Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Cost effectiveness and cost utility of risedronate for osteoporosis treatment and fracture prevention in women: a Swiss perspective.
J Med Econ. 2008; 11(3):499-523.JM

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of risedronate compared to no intervention in postmenopausal osteoporotic women in a Swiss perspective.

METHODS

A previously validated Markov model was populated with epidemiological and cost data specific to Switzerland and published utility values, and run on a population of 1,000 women of 70 years with established osteoporosis and previous vertebral fracture, treated over 5 years with risedronate 35 mg weekly or no intervention (base case), and five cohorts (according to age at therapy start) with eight risk factor distributions and three lengths of residual effects.

RESULTS

In the base case population, the ICER of averting a hip fracture and the ICUR per quality-adjusted life year gained were both dominant. In the presence of a previous vertebral fracture, the ICUR was below euro45,000 (pound30,000) in all the scenarios. For all osteoporotic women>or=70 years of age with at least one risk factor, the ICUR was below euro45,000 or the intervention may even be cost saving. Age at the start of therapy and the fracture risk profile had a significant impact on results.

CONCLUSION

Assuming a 2-year residual effect, that ICUR of risedronate in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis is below accepted thresholds from the age of 65 and even cost saving above the age of 70 with at least one risk factor.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland. jbw@chuv.chNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

19450101

Citation

Wasserfallen, Jean-Blaise, et al. "Cost Effectiveness and Cost Utility of Risedronate for Osteoporosis Treatment and Fracture Prevention in Women: a Swiss Perspective." Journal of Medical Economics, vol. 11, no. 3, 2008, pp. 499-523.
Wasserfallen JB, Krieg MA, Greiner RA, et al. Cost effectiveness and cost utility of risedronate for osteoporosis treatment and fracture prevention in women: a Swiss perspective. J Med Econ. 2008;11(3):499-523.
Wasserfallen, J. B., Krieg, M. A., Greiner, R. A., & Lamy, O. (2008). Cost effectiveness and cost utility of risedronate for osteoporosis treatment and fracture prevention in women: a Swiss perspective. Journal of Medical Economics, 11(3), 499-523. https://doi.org/10.3111/13696990802332770
Wasserfallen JB, et al. Cost Effectiveness and Cost Utility of Risedronate for Osteoporosis Treatment and Fracture Prevention in Women: a Swiss Perspective. J Med Econ. 2008;11(3):499-523. PubMed PMID: 19450101.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Cost effectiveness and cost utility of risedronate for osteoporosis treatment and fracture prevention in women: a Swiss perspective. AU - Wasserfallen,Jean-Blaise, AU - Krieg,Marc-Antoine, AU - Greiner,Roger-Axel, AU - Lamy,Olivier, PY - 2009/5/20/entrez PY - 2008/1/1/pubmed PY - 2009/6/17/medline SP - 499 EP - 523 JF - Journal of medical economics JO - J Med Econ VL - 11 IS - 3 N2 - OBJECTIVES: To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of risedronate compared to no intervention in postmenopausal osteoporotic women in a Swiss perspective. METHODS: A previously validated Markov model was populated with epidemiological and cost data specific to Switzerland and published utility values, and run on a population of 1,000 women of 70 years with established osteoporosis and previous vertebral fracture, treated over 5 years with risedronate 35 mg weekly or no intervention (base case), and five cohorts (according to age at therapy start) with eight risk factor distributions and three lengths of residual effects. RESULTS: In the base case population, the ICER of averting a hip fracture and the ICUR per quality-adjusted life year gained were both dominant. In the presence of a previous vertebral fracture, the ICUR was below euro45,000 (pound30,000) in all the scenarios. For all osteoporotic women>or=70 years of age with at least one risk factor, the ICUR was below euro45,000 or the intervention may even be cost saving. Age at the start of therapy and the fracture risk profile had a significant impact on results. CONCLUSION: Assuming a 2-year residual effect, that ICUR of risedronate in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis is below accepted thresholds from the age of 65 and even cost saving above the age of 70 with at least one risk factor. SN - 1369-6998 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/19450101/Cost_effectiveness_and_cost_utility_of_risedronate_for_osteoporosis_treatment_and_fracture_prevention_in_women:_a_Swiss_perspective_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -