IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v29y2009i6p690-706.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the Claim of Enhanced Persistence: The Case of Osteoporosis and Implications for Payers

Author

Listed:
  • Christina M. L. Kelton

    (College of Business, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, chris.kelton@uc.edu)

  • Margaret K. Pasquale

    (Epidemiology & Pharmacoeconomics, P&G Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Mason, Ohio)

Abstract

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) has been widely used in evaluating treatments for osteoporosis. To study the claim of enhanced persistence, this research determined the effects of persistence (the proportion of individuals who remain on treatment) and efficacy on incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for bisphosphonate treatment relative to no bisphosphonate treatment in the United States. For 2 age groups, 55 to 59 and 75 to 79, the authors relied on published fracture rates and applied them to 1000 postmenopausal osteoporotic patients with bone mineral density (BMD) T score ≤−2.5 during 3 years of treatment. After developing an algebraic ICER, with effectiveness measured by either quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained or number of fractures averted, they determined the effects of persistence and efficacy and then calibrated the model to variable estimates from the literature. For the younger (older) cohort, the cost per fracture averted was $66,606 ($18,256), consistent with a validated Markov simulation model. The effect of a 1 percentage point change in vertebral efficacy was 24 (5) times the effect of a 1 percentage point change in persistence for the younger cohort when QALYs (fractures) were involved. Nonvertebral efficacy had approximately 27 (9) times the effect of persistence. For the older cohort, the ratios were 15 (4.5) and 33 (10) for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures, respectively. In evaluating the claim of enhanced persistence, formulary decision makers need to exercise caution to ensure that efficacy is not compromised. Two drugs would have to be virtually identical in efficacy for better persistence to improve cost-effectiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Christina M. L. Kelton & Margaret K. Pasquale, 2009. "Evaluating the Claim of Enhanced Persistence: The Case of Osteoporosis and Implications for Payers," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 29(6), pages 690-706, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:29:y:2009:i:6:p:690-706
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X09336143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X09336143
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X09336143?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ananth Kadambi & Robert Leipold & Anuraag Kansal & Sonja Sorensen & Denis Getsios, 2012. "Inclusion of Compliance and Persistence in Economic Models," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 365-379, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:29:y:2009:i:6:p:690-706. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.