Zahra Gharibi1, Mehmet U S Ayvaci, Michael Hahsler, Tracy Giacoma, Robert S Gaston, Bekir Tanriover. 1. 1 Department of Engineering Management, Information, and Systems, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX. 2 Information Systems and Operations Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, TX. 3 Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX. 4 Transplant Services, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Dallas, TX. 5 Division of Nephrology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL. 6 Division of Nephrology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Induction therapy in deceased donor kidney transplantation is costly, with wide discrepancy in utilization and a limited evidence base, particularly regarding cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We linked the United States Renal Data System data set to Medicare claims to estimate cumulative costs, graft survival, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER - cost per additional year of graft survival) within 3 years of transplantation in 19 450 deceased donor kidney transplantation recipients with Medicare as primary payer from 2000 to 2008. We divided the study cohort into high-risk (age > 60 years, panel-reactive antibody > 20%, African American race, Kidney Donor Profile Index > 50%, cold ischemia time > 24 hours) and low-risk (not having any risk factors, comprising approximately 15% of the cohort). After the elimination of dominated options, we estimated expected ICER among induction categories: no-induction, alemtuzumab, rabbit antithymocyte globulin (r-ATG), and interleukin-2 receptor-antagonist. RESULTS: No-induction was the least effective and most costly option in both risk groups. Depletional antibodies (r-ATG and alemtuzumab) were more cost-effective across all willingness-to-pay thresholds in the low-risk group. For the high-risk group and its subcategories, the ICER was very sensitive to the graft survival; overall both depletional antibodies were more cost-effective, mainly for higher willingness to pay threshold (US $100 000 and US $150 000). Rabbit ATG appears to achieve excellent cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (80% of the recipients) in both risk groups at US $50 000 threshold (except age > 60 years). In addition, only r-ATG was associated with graft survival benefit over no-induction category (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-0.99) in a multivariable Cox regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Antibody-based induction appears to offer substantial advantages in both cost and outcome compared with no-induction. Overall, depletional induction (preferably r-ATG) appears to offer the greatest benefits.
BACKGROUND: Induction therapy in deceased donor kidney transplantation is costly, with wide discrepancy in utilization and a limited evidence base, particularly regarding cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We linked the United States Renal Data System data set to Medicare claims to estimate cumulative costs, graft survival, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER - cost per additional year of graft survival) within 3 years of transplantation in 19 450 deceased donor kidney transplantation recipients with Medicare as primary payer from 2000 to 2008. We divided the study cohort into high-risk (age > 60 years, panel-reactive antibody > 20%, African American race, Kidney Donor Profile Index > 50%, cold ischemia time > 24 hours) and low-risk (not having any risk factors, comprising approximately 15% of the cohort). After the elimination of dominated options, we estimated expected ICER among induction categories: no-induction, alemtuzumab, rabbit antithymocyte globulin (r-ATG), and interleukin-2 receptor-antagonist. RESULTS: No-induction was the least effective and most costly option in both risk groups. Depletional antibodies (r-ATG and alemtuzumab) were more cost-effective across all willingness-to-pay thresholds in the low-risk group. For the high-risk group and its subcategories, the ICER was very sensitive to the graft survival; overall both depletional antibodies were more cost-effective, mainly for higher willingness to pay threshold (US $100 000 and US $150 000). Rabbit ATG appears to achieve excellent cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (80% of the recipients) in both risk groups at US $50 000 threshold (except age > 60 years). In addition, only r-ATG was associated with graft survival benefit over no-induction category (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-0.99) in a multivariable Cox regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Antibody-based induction appears to offer substantial advantages in both cost and outcome compared with no-induction. Overall, depletional induction (preferably r-ATG) appears to offer the greatest benefits.
Authors: J F Whiting; R S Woodward; E Y Zavala; D S Cohen; J E Martin; G G Singer; J A Lowell; M R First; D C Brennan; M A Schnitzler Journal: Transplantation Date: 2000-09-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Waichi Wong; Neerja Agrawal; Manuel Pascual; David C Anderson; Hans H Hirsch; Kumiko Fujimoto; Francesca Cardarelli; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; A Benedict Cosimi; Nina Tolkoff-Rubin Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: Louis P Garrison; Edward C Mansley; Thomas A Abbott; Brian W Bresnahan; Joel W Hay; James Smeeding Journal: Value Health Date: 2009-10-23 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Daniel C Brennan; John A Daller; Kathleen D Lake; Diane Cibrik; Domingo Del Castillo Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-11-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bekir Tanriover; Patricia W Stone; Sumit Mohan; David J Cohen; Robert S Gaston Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2013-04-04 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Mohsen Yaghoubi; Sonya Cressman; Louisa Edwards; Steven Shechter; Mary M Doyle-Waters; Paul Keown; Ruth Sapir-Pichhadze; Stirling Bryan Journal: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Date: 2022-08-09 Impact factor: 3.686
Authors: Vikas R Dharnidharka; Abhijit S Naik; David A Axelrod; Mark A Schnitzler; Zidong Zhang; Sunjae Bae; Dorry L Segev; Daniel C Brennan; Tarek Alhamad; Rosemary Ouseph; Ngan N Lam; Mustafa Nazzal; Henry Randall; Bertram L Kasiske; Mara McAdams-Demarco; Krista L Lentine Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2017-11-02 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: Brittany A Shelton; Gideon Berdahl; Deirdre Sawinski; Benjamin P Linas; Peter P Reese; Margaux N Mustian; Rhiannon D Reed; Paul A MacLennan; Jayme E Locke Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 9.369