Literature DB >> 15774234

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa (activated) (Xigris) for the treatment of severe sepsis in adults: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

C Green1, J Dinnes, A Takeda, J Shepherd, D Hartwell, C Cave, E Payne, B H Cuthbertson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa (activated) for the treatment of adults with severe sepsis in a UK context. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases. Data from the commercial use of the drug up to April 2002. Data from the manufacturer submission to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). REVIEW
METHODS: A systematic review of the literature and an economic evaluation were undertaken. Data were synthesised through a narrative review with full tabulation of results from included studies.
RESULTS: The evidence on the effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa (activated) for the treatment of severe sepsis came primarily from one large pivotal randomised controlled trial, the PROWESS study. This study demonstrated a statistically significant absolute reduction in 28-day mortality of 6.5%. Longer term survival benefit was maintained to 90 days. By 9 months, the trend towards increased median survival was non-significant, although the survival curves did not cross. Results presented by the number of organ dysfunctions were not statistically significant, but when mortality rates for those with two or more organ failures were combined, the relative risk of death was significantly lower in those treated with drotrecogin alfa (activated) compared with placebo. However, this report highlights a number of considerations relevant to the subgroup analyses reported for the PROWESS study. Published cost-effectiveness studies of treatment with drotrecogin alfa (activated) have applied a range of methods to the estimation of benefits, estimating an incremental gain per treated patient of between 0.38 and 0.68 life-years (for patients with severe sepsis). For patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ dysfunction, the manufacturer (Eli Lilly) estimated an incremental gain of 1.115 life-years per treated patient, compared to 1.351 life-years per treated patient estimated by the Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre (SHTAC). These latter UK analyses are based on a patient group that is more severely affected by disease, where effectiveness is greater and the baseline risk of all-cause mortality is much higher (SHTAC analysis), these factors are associated with the noted difference in effect. The three published cost-effectiveness studies report cost for US and Canadian patient groups; for those patients with severe sepsis they report the additional cost per patient treated in a range around 10,000-16,000 dollars. The manufacturer's submission reports analysis for the UK, based on 28-day survival data in patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ dysfunction (the European licence indication), with the additional mean cost per treated patient estimated to be 5106 pounds. The analysis undertaken by SHTAC, for a UK group of patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ dysfunction, estimates an additional mean cost per patient treated of 6661 pounds. The manufacturer's submission to NICE presents cost-effectiveness estimates for drotrecogin alfa (activated) in the UK, in patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ dysfunction, at 6637 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) based on 28-day effectiveness data, and 10,937 pounds per QALY based on longer term follow-up data. SHTAC developed an independent cost-effectiveness model and estimated a base-case cost per QALY of 8228 pounds in patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ failure (based on 28-day survival data). Simulation results indicate that where the NHS is willing to pay 20,000 pounds per QALY, drotrecogin alfa (activated) is a cost-effective use of resources in 98.7% of cases. Published economic evaluations report various sensitivity analyses, with results sensitive to changes in the measure of treatment effect, but otherwise studies reported that results were robust to variations in most assumptions used in the cost-effectiveness analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Drotrecogin alfa (activated) plus best supportive care appears clinically and cost-effective compared with best supportive care alone, in a UK cohort of severe sepsis patients, and in the subgroup of more severely affected patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ failure. The introduction of drotrecogin alfa (activated) will involve a substantial additional cost to the NHS. The treatment-eligible population in England and Wales may comprise up to 16,570 patients, with an estimated annual drug acquisition cost of over 80 million pounds, excluding VAT. Further research is required on the longer term impact of drotrecogin alfa (activated) on both mortality and morbidity in UK patients with severe sepsis, on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in children (under 18 years) with severe sepsis, and on the effect of the timing of dosage and duration of treatment on outcomes in severe sepsis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15774234     DOI: 10.3310/hta9110

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Technol Assess        ISSN: 1366-5278            Impact factor:   4.014


  11 in total

Review 1.  Human recombinant protein C for severe sepsis and septic shock in adult and paediatric patients.

Authors:  Arturo J Martí-Carvajal; Ivan Solà; Christian Gluud; Dimitrios Lathyris; Andrés Felipe Cardona
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-12-12

2.  Cost effectiveness of intensive care in a low resource setting: A prospective cohort of medical critically ill patients.

Authors:  Hajrunisa Cubro; Rabija Somun-Kapetanovic; Guillaume Thiery; Daniel Talmor; Ognjen Gajic
Journal:  World J Crit Care Med       Date:  2016-05-04

Review 3.  Recombinant human activated protein C for severe sepsis in neonates.

Authors:  Ranjit I Kylat; Arne Ohlsson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-04-18

4.  Why activated protein C was not successful in severe sepsis and septic shock: are we still tilting at windmills?

Authors:  Peggy S Lai; B Taylor Thompson
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 3.725

Review 5.  T-cell-mediated immunity and the role of TRAIL in sepsis-induced immunosuppression.

Authors:  Stephanie A Condotta; Javier Cabrera-Perez; Vladimir P Badovinac; Thomas S Griffith
Journal:  Crit Rev Immunol       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.214

6.  Efficacy and effectiveness of recombinant human activated protein C in severe sepsis of adults.

Authors:  Helge Knut Schumacher; Jacqueline Müller-Nordhorn; Stefanie Roll; Stefan N Willich; Wolfgang Greiner
Journal:  GMS Health Technol Assess       Date:  2007-07-25

7.  Is Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis, cost-effective in routine clinical practice?

Authors:  M Zia Sadique; Richard Grieve; David A Harrison; Brian H Cuthbertson; Kathryn M Rowan
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2011-09-26       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 8.  Drotrecogin alfa (activated): does current evidence support treatment for any patients with severe sepsis?

Authors:  Jan O Friedrich; Neill K J Adhikari; Maureen O Meade
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2006-06-02       Impact factor: 9.097

9.  Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in severe sepsis: a systematic review and new cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Vania Costa; James M Brophy
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2007-06-25       Impact factor: 2.217

Review 10.  Practical aspects of treatment with drotrecogin alfa (activated).

Authors:  Luigi Camporota; Duncan Wyncoll
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.097

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.