The Cost-Effectiveness of Interventions in Health and Medicine William H. Herman, M.D., M.P.H. University of Michigan • Rationale for conducting costeffectiveness analyses • How is cost-effectiveness assessed? • What is the cost-effectiveness of diabetes prevention? Barriers to diffusion of new medical treatments • Patient • Provider • System Patient level barriers • Demographic (age, gender, race) • Socioeconomic position (education, income) • Health status (including depression) • Self-efficacy • Cost Provider level barriers • Demographics (age, training, CME, experience) • Knowledge of guidelines and critical pathways • Attitudes to innovation • Opinions of key opinion leaders • Peer practices • Cost System level barriers • • • • Practice structure and organization Information systems Time barriers Cost Why perform CEAs? • Resources are limited • Choices must be made • Choices should consider costs and outcomes Value for Money Essential Elements of Economic Analyses of Health-Care Programs • • • • • • • • Type of analysis Perspective Type and definition of costs Description and valuation of outcomes Choice of comparator Modeling Discounting Sensitivity analyses Types of Economic Analyses • • • • Descriptive cost analysis Cost-benefit Cost-effectiveness Cost-utility Perspective of Economic Analyses • Payer • Society Type of Costs • Direct medical • Direct nonmedical • Indirect Definition of Direct Medical Costs • Cost of intervention • Cost of side-effects of intervention • Cost of outcomes Description and Valuation of Outcomes • Beneficial outcomes produced • Adverse outcomes averted Outcomes • Clinical • Years of life • Quality-adjusted life-years QALY Quality-Adjusted Life-Year adjusts length of life for quality of life Quality-Adjusted Life-Year time in health state x quality of life in health state where quality of life = health utility 1.0 = excellent health 0 = death Calculation of QALYs 20 years of life/excellent health 20 x 1.0 = 20 QALYs 20 years of life/10 excellent health 10 with blindness (10 x 1.0) + (10 x 0.51) = 15.1 QALYs Approaches to Measuring Health Utilities • Standard gamble • Multiattribute utility models • Rating scales Multiattribute Utility Models • Health Utilities Index (HUI) • Quality of Well-Being Index (QWB) • EuroQol (EQ-5D) 21 22 Choice of Comparator New therapy vs. ? all relevant alternatives? ? usual therapy? ? substandard therapy? ? placebo? Choice of Comparator Failure to compare a new therapy with a strong alternative will result in a deceptively favorable costeffectiveness picture. Modeling • When direct empirical data are not available, methods of imputation and extrapolation are used to estimate outcomes • No model generates new data, it merely combines existing information within an explicit framework Discounting • Even in a world of zero inflation, there are advantages to receiving benefits earlier and incurring costs later. • Discounting adjusts future costs and benefits to current value. Sensitivity Analyses The values of one or more of the key parameters are varied singly or simultaneously to evaluate the robustness of the results to the underlying assumptions. What is the costeffectiveness of diabetes prevention? Interventions Proven to Delay or Prevent the Development of Type 2 Diabetes Intervention % Risk Reduction Lifestyle (4 trials) 29-58% Metformin (2 trials) 26-31% Lifestyle & Metformin (1 trial) 28% Acarbose (1 trial) 25% Troglitazone (1 trial) 55% Rosiglitazone (1 trial) 60% DPP Study Population • 3,234 subjects with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) –Fasting plasma glucose 95 - 125 mg/dl –2 hour plasma glucose 140 - 199 mg/dl • • • • Age > 25 years (mean 51 years) BMI > 24 kg/m2 (mean 34 kg/m2) 68% women 45% minorities DPP Interventions • Lifestyle – healthy, low-calorie, low-fat diet & physical activity of moderate intensity (brisk walking for 150 min/week) to achieve and maintain 7% loss of body weight – 16 session core curriculum over 6 months then monthly follow-up • Metformin – 850 mg daily increasing to 850 mg twice daily – standard lifestyle recommendations – quarterly follow-up • Placebo – standard lifestyle recommendations Percent developing diabetes Incidence of Diabetes Placebo (n=1082)All Metformin (n=1073, p<0.001 vs. Placebo) Lifestyle (n=1079, p<0.001 