Aims: Although the benefit of first-line epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) over chemotherapy in EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm) non-smallcell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been demonstrated in clinical trials, the optimal treatment sequence remains unclear. The objective of our study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dacomitinib in Sweden versus afatinib and osimertinib in first-line treatment of EGFRm NSCLC. Materials and methods: A partitioned survival model was developed with three health states: progression-free, post-progression, and death. Progression-free and overall survival curves were used to inform movements between states. Clinical data were taken from randomized trials, compared via a network meta-analysis (NMA). Utility data were taken from published studies and costs from national Swedish sources. The model used a 15-year time horizon and a Swedish healthcare payer perspective. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. Results: The base-case analysis showed that dacomitinib accrued a total of 2.10 qualityadjusted life years (QALYs) at a total cost of Swedish krona (SEK) 874,615. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for dacomitinib versus afatinib was SEK 461,556 per QALY gained. The ICER of osimertinib versus dacomitinib, where the small QALY gains of the former came at a high additional cost, was SEK 11,444,709. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness of these results; changes to drug and medical resource use costs and overall survival had the greatest impact on ICER estimates. Limitations: This model is subject to uncertainty associated with extrapolating long-term A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t treatment effects from shorter trial follow-up periods, although this would also be a limitation when using direct comparison or time-dependent hazard ratios. The NMA was limited by the use of indirect comparison although sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of our findings. Conclusions: Our model demonstrated dacomitinib is cost-effective for first-line EGFRm NSCLC treatment in Sweden versus afatinib and osimertinib.
A611within and between the MTM members and controls were measured (differencein-differences (DID) analysis). Results: 2382 patients (MTM group: n= 201, mean age= 75,44%male; control group: n= 2181,mean age= 74,48%male) in the diabetes cohort and 9751 patients (MTM group: n= 563, mean age= 76,39% male; control group: n= 9188, mean age= 75,40% male) in the hypertension cohort were included. For patients in diabetes cohort, the MTM group had pre-post increase in PDC by 5.19% (P= 0.05), while the control group had decrease of 2.82% (P< 0.01) (DID= 8.03%; P= 0.003). For patients in hypertension cohort, the MTM group had pre-post increase in PDC by 17.33% (P< 0.01), while the control group had increase of 9.64% (P< 0.01) (DID= 7.67%; P< 0.01). The PDC finding was confirmed with regression analyses with propensity score adjustment showing the MTM groups had a significant increase in pre-post PDC for hypertension, as compared with the control group, while controlling for baseline characteristics (P= 0.01). ConClusions: This study found that the pharmacist-managed MTM program significantly increased medication adherence in Medicare MAPD patients with hypertension, as compared with a control group.
Prevalence of opioid-related side effects among patients with CNCP who initiated opioids was substantially higher based on patient survey than from charts or claims. Opioid-related side effects were associated with significantly higher healthcare costs.
Employees with DC had substantially higher comorbidity rates, utilization, and direct and indirect costs compared with demographically matched controls.
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.