Journal article
Cost–utility analysis comparing hospital‐based intravenous immunoglobulin with home‐based subcutaneous immunoglobulin in patients with secondary immunodeficiency
Vox Sanguinis, Vol.114(3), pp.237-246
2019
Abstract
Background and Objective: Immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IRT) is often used to support patients with primary immunodeficiency disease (PID) and secondary immunodeficiency disease (SID). Home-based subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg) is reported to be a cheaper and more efficient option compared to hospital-based intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) for PID. In contrast, there is little information on the cost-effectiveness of IRT in SID. However, patients who develop hypogammaglobulinaemia secondary to other conditions (SID) have different clinical aetiology compared to PID. This study assesses whether SCIg provides a good value-for-money treatment option in patients with secondary immunodeficiency disease (SID). Methods: A Markov cohort simulation model with six health states was used to compare cost-effectiveness of IVIg with SCIg from a healthcare system perspective. The costs of treatment, infection and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for IVIg and SCIg treatment options were modelled with a time horizon of 10 years and weekly cycles. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed around key parameters. Results: The cumulative cost for IVIg was A$151 511 and for SCIg A$144 296. The QALYs with IVIg were 3.07 and with SCIg 3.51. Based on the means, SCIg is the dominant strategy with better outcomes and at lower cost. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows that 88.3% of the 50 000 iterations fall below the nominated willingness to pay threshold of A$50 000 per QALY. Therefore, SCIg is a cost-effective treatment option. Conclusion: For SID patients in Queensland (Australia), the home-based SCIg treatment option provides better health outcomes and cost savings.
Details
- Title
- Cost–utility analysis comparing hospital‐based intravenous immunoglobulin with home‐based subcutaneous immunoglobulin in patients with secondary immunodeficiency
- Authors
- Tanja Windegger (Corresponding Author) - University of the Sunshine Coast - School of Health & Sports SciencesSon Nghiem (Author) - Griffith UniversityKim-Huong Nguyen (Author) - University of QueenslandYoke Lin Fung (Author) - University of the Sunshine Coast - School of Health & Sports SciencesPaul Anthony Scuffham (Author) - Griffith University
- Publication details
- Vox Sanguinis, Vol.114(3), pp.237-246
- Publisher
- Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
- Date published
- 2019
- DOI
- 10.1111/vox.12760
- ISSN
- 0042-9007; 1423-0410
- Copyright note
- Copyright © 2019 Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd. This is the accepted version of the following article: Windegger, T.M., Nghiem, S., Nguyen, K.-H., Fung, Y.-L. and Scuffham, P.A. (2019), Cost-utility analysis comparing hospital-based intravenous immunoglobulin with home-based subcutaneous immunoglobulin in patients with secondary immunodeficiency. Vox Sang, 114: 237-246. doi:10.1111/vox.12760, which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/vox.12760
- Organisation Unit
- School of Health - Biomedicine; University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland; School of Health and Sport Sciences - Legacy; School of Health and Behavioural Sciences - Legacy
- Language
- English
- Record Identifier
- 99451475002621
- Output Type
- Journal article
Metrics
103 File views/ downloads
457 Record Views
InCites Highlights
These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output
- Collaboration types
- Domestic collaboration
- Web Of Science research areas
- Hematology
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
Source: InCites