Literature DB >> 25795391

A cost-utility analysis of ingenol mebutate gel for the treatment of actinic keratosis: a Scottish perspective.

Keith Tolley1, Danny Kemmett2, Signe Thybo3, Ruth Nasr3, Helen Smethurst4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Actinic keratosis (AK) is a UV-induced, pre-malignant skin condition that is common in adults over 60 years of age with fair skin in Scotland. The most commonly prescribed first-line treatment for AK in Scotland is currently diclofenac gel (3 %). Ingenol mebutate gel is a recently developed topical therapy available in two strengths for the treatment of AK lesions on the face and scalp (150 mcg/g once daily for 3 consecutive days) or trunk and extremities (500 mcg/g once daily for 2 consecutive days).
OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of two strengths of ingenol mebutate gel developed to treat AK lesions on the face and scalp (150 mcg/g once daily for 3 consecutive days) or trunk and extremities (500 mcg/g once daily for 2 consecutive days) with other first-line AK therapies including diclofenac gel, 5-FU, 5-FU/salicylic acid, and cryotherapy for the first-line treatment of AK in adult patients, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in Scotland.
METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was conducted using a decision-tree approach to calculate the costs and benefits of different treatment strategies for AK on the face and scalp or trunk and limbs over a 12-month time horizon. Data on the relative efficacy of treatments were obtained from a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Utility scores and resource-use data were obtained from published sources.
RESULTS: Over 12 months, ingenol mebutate 150 mcg/g gel and 500 mcg/g gel were cost-effective compared with the most commonly used topical therapy in Scotland, diclofenac (3 %) gel, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY, with a minimal additional cost of £43 and £105, respectively per QALY gained.
CONCLUSIONS: Ingenol mebutate gel is a cost-effective therapy for the first-line treatment of AK from a Scottish NHS perspective.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Actinic keratosis; Cost-effectiveness; ICER; Ingenol mebutate gel

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25795391     DOI: 10.1007/s10198-015-0679-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Health Econ        ISSN: 1618-7598


  24 in total

Review 1.  Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models.

Authors:  A H Briggs
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  A catalog of dermatology utilities: a measure of the burden of skin diseases.

Authors:  Suephy C Chen; Ahmed M Bayoumi; Seaver L Soon; Kent Aftergut; Ponciano Cruz; Shenara A Sexton; Calvin O McCall; Mary K Goldstein
Journal:  J Investig Dermatol Symp Proc       Date:  2004-03

3.  Cost of skin cancer in England.

Authors:  S Morris; B Cox; N Bosanquet
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2008-09-13

4.  Photodynamic therapy with topical application of 5-aminolevulinic acid in the treatment of actinic keratoses: an initial clinical study.

Authors:  R M Szeimies; S Karrer; A Sauerwald; M Landthaler
Journal:  Dermatology       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 5.366

Review 5.  Chemoprevention of human skin cancer.

Authors:  Janine G Einspahr; Steven P Stratton; G Timothy Bowden; David S Alberts
Journal:  Crit Rev Oncol Hematol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 6.312

6.  Spontaneous remission of solar keratoses: the case for conservative management.

Authors:  R Marks; P Foley; G Goodman; B H Hage; T S Selwood
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 9.302

7.  Topical diclofenac in hyaluronan gel for the treatment of solar keratoses.

Authors:  Kurt Gebauer; Pam Brown; George Varigos
Journal:  Australas J Dermatol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.875

8.  Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of salicylic acid and cryotherapy for cutaneous warts. An economic decision model.

Authors:  K S Thomas; M R Keogh-Brown; J R Chalmers; R J Fordham; R C Holland; S J Armstrong; M O Bachmann; A H Howe; S Rodgers; A J Avery; I Harvey; H C Williams
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.014

9.  Paper Standard Gamble: the reliability of a paper questionnaire to assess utility.

Authors:  Benjamin Littenberg; Steven Partilo; Anita Licata; Michael W M Kattan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2003 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Quality of life in the actinic neoplasia syndrome: The VA Topical Tretinoin Chemoprevention (VATTC) Trial.

Authors:  Martin A Weinstock; Kachiu C Lee; Mary-Margaret Chren; Kimberly Marcolivio
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2009-04-26       Impact factor: 11.527

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacoeconomic Considerations in Treating Actinic Keratosis: An Update.

Authors:  Spencer M Vale; Dane Hill; Steven R Feldman
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Pharmacoeconomic evaluations in the treatment of actinic keratoses.

Authors:  Keith Tolley; Giuseppe Argenziano; Pier Giacomo Calzavara-Pinton; Thomas Larsson; Lasse Ryttig
Journal:  Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 3.219

3.  Patient-reported health outcomes in patients with non-melanoma skin cancer and actinic keratosis: results from a large-scale observational study analysing effects of diagnoses and disease progression.

Authors:  W G Philipp-Dormston; K Müller; B Novak; K Strömer; C Termeer; U Hammann; J W Glutsch; G Krähn-Senftleben; H Lübbert; M Koller; R M Szeimies
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 6.166

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.