且血清尿酸≥0.36 mmol/L (6mg/dL)的痛风患者,随机分配(1:1)至秋水仙碱组(每天0.5 mg)或安慰剂组,为期6个月,并进一步随访6个月。结果:200名参与者被随机分为秋水仙碱组(n=100)和安慰剂组(n=100)。秋水仙碱组在6个月和1年内的平均费用较高(调整后的平均差异分别为1848美元[95%CI -321至4 017]和2 282美元[95%CI -173至4 737])。秋水仙碱组6个月以上的质量调整生命年略高(调整平均差值为0.008 [95%CI -0.020至0.035]),但1年以上的质量调整生命年较低(-0.015,[95%CI -0.039至0.010])。使用秋水仙碱治疗在6个月或12个月时均未发现具有成本效益(INMB -1 373美元(95%CI -4 287至1 542)和- 3 191美元(95%CI -6 274至-107),成本-效果概率分别为17.7%和1.5%)。从社会角度来看,也得到了类似的结果。结论:在开始使用别嘌呤醇时使用6个月的低剂量秋水仙碱预防,使用“低开始-慢”的方法在12个月内不太可能具有成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-effectiveness of low dose colchicine prophylaxis when starting allopurinol using the "start-low go-slow" approach for gout: evidence from a non-inferiority randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of low-dose colchicine prophylaxis for preventing gout flares when starting allopurinol using the "start-low go-slow" approach.

Methods: Participants with gout, fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology recommendations for starting urate-lowering therapy and with serum urate ≥0.36 mmol/L (6mg/dL), were randomly allocated (1:1) to either colchicine (0.5 mg daily) or placebo for six months with a further six-month follow-up. All participants received allopurinol, with monthly increase in dose to achieve target urate <0.36 mmol/L. The primary outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness at 6-month and 1-year follow-up from the health system perspective, measured by incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) at a willingness-to-pay threshold equivalent to gross domestic product per capita.

Results: Two hundred participants were randomized to either colchicine (n=100) or placebo (n=100). Mean costs were higher in the colchicine group over both 6 months and 1 year (adjusted mean difference $1 848 [95%CI -321 to 4 017] and $2 282 [95%CI -173 to 4 737], respectively). Quality-adjusted life years were slightly higher in the colchicine group over 6 months (adjusted mean difference 0.008 [95%CI -0.020 to 0.035]), but lower over 1 year (-0.015, [95%CI -0.039 to 0.010]). Treatment with colchicine was not found to be cost-effective at either 6-months or 12-months (INMB -$1 373 (95%CI -4 287 to 1 542) and -$3 191 (95%CI -6 274 to -107), probability of cost-effectiveness 17.7% and 1.5%, respectively). Similar results were obtained from a societal perspective.

Conclusion: Six months of low-dose colchicine prophylaxis when starting allopurinol using the "start-low go-slow" approach is unlikely to be cost-effective over 12 months.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
6.40%
发文量
368
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Arthritis Care & Research, an official journal of the American College of Rheumatology and the Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals (a division of the College), is a peer-reviewed publication that publishes original research, review articles, and editorials that promote excellence in the clinical practice of rheumatology. Relevant to the care of individuals with rheumatic diseases, major topics are evidence-based practice studies, clinical problems, practice guidelines, educational, social, and public health issues, health economics, health care policy, and future trends in rheumatology practice.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信