scholarly journals Comparative Economic Outcomes in Patients with Focal Seizure Initiating First-Line Eslicarbazepine Acetate Monotherapy versus Generic Antiseizure Drugs

2021 ◽  
Vol Volume 13 ◽  
pp. 251-261
Author(s):  
Darshan Mehta ◽  
Matthew Davis ◽  
Andrew J Epstein ◽  
Brian Wensel ◽  
Todd Grinnell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Focal Seizure ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
First Line ◽  
Eslicarbazepine Acetate

scholarly journals Impact of Early Initiation of Eslicarbazepine Acetate on Economic Outcomes Among Patients with Focal Seizure: Results from Retrospective Database Analyses

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 585-598
Author(s):  
Darshan Mehta ◽  
Matthew Davis ◽  
Andrew J. Epstein ◽  
Brian Wensel ◽  
Todd Grinnell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Early Initiation ◽  
Focal Seizure ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
Eslicarbazepine Acetate ◽  
Retrospective Database

scholarly journals Economic Outcomes of First-Line Regimen Switching Among Stable Patients with HIV

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 725-734 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Rosenblatt ◽  
Ami R. Buikema ◽  
Jerry Seare ◽  
Lindsay G. S. Bengtson ◽  
Jonathan Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
First Line

Clinical implications of assumptions in cost-effectiveness analyses of systemic therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16021-e16021
Author(s):  
Koen Degeling ◽  
Martin Vu ◽  
Hendrik Koffijberg ◽  
Hui-Li Wong ◽  
Miriam Koopman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Economic ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Health Economic Evaluation ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Model Based ◽  
First Line Treatment ◽  
Systemic Therapies

e16021 Background: Considerable variation is observed in model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of systemic therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This review provides a comprehensive and detailed discussion of structural and methodological assumptions in such analyses, and how those might impact health and economic outcomes. Methods: Five databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment, and National Health Service Health Economic Evaluation Database) were searched for model-based health economic evaluations of systemic mCRC treatment. Study selection, appraisal using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist, and data extraction was performed by two reviewers independently. Data extraction included general study characteristics, economic methods and assumptions, model structures and modelling technique, evidence used, extrapolation methods, validation efforts, and analyses performed. Economic outcomes were indexed to 2019 US$. Results: The search yielded 1,418 publications of which 54 were included, representing 51 unique studies. Most studies focused on first-line treatment (n = 29, 57%), followed by third-line treatment (n = 13, 25%). Although most studies mentioned consideration of further treatments (n = 29, 57%), this was typically only done by means of a lumpsum treatment cost (n = 21). Studies used varied modelling techniques and model structures, and different control strategies were adopted by studies aiming to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the same treatment. Only 15 studies (29%) reported some sort of model validation. Health economic outcomes for specific strategies differed substantially between studies. For example, survival following first-line treatment with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin ranged from 1.21 to 7.33 years, with treatment costs ranging from US$8,125 to US$126,606. Conclusions: Model-based cost-effectiveness analyses of systemic mCRC treatments have adopted varied modelling methods and structures, which has resulted in substantial different health economic outcome estimates between studies, for example in terms of overall survival and average treatment cost per patient. Models generally focus on first-line treatment without considering the use of downstream treatments, suggesting these studies likely present biased results. This may impact the uptake of new systemic therapies.

scholarly journals Healthcare utilization and total costs of care among patients with advanced metastatic gastric and esophageal cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pranav Abraham ◽  
Liya Wang ◽  
Zhengzheng Jiang ◽  
Joseph Gricar ◽  
Hiangkiat Tan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Healthcare Utilization ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
First Line ◽  
Short Treatment ◽  
Costs Of Care

Aim: Study first-line (1L) treatment patterns and economic outcomes among patients with advanced metastatic gastric cancer (GC) and esophageal cancer (EC). Materials & methods: Newly diagnosed patients with systemic GC and EC treatments were identified between 1 January 2011 and 31 July 2017; costs were presented as per patient per month (PPPM) basis. Results: Study included 392 GC and 436 EC patients. Most frequently used 1L regimens were: 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) + oxaliplatin (22.5%) and epirubicin + cisplatin + 5-FU (ECF)/ECF modifications (21.9%) in patients with GC; and carboplatin + paclitaxel (29.6%) and 5-FU + oxaliplatin (11.5%) in EC patients. Mean all-cause costs were US$16,242 PPPM for GC, and $18,384 PPPM for EC during 1L treatment. Conclusion: GC and EC were resource intensive and costly. High costs and short treatment durations underscored a gap in care in 1L treatment.

Treatments for mild-to-moderate recalcitrant plaque psoriasis: Expected clinical and economic outcomes for first-line and second-line care

2005 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert Marchetti ◽  
Steven R Feldman ◽  
Alexandra Boer Kimball ◽  
Richard Rox Anderson ◽  
Laurence H Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document