John Hornberger1,2, Jay Bae3, Ian Watson3, Joe Johnston3, Michael Happich4. 1. a Cedar Associates , Menlo Park , CA USA. 2. b Stanford University , Stanford , CA USA. 3. c Eli Lilly and Company , Indianapolis , IN USA. 4. d Eli Lilly and Company , Bad Homburg , Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Amyloid beta (Aβ) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging helps estimate Aβ neuritic plaque density in patients with cognitive impairment who are under evaluation for Alzheimer's disease (AD). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Aβ-PET scan as an adjunct to standard diagnostic assessment for diagnosis of AD in France, using florbetapir as an example. METHODS: A state-transition probability analysis was developed adopting the French Health Technology Assessment (HTA) perspective per guidance. Parameters included test characteristics, rate of cognitive decline, treatment effect, costs, and quality of life. Additional scenarios assessed the validity of the analytical framework, including: (1) earlier evaluation/treatment; (2) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) as a comparator; and (3) use of other diagnostic procedures. Outputs included differences in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). All benefits and costs were discounted for time preferences. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of findings and key influencers of outcomes. RESULTS: Aβ-PET used as an adjunct to standard diagnostic assessment increased QALYs by 0.021 years and 10 year costs by €470 per patient. The ICER was €21,888 per QALY gained compared to standard diagnostic assessment alone. When compared with CSF, Aβ-PET costs €24,084 per QALY gained. In other scenarios, Aβ-PET was consistently cost-effective relative to the commonly used affordability threshold (€40,000 per QALY). Over 95% of simulations in the sensitivity analysis were cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Aβ-PET is projected to affordably increase QALYs from the French HTA perspective per guidance over a range of clinical scenarios, comparators, and input parameters.
OBJECTIVE:Amyloid beta (Aβ) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging helps estimate Aβ neuritic plaque density in patients with cognitive impairment who are under evaluation for Alzheimer's disease (AD). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Aβ-PET scan as an adjunct to standard diagnostic assessment for diagnosis of AD in France, using florbetapir as an example. METHODS: A state-transition probability analysis was developed adopting the French Health Technology Assessment (HTA) perspective per guidance. Parameters included test characteristics, rate of cognitive decline, treatment effect, costs, and quality of life. Additional scenarios assessed the validity of the analytical framework, including: (1) earlier evaluation/treatment; (2) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) as a comparator; and (3) use of other diagnostic procedures. Outputs included differences in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). All benefits and costs were discounted for time preferences. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of findings and key influencers of outcomes. RESULTS: Aβ-PET used as an adjunct to standard diagnostic assessment increased QALYs by 0.021 years and 10 year costs by €470 per patient. The ICER was €21,888 per QALY gained compared to standard diagnostic assessment alone. When compared with CSF, Aβ-PET costs €24,084 per QALY gained. In other scenarios, Aβ-PET was consistently cost-effective relative to the commonly used affordability threshold (€40,000 per QALY). Over 95% of simulations in the sensitivity analysis were cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Aβ-PET is projected to affordably increase QALYs from the French HTA perspective per guidance over a range of clinical scenarios, comparators, and input parameters.
Authors: Jacoba Alida van de Kreeke; Hoang-Ton Nguyen; Elles Konijnenberg; Jori Tomassen; Anouk den Braber; Mara Ten Kate; Maqsood Yaqub; Bart van Berckel; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Dorret I Boomsma; Stevie H Tan; Frank Verbraak; Pieter Jelle Visser Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-05-22 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: KongFatt Wong-Lin; Paula L McClean; Niamh McCombe; Daman Kaur; Jose M Sanchez-Bornot; Paddy Gillespie; Stephen Todd; David P Finn; Alok Joshi; Joseph Kane; Bernadette McGuinness Journal: BMC Med Date: 2020-12-16 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Matteo Cotta Ramusino; Giulia Perini; Daniele Altomare; Paola Barbarino; Wendy Weidner; Gabriella Salvini Porro; Frederik Barkhof; Gil D Rabinovici; Wiesje M van der Flier; Giovanni B Frisoni; Valentina Garibotto; Stefan Teipel; Marina Boccardi Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Jacoba A van de Kreeke; Hoang-Ton Nguyen; Jurre den Haan; Elles Konijnenberg; Jori Tomassen; Anouk den Braber; Mara Ten Kate; Lyduine Collij; Maqsood Yaqub; Bart van Berckel; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Dorret I Boomsma; Hendra Stevie Tan; Frank D Verbraak; Pieter Jelle Visser Journal: Acta Ophthalmol Date: 2019-05-06 Impact factor: 3.761