Journal List > Korean J Hematol > v.43(2) > 1032809

Kim and Kim: Economic Evaluation of Iron Chelation Agents: Oral Deferasirox versus Infusional Deferoxamine

Abstract

Background:

Patients with transfusional iron overload have relied on treatment with deferoxamine, a standard chelating agent. Deferoxamine is administered by intravenous or subcutaneous infusion over an 8∼12 hour period 5∼7 times per week; however, administration of deferoxamine may lead to poor compliance and reduced quality of life in patients. The use of deferasirox, a once daily oral chelation agent, was recently approved. We conducted an economic evaluation of these two iron-chelating medications in transfusion-dependent patients.

Methods:

The efficacy of oral deferasirox and infusion deferoxamine was assumed equal based on clinical trials of non-inferiority with the administration of 20mg/kg/day deferasirox versus 40mg/kg/day deferoxamine. Depending on the methods utilized for measuring administration time, travel time and convenience between the use of infusion and oral therapy, either cost analysis or cost-utility analysis was undertaken, respectively. Cost analysis included determination of direct medical costs (drug costs and administration costs), non-medical costs (travel costs), and indirect costs (productivity loss associated medical utilization). For cost utility analysis, the cost per QALYs (quality-adjusted life years) was calculated based on costs subtracting indirect costs (productivity loss) and gains of QALYs between the two agents.

Results:

Deferasirox therapy resulted in a cost savings per patient of 23,471,777 Korean won based on cost analysis. Based on cost utility analysis, the cost per QALYs gained was −398,576 Korean won (4,527,819 Korean won savings with a gain of 11.5 QALYs per patient).

Conclusion:

The results of cost analysis and cost utility analysis of the use of oral deferasirox versus infusion deferoxamine showed that deferasirox is a more economical and potentially socially beneficial iron-chelating agent in Korea.

REFERENCES

1). Cappellini MD., Cohen A., Piga A, et al. A phase 3 study of deferasirox (ICL670), a once-daily oral iron chelator, in patients with beta-thalassemia. Blood. 2006. 107:3455–62.
crossref
2). Gabutti V., Piga A. Results of long-term iron-chelating therapy. Acta Haematol. 1996. 95:26–36.
crossref
3). Piga A., Galanello R., Forni GL, et al. Randomized phase II trial of deferasirox (Exjade, ICL670), a once-daily, orally-administered iron chelator, in comparison to deferoxamine in thalassemia patients with transfusional iron overload. Haematologica. 2006. 91:873–80.
4). Neufeld EJ. Oral chelators deferasirox and deferiprone for transfusional iron overload in thalassemia major: new data, new questions. Blood. 2006. 107:3436–41.
crossref
5). Cappellini MD., Bejaoui M., Agaoglu L, et al. Prospective evaluation of patient-reported outcomes during treatment with deferasirox or deferoxamine for iron overload in patients with beta-thalassemia. Clin Ther. 2007. 29:909–17.
6). Vichinsky E., Pakbaz Z., Onyekwere O, et al. Patient-reported outcomes of deferasirox (Exjade? ICL670) versus deferoxamine in sickle cell disease patients with transfusional hemosiderosis. Substudy of a randomized open-label phase II trial. Acta Haematol. 2008. 119:133–41.
7). Osborne RH., De Abreu Lourenco R., Dalton A, et al. Quality of life relatedto oral versus subcutaneous iron chelation: a time trade-off study. Value in Health. 2007. 10:451–6.
8). Fischer R., Longo F., Nielsen P., Engelhardt R., Hider RC., Piga A. Monitoring long-term efficacy of iron chelation therapy by deferiprone and desferriox-amine in patients with beta-thalassaemia major: application of SQUID biomagnetic liver susceptometry. Br J Haematol. 2003. 121:938–48.
9). Delea TE., Sofrygin O., Thomas SK., Baladi JF., Phatak PD., Coates TD. Cost effectiveness of once-daily oralchelation therapy with deferasirox versus infusional deferoxamine in transfusion-dependent thalassaemia patients: US healthcare system perspective. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007. 25:329–42.
10). Canatan D., Temimhan N., Dincer N., Ozsancak A., Oğuz N., Temimhan M. Continuous desferoxamine infusion by an infusor in thalassaemia major. Acta Paediatr. 1999. 88:550–2.
crossref
11). Chan GC., Ng DM., Fong DY., Ha SY., Lau YL. Comparison of subcutaneous infusion needles for transfusion-dependent thalassemia patients by the intrapersonal cross-over assessment model. Am J Hematol. 2004. 76:398–404.
crossref
12). Sharma JB., Jain S., Mallika V, et al. A prospective, partially randomized study of pregnancy outcomes and hematologic responses to oral and intramuscular iron treatment in moderately anemic pregnant women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004. 79:116–22.
crossref
13). Rossini M., Braga V., Gatti D., Gerardi D., Zamberlan N., Adami S. Intramuscular clodronate therapy in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Bone. 1999. 24:125–9.
crossref
14). Varsano I., Volovitz B., Horev Z, et al. Intramuscular ceftriaxone compared with oral amoxicillin-clavulanate for treatment of acute otitis media in children. Eur J Pediatr. 1997. 156:858.
crossref
15). JundtJW. Browne BA., Fiocco GP., Steele AD., Mock D. A comparison of low dose methotrexate bioavail-ability: oral solution, oral tablet, subcutaneous and intramuscular dosing. J Rheumatol. 1993. 20:1845–9.

