IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v26y2008i11p951-967.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Impact and Long-Term Graft Outcomes of Mycophenolate Mofetil Dosage Modifications Following Gastrointestinal Complications in Renal Transplant Recipients

Author

Listed:
  • Gerardo Machnicki
  • Jean-Francois Ricci
  • Daniel Brennan
  • Mark Schnitzler

Abstract

Introduction: Gastrointestinal (GI) complications are common following renal transplantation. Discontinuing or reducing the dosage of mycophenolate mofetil can improve GI tolerability but adversely affect graft outcomes. This analysis was undertaken to assess the 3-year economic and clinical impact of mycophenolate mofetil dosage modifications or discontinuation following post-transplant GI events compared with no dosage modification. Methods: Adult renal transplant recipients with a Medicare-covered mycophenolate mofetil prescription at the time of GI complication between 1995 and 2000 were drawn from the US Renal Data System (USRDS). The 3-year graft survival rates after first diagnosis of a GI complication were obtained in four cohorts of patients according to mycophenolate mofetil administration within 6 months of initial GI diagnosis: (i) no dosage change in mycophenolate mofetil (NC); (ii) one or more episodes of mycophenolate mofetil dosage reduction ≥50% of the initial dosage, lasting >30 days (DR ≥50%); (iii) one or more episodes of mycophenolate mofetil dosage reduction >50% of the initial dosage, lasting >30 days (DR ≥50%); and (iv) one or more episodes of mycophenolate mofetil discontinuation >30 days (DC). Two multivariate models were used to estimate the association between DR and DC and graft survival >6 months after GI diagnosis and 6–36 months after diagnosis. In each cohort, Medicare costs for maintaining a patient with stable function were calculated using regression and were augmented with cost of graft failure, resumed maintenance dialysis and death post-graft loss using Medicare data supplied by the USRDS. Survival and cost outcomes were integrated in a 3-year Markov model with 6-month cycles. The perspective was that of Medicare, and costs and outcomes were discounted by 3% per annum. Results: Adult patients (n=3589) with a mycophenolate mofetil prescription at time of diagnosis of GI event were identified: NC=2230 (62.1%); DR >50%=247 (6.9%); DR ≥50%=348 (9.7%); and DC=764 (21.3%). In the first 6 months after GI diagnosis, DC was associated with increased risk of graft failure (hazard ratio [HR] 3.20; 95% CI 1.71, 5.99; p > 0.0001). During the period 6–36 months after GI diagnosis, the HR for graft loss was higher for the DR ≥50% group (HR 1.32; 95% CI 1.02, 1.70; p > 0.05) and DC group (HR 1.35; 95% CI 1.09, 1.69; p > 0.01) relative to the NC group. Expected 3-year cumulative Medicare costs per patient were $US68 495 for the NC and DR >50% groups, $US70 886 for the DR ≥50% group, $US79 015 for the DC group and $US70 967 overall. Respective QALYs were 2.32, 2.30, 2.27 and 2.31. In sensitivity analysis, reducing the rate of DR and DC by 25% would have lowered expected costs by $US2.2 million in the study population and increased QALYs by 11.2. Monte Carlo simulation indicated a 93% probability that such reduction in the relative risk of mycophenolate mofetil DR/DC was cost saving or cost neutral. Conclusion: Dosage reduction or discontinuation of mycophenolate mofetil in the first 6 months after diagnosis of GI complications is associated with significantly increased risk of graft failure and increased healthcare costs in adult renal transplant recipients. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2008

Suggested Citation

  • Gerardo Machnicki & Jean-Francois Ricci & Daniel Brennan & Mark Schnitzler, 2008. "Economic Impact and Long-Term Graft Outcomes of Mycophenolate Mofetil Dosage Modifications Following Gastrointestinal Complications in Renal Transplant Recipients," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 951-967, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:26:y:2008:i:11:p:951-967
    DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200826110-00007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/00019053-200826110-00007
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/00019053-200826110-00007?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J.Robert Beck & Stephen G. Pauker, 1983. "The Markov Process in Medical Prognosis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 3(4), pages 419-458, December.
    2. John C. Hornberger & Jennie H. Best & Louis P. Garrison Jr., 1997. "Cost-Effectiveness of Repeat Medical Procedures," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 17(4), pages 363-372, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Karina Hansen & Christophe Lançon & Mondher Toumi, 2006. "Pharmacoeconomic modelling in schizophrenia," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 7(1), pages 19-29, March.
    2. Donna M. Edwards & Ross D. Shachter & Douglas K. Owens, 1998. "A Dynamic HIV-Transmission Model for Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of Vaccine Programs," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 144-166, June.
    3. de Wit, G.Ardine & Ramsteijn, Paul G & de Charro, Frank Th, 1998. "Economic evaluation of end stage renal disease treatment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 215-232, June.
    4. Lukas J.A. Stalpers & Hans J.M. Van Gasteren & Willem A.J. Van Daal, 1989. "DEALE-ing with Life Expectancy and Mortality Rates," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(2), pages 150-152, June.
    5. Bruce A. Craig & Peter P. Sendi, 2002. "Estimation of the transition matrix of a discrete‐time Markov chain," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(1), pages 33-42, January.
    6. Gordon B. Hazen, 2022. "Augmenting Markov Cohort Analysis to Compute (Co)Variances: Implications for Strength of Cost-Effectiveness," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 3170-3180, November.
    7. Franck Maunoury & Anastasiia Motrunich & Maria Palka-Santini & Stéphanie F Bernatchez & Stéphane Ruckly & Jean-François Timsit, 2015. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Transparent Antimicrobial Dressing for Managing Central Venous and Arterial Catheters in Intensive Care Units," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, June.
    8. Rowan Iskandar, 2018. "A theoretical foundation for state-transition cohort models in health decision analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-11, December.
    9. Aslam Anis & Huiying Sun & Sonia Singh & John Woolcott & Bohdan Nosyk & Marc Brisson, 2006. "A Cost-Utility Analysis of Losartan versus Atenolol in the Treatment of Hypertension with Left Ventricular Hypertrophy," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 387-400, April.
    10. C. Kent Kwoh & J. Robert Beck & Stephen G. Pauker, 1984. "Repeated Syncope with Negative Diagnostic Evaluation," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 4(3), pages 351-377, August.
    11. Beate Jahn & Sarah Friedrich & Joachim Behnke & Joachim Engel & Ursula Garczarek & Ralf Münnich & Markus Pauly & Adalbert Wilhelm & Olaf Wolkenhauer & Markus Zwick & Uwe Siebert & Tim Friede, 2022. "On the role of data, statistics and decisions in a pandemic," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 106(3), pages 349-382, September.
    12. Felicitas Kuehne & Ursula Rochau & Noman Paracha & Jennifer M. Yeh & Eduardo Sabate & Uwe Siebert, 2022. "Estimating Treatment-Switching Bias in a Randomized Clinical Trial of Ovarian Cancer Treatment: Combining Causal Inference with Decision-Analytic Modeling," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 42(2), pages 194-207, February.
    13. Simon Frey & Roland Linder & Georg Juckel & Tom Stargardt, 2014. "Cost-effectiveness of long-acting injectable risperidone versus flupentixol decanoate in the treatment of schizophrenia: a Markov model parameterized using administrative data," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(2), pages 133-142, March.
    14. Uwe Siebert, 2003. "When should decision-analytic modeling be used in the economic evaluation of health care?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 4(3), pages 143-150, September.
    15. Rudzītis Normunds & Čevers Aldis, 2015. "Development of Customs Fiscal Function in Latvia," Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 27(1), pages 23-28, December.
    16. Dennis A. Plante & Seymour Zimbler & Stephen G. Pauker, 1984. "A Ten-Year-Old Boy with Cerebral Palsy and Femoral Anteversion," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 4(2), pages 229-247, June.
    17. David G. Simon, 1986. "A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Cyclosporine in Cadaveric Kidney Transplantation," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 6(4), pages 199-207, December.
    18. Craig Fleming & John B. Wong & Alan J. Moskowitz & Stephen G. Pauker, 1988. "A Peripartum Neurologic Event: Shooting from the Hip," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 8(1), pages 55-71, February.
    19. Xudong Du & Mier Li & Ping Zhu & Ju Wang & Lisha Hou & Jijie Li & Hongdao Meng & Muke Zhou & Cairong Zhu, 2018. "Comparison of the flexible parametric survival model and Cox model in estimating Markov transition probabilities using real-world data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-13, August.
    20. Franck Maunoury & Christian Farinetto & Stéphane Ruckly & Jeremy Guenezan & Jean-Christophe Lucet & Alain Lepape & Julien Pascal & Bertrand Souweine & Olivier Mimoz & Jean-François Timsit, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone iodine-alcohol solution in the prevention of intravascular-catheter-related bloodstream infections in France," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-16, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:pharme:v:26:y:2008:i:11:p:951-967. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.