Literature DB >> 25567776

Screening for and treatment of osteoporosis: construction and validation of a state-transition microsimulation cost-effectiveness model.

L Si1, T M Winzenberg, Q Jiang, A J Palmer.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: This study aimed to document and validate a new cost-effectiveness model of osteoporosis screening and treatment strategies. The state-transition microsimulation model demonstrates strong internal and external validity. It is an important tool for researchers and policy makers to test the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening and treatment strategies.
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to document and validate a new cost-effectiveness model of screening for and treatment of osteoporosis.
METHODS: A state-transition microsimulation model using a lifetime horizon was constructed with seven Markov states (no history of fractures, hip fracture, vertebral fracture, wrist fracture, other fracture, postfracture state, and death) describing the most important clinical outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Tracker variables were used to record patients' history, such as fracture events, duration of treatment, and time since last screening. The model was validated for Chinese postmenopausal women receiving screening and treatment versus no screening. Goodness-of-fit analyses were performed for internal and external validation. External validity was tested by comparing life expectancy, osteoporosis prevalence rate, and lifetime and 10-year fracture risks with published data not used in the model.
RESULTS: The model represents major clinical facets of osteoporosis-related conditions. Age-specific hip, vertebral, and wrist fracture incidence rates were accurately reproduced (the regression line slope was 0.996, R(2) = 0.99). The changes in costs, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness were consistent with changes in both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The model predicted life expectancy and 10-year any major osteoporotic fracture risk at the age of 65 of 19.01 years and 13.7%, respectively. The lifetime hip, clinical vertebral, and wrist fracture risks at age 50 were 7.9, 29.8, and 18.7% respectively, all consistent with reported data.
CONCLUSIONS: Our model demonstrated good internal and external validity, ensuring it can be confidently applied in economic evaluations of osteoporosis screening and treatment strategies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25567776     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-014-2999-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  60 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening followed by treatment: the impact of medication adherence.

Authors:  Mickaël Hiligsmann; Henry-Jean Gathon; Olivier Bruyère; Olivier Ethgen; Véronique Rabenda; Jean-Yves Reginster
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2010-01-21       Impact factor: 5.725

2.  International Society for Clinical Densitometry 2007 Adult and Pediatric Official Positions.

Authors:  E Michael Lewiecki; Catherine M Gordon; Sanford Baim; Mary B Leonard; Nicholas J Bishop; Maria-Luisa Bianchi; Heidi J Kalkwarf; Craig B Langman; Horatio Plotkin; Frank Rauch; Babette S Zemel; Neil Binkley; John P Bilezikian; David L Kendler; Didier B Hans; Stuart Silverman
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2008-08-15       Impact factor: 4.398

Review 3.  Osteoporosis: now and the future.

Authors:  Tilman D Rachner; Sundeep Khosla; Lorenz C Hofbauer
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2011-03-28       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Ten-year risk of osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal Chinese women according to clinical risk factors and BMD T-scores: a prospective study.

Authors:  Annie W C Kung; Ka-Kui Lee; Andrew Yy Ho; Grace Tang; Keith Dk Luk
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  Differences in adherence to osteoporosis regimens: a 2-year analysis of a population treated under specific guidelines.

Authors:  Tien-Tsai Cheng; Shan-Fu Yu; Chung-Yuan Hsu; Sung-Hsiung Chen; Ben Yu-Jih Su; Tsong-Shing Yang
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 3.393

Review 6.  A systematic review of models used in cost-effectiveness analyses of preventing osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  L Si; T M Winzenberg; A J Palmer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Determinants of persistence with bisphosphonates: a study in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Authors:  Fernie J A Penning-van Beest; Wim G Goettsch; Joëlle A Erkens; Ron M C Herings
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.393

8.  Adherence to bisphosphonates therapy and hip fracture risk in osteoporotic women.

Authors:  V Rabenda; R Mertens; V Fabri; J Vanoverloop; F Sumkay; C Vannecke; A Deswaef; G A Verpooten; J Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Simulation-based cost-utility analysis of population screening-based alendronate use in Switzerland.

Authors:  M Schwenkglenks; K Lippuner
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-05-26       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  How to decide intervention thresholds based on FRAX in central south Chinese postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Zhimin Zhang; Yangna Ou; Zhifeng Sheng; Eryuan Liao
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2013-10-22       Impact factor: 3.633

View more
  10 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus oral alendronate for elderly osteoporotic women in Japan.

Authors:  T Mori; C J Crandall; D A Ganz
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Cost-effectiveness of combined oral bisphosphonate therapy and falls prevention exercise for fracture prevention in the USA.

Authors:  T Mori; C J Crandall; D A Ganz
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-10-11       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Projection of osteoporosis-related fractures and costs in China: 2010-2050.

Authors:  L Si; T M Winzenberg; Q Jiang; M Chen; A J Palmer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Screening for osteoporosis in Chinese post-menopausal women: a health economic modelling study.

Authors:  L Si; T M Winzenberg; M Chen; Q Jiang; A Neil; A J Palmer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-01-27       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Microsimulation model for the health economic evaluation of osteoporosis interventions: study protocol.

Authors:  Lei Si; John A Eisman; Tania Winzenberg; Kerrie M Sanders; Jacqueline R Center; Tuan V Nguyen; Andrew J Palmer
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-02-18       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Cost-effectiveness of sequential daily teriparatide/weekly alendronate compared with alendronate monotherapy for older osteoporotic women with prior vertebral fracture in Japan.

Authors:  Takahiro Mori; Carolyn J Crandall; Tomoko Fujii; David A Ganz
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 2.617

Review 7.  Cost effectiveness analyses of pharmacological treatments in heart failure.

Authors:  Audrey Huili Lim; Nusaibah Abdul Rahim; Jinxin Zhao; S Y Amy Cheung; Yu-Wei Lin
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-09-05       Impact factor: 5.988

8.  Cost-effectiveness of raloxifene in the treatment of osteoporosis in Chinese postmenopausal women: impact of medication persistence and adherence.

Authors:  Mingsheng Chen; Lei Si; Tania M Winzenberg; Jieruo Gu; Qicheng Jiang; Andrew J Palmer
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2016-03-29       Impact factor: 2.711

9.  Predicting the intervention threshold for initiating osteoporosis treatment among postmenopausal women in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis based on real-world data.

Authors:  L Cui; T He; Y Jiang; M Li; O Wang; R Jiajue; Y Chi; Q Xu; X Xing; W Xia
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid compared with sequential denosumab/alendronate for older osteoporotic women in Japan.

Authors:  Takahiro Mori; Carolyn J Crandall; Tomoko Fujii; David A Ganz
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2021-07-15       Impact factor: 2.617

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.