vs. Met , p<0.001 vs. Plac ) Lifestyle (n=1079, p<0.001 vs. , Metformin (n=1073, p<0.001 vs.Metformin Plac) Placebo (n=1082) p<0.001 vs. Placebo) Cumulative incidence (%) 40 30 participants Risk reduction 31% by metformin 58% by lifestyle 20 10 0 0 1 2 3 4 Years from randomization The DPP Research Group, NEJM 346:393-403, 2002 Analyses • • • • • Health system perspective Cost per Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY) Lifetime time horizon Interventions as implemented in the DPP Year 2000 US dollars DPP. Ann Intern Med 142:323, 2005 Data Sources Treatment of IGT Treatment of Diabetes Costs DPP Cost Model Quality of Life DPP Quality of Life Model Health Outcomes DPP Type 2 Diabetes Model DPP. Ann Intern Med 142:323, 2005 Annual Direct Medical Costs in a Man Progressing from IGT to Diabetes with Complications $0 IGT (Placebo) Diabetes (Diet & Exercise) Diabetes (Oral Agent) Diabetes with Microalbuminuria Diabetes with MA and High BP Diabetes with MA, High BP, and Angina $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 1400 1684 1900 2200 2700 4600 Brandle et al. Diabetes Care 26:2300, 2003. Health Utility Scores in a Man Progressing from IGT to Diabetes with Complications 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.70 IGT (Placebo) Diabetes (Diet & Exercise) 0.69 0.67 Diabetes (Oral Agent) Diabetes with Neuropathy 0.60 Diabetes with Neuro and High BP Diabetes with Neuro, High BP, and Stroke 0.7 0.59 0.52 Coffey et al. Diabetes Care 25:2238, 2002. Diabetes Cost-Effectiveness Model • Markov model structure • Follows a patient cohort from diagnosis of IGT to death • IGT transition probabilities based on DPP • Diabetes, microvascular and macrovascular transition probabilities based on UKPDS and literature • Assumes 10 year interval between DPP onset and UKPDS clinical diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus • Tracks costs, QALYs, disease progression, 5 complications, and survival CDC Diabetes Cost-effectiveness Group. JAMA 287:2542, 2002 Simulated Cumulative Incidence of Diabetes in the DPP 90% 11.1 yrs Placebo 80% 8.7% 8% 3.4 yrs Metformin 22.3% 20% 70% Lifestyle 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Years Since IGT Diagnosis Herman et al. Ann Intern Med 142:323, 2005 Simulated Lifetime Clinical Outcomes in the DPP Outcome Diabetes (%) Blindness (%) ESRD (%) Amputation (%) Stroke (%) CHD (%) Life expectancy (yrs) Lifestyle Metformin Placebo 63 3 0.6 1.3 19 39 24.7 75 5 0.8 1.6 21 41 24.3 83 6 1.0 1.9 21 42 24.1 Herman et al. Ann Intern Med 142:323, 2005 IGT Intervention Summary Lifetime Outcomes* Outcome Lifestyle Metformin Placebo Lifetime Costs $51,974 $55,261 $51,339 Lifetime QALYs 10.89 10.45 10.32 Cost v. Pbo $635 $3,922 —— QALY v. Pbo 0.57 0.13 —— $1,124 $31,286 —— Cost/ QALY * costs and QALYs discounted at 3% per year Herman et al. Ann Intern Med 142:323, 2005 How Attractive Does a New Technology Have to be to Warrant Adoption and Utilization? more costly less effective & more costly more effective & more costly Decrease in QALYs Increase in QALYs less effective & less costly more effective & less costly less costly Distribution of Cost-Effectiveness Ratios for Preventive Measures and Treatments for Existing Conditions Cohen JT. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:661-663 Cost-Effectiveness of Selected Interventions in the Medicare Population Intervention Influenza vaccine Beta-blockers after myocardial infarction Cost-Effectiveness (Cost/QALY) Cost-saving <$10,000 Mammographic screening $10,000-$25,000 Hypertension medication (DBP >105 mmHg) $10,000-$60,000 Cholesterol management, as secondary prevention $10,000-$50,000 Dialysis for end-stage renal disease $50,000-$100,000 Left ventricular assist devices PJ Neumann. