Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.

<h4>Introduction</h4>In cost-effectiveness analyses, the future costs, disutility and mortality from alternative causes of morbidity are often not completely taken into account. We explored the impact of different assumed values for each of these factors on the cost-effectiveness of scre...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Amir-Houshang Omidvari, Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar, Harry J de Koning, Reinier G S Meester
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/a4baaeb4661f441ba6885d0cbbe227b1
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:a4baaeb4661f441ba6885d0cbbe227b1
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:a4baaeb4661f441ba6885d0cbbe227b12021-12-02T20:15:29ZImpact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0253893https://doaj.org/article/a4baaeb4661f441ba6885d0cbbe227b12021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253893https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Introduction</h4>In cost-effectiveness analyses, the future costs, disutility and mortality from alternative causes of morbidity are often not completely taken into account. We explored the impact of different assumed values for each of these factors on the cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).<h4>Methods</h4>Twenty different CRC screening strategies and two EAC screening strategies were evaluated using microsimulation. Average health-related expenses, disutility and mortality by age for the U.S. general population were estimated using surveys and lifetables. First, we evaluated strategies under default assumptions, with average mortality, and no accounting for health-related costs and disutility. Then, we varied costs, disutility and mortality between 100% and 150% of the estimated population averages, with 125% as the best estimate. Primary outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained among efficient strategies.<h4>Results</h4>The set of efficient strategies was robust to assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality from other causes of morbidity. However, the incremental cost per QALY gained increased with higher assumed values. For example, for CRC, the ratio for the recommended strategy increased from $15,600 with default assumptions, to $32,600 with average assumption levels, $61,100 with 25% increased levels, and $111,100 with 50% increased levels. Similarly, for EAC, the incremental costs per QALY gained for the recommended EAC screening strategy increased from $106,300 with default assumptions to $198,300 with 50% increased assumptions. In sensitivity analyses without discounting or including only above-average expenses, the impact of assumptions was relatively smaller, but best estimates of the cost per QALY gained remained substantially higher than default estimates.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Assumptions on future costs, utility and mortality from other causes of morbidity substantially impact cost-effectiveness outcomes of cancer screening. More empiric evidence and consensus are needed to guide assumptions in future analyses.Amir-Houshang OmidvariIris Lansdorp-VogelaarHarry J de KoningReinier G S MeesterPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 7, p e0253893 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Amir-Houshang Omidvari Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Harry J de Koning Reinier G S Meester Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.
description	<h4>Introduction</h4>In cost-effectiveness analyses, the future costs, disutility and mortality from alternative causes of morbidity are often not completely taken into account. We explored the impact of different assumed values for each of these factors on the cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).<h4>Methods</h4>Twenty different CRC screening strategies and two EAC screening strategies were evaluated using microsimulation. Average health-related expenses, disutility and mortality by age for the U.S. general population were estimated using surveys and lifetables. First, we evaluated strategies under default assumptions, with average mortality, and no accounting for health-related costs and disutility. Then, we varied costs, disutility and mortality between 100% and 150% of the estimated population averages, with 125% as the best estimate. Primary outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained among efficient strategies.<h4>Results</h4>The set of efficient strategies was robust to assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality from other causes of morbidity. However, the incremental cost per QALY gained increased with higher assumed values. For example, for CRC, the ratio for the recommended strategy increased from $15,600 with default assumptions, to $32,600 with average assumption levels, $61,100 with 25% increased levels, and $111,100 with 50% increased levels. Similarly, for EAC, the incremental costs per QALY gained for the recommended EAC screening strategy increased from $106,300 with default assumptions to $198,300 with 50% increased assumptions. In sensitivity analyses without discounting or including only above-average expenses, the impact of assumptions was relatively smaller, but best estimates of the cost per QALY gained remained substantially higher than default estimates.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Assumptions on future costs, utility and mortality from other causes of morbidity substantially impact cost-effectiveness outcomes of cancer screening. More empiric evidence and consensus are needed to guide assumptions in future analyses.
format	article
author	Amir-Houshang Omidvari Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Harry J de Koning Reinier G S Meester
author_facet	Amir-Houshang Omidvari Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar Harry J de Koning Reinier G S Meester
author_sort	Amir-Houshang Omidvari
title	Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.
title_short	Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.
title_full	Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.
title_fullStr	Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.
title_full_unstemmed	Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.
title_sort	impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/a4baaeb4661f441ba6885d0cbbe227b1
work_keys_str_mv	AT amirhoushangomidvari impactofassumptionsonfuturecostsdisutilityandmortalityincosteffectivenessanalysisamodelexploration AT irislansdorpvogelaar impactofassumptionsonfuturecostsdisutilityandmortalityincosteffectivenessanalysisamodelexploration AT harryjdekoning impactofassumptionsonfuturecostsdisutilityandmortalityincosteffectivenessanalysisamodelexploration AT reiniergsmeester impactofassumptionsonfuturecostsdisutilityandmortalityincosteffectivenessanalysisamodelexploration
_version_	1718374599078445056

Impact of assumptions on future costs, disutility and mortality in cost-effectiveness analysis; a model exploration.

Ejemplares similares