Background
In older adults, the burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) resembles that of influenza and may even be considered worse due to the lack of preventive interventions. This study was performed to identify the available literature on RSV infection in older adults, and to provide updated exploratory results of the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical RSV vaccine in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.
Methods
A literature search was performed in Medline and EMBASE on 11 November 2019, which served as input for a static decision-tree model that was used to estimate the EJP, for an RSV vaccine applying different willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. WTP thresholds applied were €20 000 and €50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year for the Netherlands, and £20 000 and £30 000 per quality-adjusted life-year for the United Kingdom. Analyses were—in line with country-specific guidelines—conducted from a societal perspective for the Netherlands and a third-party payer perspective for the United Kingdom. The robustness of the cost-effectiveness results was tested in sensitivity analysis.
Results
After screening the literature, 3 studies for the Netherlands and 6 for the United Kingdom remained to populate the country-specific models. In the base case analysis for the Netherlands (mean RSV incidence, 3.32%), justifiable vaccine prices of €16.38 and €50.03 were found, based on applying the lower and higher WTP thresholds, respectively. Similarly, for the United Kingdom (mean incidence, 7.13%), vaccine prices of £72.29 and £109.74 were found, respectively.
Conclusion
RSV vaccination may well be cost-effective in both the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, depending on the exact RSV incidence, vaccine effectiveness and price. However, sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust based on varying the different parameter estimates and assumptions. With RSV vaccines reaching the final stages of development, a strong need exists for cost-effectiveness studies to understand economically justifiable pricing of the vaccine.
Objectives
Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) was recently recommended by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use as a treatment for adult patients with unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, who had received a prior anti-HER2-based regimen. In our study, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of T-DXd compared with ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) for this indication in Finland.
Methods
A three-state partitioned survival analysis model was developed with a payer’s perspective. Time to event data from the DESTINY-Breast03 (DB-03) trial were extrapolated over a lifetime horizon either directly—for progression-free survival and time to treatment discontinuation—or using an alternative approach utilizing long-term T-DM1 survival data and DB-03 data—for overall survival. Discount rates of 3% were applied for costs and effects. Inputs were sourced from the Medicinal Products Database from Kela, Helsinki University Hospital service price list, Finnish Medicines Agency assessments, clinical experts, and DB-03. Sensitivity analyses were performed to characterize and demonstrate parameter uncertainties in the model.
Results
Total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and life years (LYs) gained for T-DXd compared with T-DM1 were 1.93 and 2.56, respectively. Incremental costs for T-DXd compared with T-DM1 were €106,800, resulting in an ICER of €55,360 per QALY gained and an ICER of €41,775 per LY gained. One-way sensitivity analysis showed the hazard ratio of T-DXd vs T-DM1 for OS was the most influential parameter. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed similar results to the base case.
Conclusions
T-DXd is cost-effective based on surrogate WTP thresholds of €72,000 and €139,000 per QALY.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.