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:1516-1522 $500,000-$1.4 million How Attractive Does a New Technology Have to be to Warrant Adoption and Utilization? more costly $100,000/QALY $20,000/QALY Decreased QALYs Increased QALYs $20,000/QALY $100,000/QALY less costly Conclusion Interventions for diabetes prevention represent a good value for money in people with IGT. But... • An alternative analysis suggested a substantially higher cost per QALY-gained for the lifestyle intervention ($200,000 per QALYgained). Eddy DM. Ann Intern Med 2005; 143:251-264 Purpose To assess the cost-effectiveness of the lifestyle and metformin interventions relative to the placebo intervention with an intent-to-treat analysis spanning the combined 10 years of DPP/DPPOS. Background • The DPPOS followed participants for an additional 7 years during which time those in the lifestyle and metformin interventions were encouraged to continue those interventions. • During DPPOS, lifestyle participants received extra lifestyle support and all participants were offered a 16 session group lifestyle intervention and 4 healthy lifestyle program sessions per year. • A recent intent-to-treat analysis demonstrated a persistent benefit of the lifestyle and metformin interventions on the incidence of type 2 diabetes for at least 10 years after randomization. Cumulative Incidence of Diabetes during DPP/DPPOS 10-year incidence 52% 47% 42% Risk reduction vs Placebo DPP – 3 years Lifestyle 58% Metformin 31% Risk reduction vs Placebo DPP/DPPOS – 10 years Lifestyle 31% Metformin 19% DPP Research Group. Lancet. 2009; 374:1677-1686 Methods • Data on resource utilization, cost, and quality-of-life were collected prospectively during DPP and DPPOS. • To estimate the cost of lifestyle if it had been administered in a group format rather than individually as it was during DPP, we recalculated costs assuming that the core curriculum and monthly follow-up visits with the lifestyle case managers were conducted as group sessions with ten participants • Economic analyses were performed from a health system perspective that considered direct medical costs. Cumulative, Undiscounted, Per-participant, Direct Medical Costs of the DPP/DPPOS Interventions by Intervention Group and Year Cumulative, Undiscounted, Per-participant, Direct Medical Costs of Medical Care Received Outside the DPP/DPPOS by Intervention Group and Year Undiscounted, Per-participant, 10-year Direct Costs of Medical Care Received Outside the DPP/DPPOS by Intervention Group and Type Costs ($) by category Outpatient visits Inpatient care ER visits Urgent care visits Calls to physicians Prescription medications Self monitoring supplies and laboratory tests* TOTAL * diabetic participants only Lifestyle Metformin Placebo 6,845 7,145 7,325 5,631 5,817 6,856 1,941 1,690 1,825 1,697 1,945 1,811 712 742 712 6,490 6,619 6,959 1,248 24,563 1,628 25,615 1,978 27,468 Cumulative, Undiscounted, Per-participant, Total Direct Medical Costs of the DPP/DPPOS Interventions and Medical Care Received Outside the DPP/DPPOS by Intervention Group and Year Cumulative, Undiscounted, Perparticipant, Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Gained by Intervention Group and Year Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios over 10 Years by Intervention Group – Health System Perspective Differences in costs ( cost ) Health system perspective1 Undiscounted Discounted2 Differences in QALYs ( QALY) Undiscounted Discounted Lifestyle vs placebo DPP group lifestyle vs placebo Metformin vs placebo 928 1,226 -650 -323 -321 -159 0.14 0.12 0.14 0.12 0.02 0.02 Cost-saving Cost-saving Cost-saving Cost-saving Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ( Cost / QALY) Health system perspective1 Undiscounted 6,651 Discounted2 10,037 1 2 Includes total direct medical costs Both costs and QALYs discounted at 3% Summary Over 10 years, from a payer perspective: • The lifestyle intervention was cost-effective and the group lifestyle intervention was cost-saving compared to the placebo intervention – The group lifestyle intervention was approximately 1/3 less expensive than the lifestyle intervention – The increased cost of the lifestyle intervention relative to the placebo intervention was largely offset by the reduced costs of non-intervention-related medical care – The lifestyle intervention was associated with better quality-of-life than the placebo intervention • The metformin intervention was cost-saving or at least, cost-neutral compared to the placebo intervention – The increased cost of the metformin intervention relative to the placebo intervention was entirely offset by the reduced costs of non-intervention-related medical care Conclusion Health policy and societal policy in the United States should support the funding of intensive lifestyle and metformin interventions for diabetes prevention