Literature DB >> 11726575

Cost-effectiveness modelling of recombinant FSH versus urinary FSH in assisted reproduction techniques in the UK.

S Daya1, W Ledger, J P Auray, G Duru, K Silverberg, M Wikland, R Bouzayen, C M Howles, A Beresniak.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to undertake an economic evaluation to compare the cost-effectiveness of recombinant (r)FSH with urinary (u)FSH for attaining clinical pregnancy with assisted reproduction.
METHODS: Mathematical modelling was utilized incorporating a Markovian decision framework and a Monte Carlo simulation. Statistical representations of recurrent events over time were incorporated into a decision analysis involving fresh and frozen cycles in any sequence (after the first fresh embryo transfer cycle) over three successive assisted reproduction attempts. The mean values of transition probabilities were derived from randomized controlled clinical trials and published reports. The distributions of these transition probabilities were agreed upon by a panel of experts. Cost data for procedures and drugs were derived and validated according to the perspectives of the National Health Service and private clinics in the UK.
RESULTS: The study involved 5000 Monte-Carlo simulations of treatment on a Markov cohort of 100 000 patients. The total number of pregnancies attained was significantly higher in the rFSH (40 575) compared with the uFSH (37 358) group. The cost per successful pregnancy was significantly lower for rFSH (5906 pounds sterling) compared with uFSH (6060 pounds sterling) and overall, fewer cycles of treatment were required with rFSH to achieve an ongoing pregnancy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is 4148 pounds sterling for each additional clinical pregnancy with rFSH.
CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the increased effectiveness of rFSH in ART, this study demonstrated that it is more cost-effective and more efficient than uFSH in attaining an ongoing pregnancy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11726575     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/16.12.2563

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  8 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of recombinant versus urinary follicle-stimulating hormone in assisted reproduction techniques in the Spanish public health care system.

Authors:  Alberto Romeu; Juan Balasch; José A Ruiz Balda; Pedro N Barri; Salim Daya; Jean P Auray; Gerald Duru; Ariel Beresniak; José A Peinado
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Recombinant follitropin alfa/lutropin alfa in fertility treatment.

Authors:  Ahmed Gibreel; Siladitya Bhattacharya
Journal:  Biologics       Date:  2010-02-04

Review 3.  Contemporary pharmacological manipulation in assisted reproduction.

Authors:  Judith A F Huirne; Cornelis B Lambalk; Andre C D van Loenen; Roel Schats; Peter G A Hompes; Bart C J M Fauser; Nick S Macklon
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  [Economic studies of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer].

Authors:  Miaomiao Jing; Runju Zhang
Journal:  Zhejiang Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban       Date:  2019-07-25

5.  Economic evaluation of alternative assisted reproduction techniques in management of infertility in Greece.

Authors:  Vassilis Fragoulakis; Georgia Kourlaba; Basil Tarlatzis; Minas Mastrominas; Nikolaos Maniadakis
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2012-07-12

6.  Recombinant versus highly-purified, urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (r-FSH vs. HP-uFSH) in ovulation induction: a prospective, randomized study with cost-minimization analysis.

Authors:  Alberto Revelli; Francesca Poso; Gianluca Gennarelli; Federica Moffa; Giuseppina Grassi; Marco Massobrio
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2006-07-18       Impact factor: 5.211

7.  Economic evaluation of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin versus recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone in fresh and frozen in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm-injection cycles in Sweden.

Authors:  Jaro Wex; Ahmed M Abou-Setta
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2013-08-09

8.  Purification Process of a Recombinant Human Follicle Stimulating Hormone Biosimilar (Primapur®) to Yield a Pharmaceutical Product with High Batch-to-Batch Consistency.

Authors:  Maria Sinegubova; Ivan Vorobiev; Anatoly Klishin; Dmitry Eremin; Nadezhda Orlova; Natalya Orlova; Mikhail Polzikov
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 6.321

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.