Fig. 1
The structure of economic evaluation.
kjh-43-89f1.tif
Table 1.
Comparison of available iron chelators
Parameter DFO DSX
Dosages (based on 50kg) 2,000mg 1,000mg
Utility value QALYs 0.61 28.85 0.85 40.21
Costs 10,959 Won/500mg 27,462 Won/500mg

Abbreviations: DFO, deferoxamine; DSX, deferasirox; QALYs, quality-adjusted life years.

Table 2.
Costs of DFO and DSX (Unit: Won)
  Cost DFO DSX
Daily Year Daily Year
Direct cost Established patient 18,337 2,183,818 18,337 220,038
  Day care 30,530 7,937,800
  Intravenous infusion (500mL×2 2) 4,784 1,243,840
  IV side injection (inpatient) 2,314 606,640
  Infusion pump (once a day) 1,642 427,025
  5% glucose (500mL×2 vial) 1,952 507,520
  Drug 43,836 11,397,474 54,924 20,047,260
  Travel cost 2,000 520,000 2,000 24,000
Indirect cost Subtotal Travel time cost (2 hours) 105,395 14,708 24,819,117 3,824,091 75,261 14,708 20,291,298 176,496
  Infusional time cost (8 hr/day) 58,832 15,296,363 0 0
  Subtotal 73,540 19,120,454 14,708 176,496
Total Cost   178,936 43,939,571 89,969 20,467,794

Abbreviations: DFO, deferoxamine; DSX, deferasirox.

Table 3.
Results of cost analysis and cost-utility analysis
    DFO DSX Difference
Cost Total cost (Won) 43,939,571 20,467,794 − −23,471,777
Effectiveness LYG 47.3 47.3 0
Cost analysis Net cost   −23,471,777
Cost Direct cost (Won) 24,819,117 20,291,298 −4,527,819
Utility QALYs 28.85 40.21 11.35
Cost-utility ACUR ICUR 860,281 504,633 −355,648 −398,576

Abbreviations: DFO, deferoxamine; DSX, deferasirox; LYG, life-years gained; QALYs, quality-adjusted life years; ACUR, average cost-utility ratio; ICUR, incremental cost-utility ratio.

Table 4.
LYG according to the compliance with DFO and DSX
Number of infusions LYG DFO DSX
0∼75 infusions/yr 12.5 166 infusions/yr (64%)  
76∼225 infusions/yr 28.4  
225∼300 infusions/yr 47.3 271 infusions/yr (74.24%)
>301 infusions/yr 57 308 infusions/yr (84.48%)

Abbreviations: DFO, deferoxamine; DSX, deferasirox; LYG, life-year gained; (), compliance rate.

Table 5.
Sensitivity analysis for compliance with DFO and DSX: ICER (Unit: Won/LYG)
  Compliance with DSX
74% (271 days) (LYG: 47.3) 84% (308 days) (LYG: 57)
Compliance with DFO 64% (166 infusions) (LYG: 28.4) −683,917 −378,676

Abbreviations: DFO, deferoxamine; DSX, deferasirox; LYG, life-year gained.

Table 6.
Sensitivity analysis for compliance with DFO and DSX: ICUR (Unit: Won/QALY)
  Compliance with DSX
74% (271 days) (QALYs: 40.2) 84% (308 days) (QALYs: 48.5)
Compliance with DFO 64% (166 infusions) (QALYs: 17.3) −35,837 40,412

Abbreviations: DFO, deferoxamine; DSX, deferasirox; QALYs, quality-adjusted life years; ACUR, average costutility ratio.

TOOLS
Similar articles