Cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver DOT for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis.

BACKGROUND:Oral miltefosine has been shown to be non-inferior to first-line, injectable meglumine antimoniate (MA) for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) in children. Miltefosine may be administered via in-home caregiver Directly Observed Therapy (cDOT), while patients must travel to clin...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
Main Authors: Brandon A Berger, Alexandra Cossio, Nancy Gore Saravia, Maria Del Mar Castro, Sergio Prada, Allison H Bartlett, Mai T Pho
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005459
https://doaj.org/article/3e7b990fcc774ca28dd5ce24a538174e
id ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:3e7b990fcc774ca28dd5ce24a538174e
record_format openpolar
spelling ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:3e7b990fcc774ca28dd5ce24a538174e 2023-05-15T15:14:11+02:00 Cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver DOT for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis. Brandon A Berger Alexandra Cossio Nancy Gore Saravia Maria Del Mar Castro Sergio Prada Allison H Bartlett Mai T Pho 2017-04-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005459 https://doaj.org/article/3e7b990fcc774ca28dd5ce24a538174e EN eng Public Library of Science (PLoS) http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5404883?pdf=render https://doaj.org/toc/1935-2727 https://doaj.org/toc/1935-2735 1935-2727 1935-2735 doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0005459 https://doaj.org/article/3e7b990fcc774ca28dd5ce24a538174e PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Vol 11, Iss 4, p e0005459 (2017) Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine RC955-962 Public aspects of medicine RA1-1270 article 2017 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005459 2022-12-31T04:15:03Z BACKGROUND:Oral miltefosine has been shown to be non-inferior to first-line, injectable meglumine antimoniate (MA) for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) in children. Miltefosine may be administered via in-home caregiver Directly Observed Therapy (cDOT), while patients must travel to clinics to receive MA. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing miltefosine by cDOT versus MA for pediatric CL in southwest Colombia. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPLE FINDINGS:We developed a Monte Carlo model comparing the cost-per-cure of miltefosine by cDOT compared to MA from patient, government payer, and societal perspectives (societal = sum of patient and government payer perspective costs). Drug effectiveness and adverse events were estimated from clinical trials. Healthcare utilization and costs of travel were obtained from surveys of providers and published sources. The primary outcome was cost-per-cure reported in 2015 USD. Treatment efficacy, costs, and adherence were varied in sensitivity analysis to assess robustness of results. Treatment with miltefosine resulted in substantially lower cost-per-cure from a societal and patient perspective, and slightly higher cost-per-cure from a government payer perspective compared to MA. Mean societal cost-per-cure were $531 (SD±$239) for MA and $188 (SD±$100) for miltefosine, a mean cost-per-cure difference of +$343. Mean cost-per-cure from a patient perspective were $442 (SD ±$233) for MA and $30 (SD±$16) for miltefosine, a mean difference of +$412. Mean cost-per-cure from a government perspective were $89 (SD±$55) for MA and $158 (SD±$98) for miltefosine, with a mean difference of -$69. Results were robust across a variety of assumptions in univariate and multi-way analysis. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:Treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis with miltefosine via cDOT is cost saving from patient and societal perspectives, and moderately more costly from the government payer perspective compared to treatment with MA. Results were robust over a range of sensitivity ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Arctic PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases 11 4 e0005459
institution Open Polar
collection Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles
op_collection_id ftdoajarticles
language English
topic Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine
RC955-962
Public aspects of medicine
RA1-1270
spellingShingle Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine
RC955-962
Public aspects of medicine
RA1-1270
Brandon A Berger
Alexandra Cossio
Nancy Gore Saravia
Maria Del Mar Castro
Sergio Prada
Allison H Bartlett
Mai T Pho
Cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver DOT for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis.
topic_facet Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine
RC955-962
Public aspects of medicine
RA1-1270
description BACKGROUND:Oral miltefosine has been shown to be non-inferior to first-line, injectable meglumine antimoniate (MA) for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) in children. Miltefosine may be administered via in-home caregiver Directly Observed Therapy (cDOT), while patients must travel to clinics to receive MA. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing miltefosine by cDOT versus MA for pediatric CL in southwest Colombia. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPLE FINDINGS:We developed a Monte Carlo model comparing the cost-per-cure of miltefosine by cDOT compared to MA from patient, government payer, and societal perspectives (societal = sum of patient and government payer perspective costs). Drug effectiveness and adverse events were estimated from clinical trials. Healthcare utilization and costs of travel were obtained from surveys of providers and published sources. The primary outcome was cost-per-cure reported in 2015 USD. Treatment efficacy, costs, and adherence were varied in sensitivity analysis to assess robustness of results. Treatment with miltefosine resulted in substantially lower cost-per-cure from a societal and patient perspective, and slightly higher cost-per-cure from a government payer perspective compared to MA. Mean societal cost-per-cure were $531 (SD±$239) for MA and $188 (SD±$100) for miltefosine, a mean cost-per-cure difference of +$343. Mean cost-per-cure from a patient perspective were $442 (SD ±$233) for MA and $30 (SD±$16) for miltefosine, a mean difference of +$412. Mean cost-per-cure from a government perspective were $89 (SD±$55) for MA and $158 (SD±$98) for miltefosine, with a mean difference of -$69. Results were robust across a variety of assumptions in univariate and multi-way analysis. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:Treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis with miltefosine via cDOT is cost saving from patient and societal perspectives, and moderately more costly from the government payer perspective compared to treatment with MA. Results were robust over a range of sensitivity ...
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Brandon A Berger
Alexandra Cossio
Nancy Gore Saravia
Maria Del Mar Castro
Sergio Prada
Allison H Bartlett
Mai T Pho
author_facet Brandon A Berger
Alexandra Cossio
Nancy Gore Saravia
Maria Del Mar Castro
Sergio Prada
Allison H Bartlett
Mai T Pho
author_sort Brandon A Berger
title Cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver DOT for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis.
title_short Cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver DOT for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis.
title_full Cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver DOT for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis.
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver DOT for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis.
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver DOT for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis.
title_sort cost-effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate versus miltefosine caregiver dot for the treatment of pediatric cutaneous leishmaniasis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate 2017
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005459
https://doaj.org/article/3e7b990fcc774ca28dd5ce24a538174e
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
genre Arctic
genre_facet Arctic
op_source PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Vol 11, Iss 4, p e0005459 (2017)
op_relation http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5404883?pdf=render
https://doaj.org/toc/1935-2727
https://doaj.org/toc/1935-2735
1935-2727
1935-2735
doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0005459
https://doaj.org/article/3e7b990fcc774ca28dd5ce24a538174e
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005459
container_title PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
container_volume 11
container_issue 4
container_start_page e0005459
_version_ 1766344666993655808