RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Subtotal Parathyroidectomy (S-PTx) and total Parathyroidectomy with immediate Autograft (PTx-AG) are well-established techniques for the treatment of refractory Secondary Hyperparathyroidism (SHPT), with comparable improvements in patients' quality of life and survival. However, the long-term costs after these operations may impact the choice of surgical technique. The objective of the study is to analyze the impact of surgical treatment on medication costs and whether there is any difference between medication use after each procedure, considering impacts on the health system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective and randomized study in patients with severe SHPT undergoing S-PTx and PTx-AG. Analysis of prescribed medication costs in the month before the postoperative period at 1-, 3-, 6-, 12-, and 18 months. Costs were estimated according to government payment system values. The medications of 65 patients after PTx-AG were compared with those of 24 patients after S-PTx. A comparison of the total costs of the period between 38 men and 51 women was also made. RESULTS: There were 89 evaluable cases. Surgery reduced medication costs after 12 months. The median of total drug costs in the analyzed period was R$ 8,375.00 per patient. There was no difference in costs per patient in the S-PTx group compared to the PTx-AG group. The median total costs were R$ 11,063.0 for men and R$ 7,651.0 for women (p = 0.0078). CONCLUSIONS: The type of parathyroidectomy did not impact costs after surgery. In the first year after surgery, the use of calcium and calcitriol was more significant than the use of other medications. In the following months, the use of sevelamer is responsible for the highest costs. Men have higher costs in outpatient follow-up after surgery.
Assuntos
Custos de Medicamentos , Hiperparatireoidismo Secundário , Paratireoidectomia , Humanos , Hiperparatireoidismo Secundário/cirurgia , Hiperparatireoidismo Secundário/economia , Hiperparatireoidismo Secundário/tratamento farmacológico , Paratireoidectomia/economia , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Adulto , Custos de Medicamentos/estatística & dados numéricos , Resultado do Tratamento , Fatores de Tempo , IdosoRESUMO
Introduction: Secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) is a consequence of chronic kidney disease. The treatment at the Brazilian Unified Heath System (SUS) is performed with calcitriol, a drug which favors hypercalcemia and/or hyperphosphatemia, hindering the control of SHPT. Another option is paricalcitol, which causes parathormone (PTH) suppression faster than calcitriol, with minor changes in calcium-phosphorus product and calcium and phosphorus serum levels. Objective: This study aims to develop a cost-effectiveness analysis of paricalcitol versus calcitriol for patients in dialytic treatment with SHPT, from the SUS perspective. Methods: A Markov decision model was developed for patients ≥ 50 years old with end stage renal disease in dialytic treatment and SHPT. Quarterly cycles and a lifetime time horizon were considered. Life years (LY) gained were assessed as clinical outcome. Clinical and economic inputs were obtained from systematic literature review and official databases. Costs are presented in Brazilian real (BRL), for the year 2014. Results: In the base case: paricalcitol generated a clinical benefit of 16.28 LY gained versus 14.11 LY gained with calcitriol, total costs of BRL 131,064 and BRL 114,262, respectively, determining an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of BRL 7,740 per LY gained. The data robustness was confirmed by the sensitivity analysis. Conclusions: According to cost-effectiveness threshold recommended by the World Health Organization for 2013, the treatment of SHPT in patients on dialysis with paricalcitol is cost-effective when compared to calcitriol, from the public healthcare system perspective, in Brazil.
Introdução: O hiperparatireoidismo secundário (HPTS) é uma consequência da doença renal crônica. O tratamento no SUS é realizado com calcitriol, que favorece a hipercalcemia e/ou hiperfosfatemia, dificultando o controle do HPTS. Uma opção clinicamente relevante é o paricalcitol, que ocasiona a supressão do paratormônio (PTH) de forma mais rápida que o calcitriol e com menores alterações nas taxas séricas de cálcio, fósforo e do produto cálcio-fósforo. Objetivo: Este trabalho tem como objetivo desenvolver uma análise de custo-efetividade de paricalcitol versus calcitriol para pacientes em diálise com HPTS, perspectiva do SUS. Métodos: Foi desenvolvido um modelo de decisão de Markov para a população ≥ 50 anos, com DRC em diálise e HPTS. Foram considerados ciclos trimestrais e um horizonte temporal lifetime. O desfecho clínico avaliado foram os anos de vida ganhos. Dados foram obtidos a partir de revisão sistemática da literatura e bases de dados oficiais. Custos em reais (R$), ano de 2014. Resultados: No caso base: paricalcitol gerou benefício clínico de 16,28 anos de vida ganhos versus 14,11 anos de vida ganhos com calcitriol, custos totais de R$ 131.064 e R$ 114.262, respectivamente. A razão de custo-efetividade incremental de R$ 7.740 por ano de vida salvo. Dados robustos confirmados pela análise de sensibilidade. Conclusão: De acordo com o limiar de custo-efetividade recomendado pela Organização Mundial de Saúde para o ano de 2013, o tratamento de pacientes com HPTS em diálise com paricalcitol é custo-efetivo, comparado ao calcitriol, perspectiva SUS.
Assuntos
Conservadores da Densidade Óssea/economia , Conservadores da Densidade Óssea/uso terapêutico , Calcitriol/economia , Calcitriol/uso terapêutico , Análise Custo-Benefício , Ergocalciferóis/economia , Ergocalciferóis/uso terapêutico , Hiperparatireoidismo Secundário/tratamento farmacológico , Hiperparatireoidismo Secundário/economia , Diálise Renal , Brasil , Atenção à Saúde , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
Abstract Introduction: Secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) is a consequence of chronic kidney disease. The treatment at the Brazilian Unified Heath System (SUS) is performed with calcitriol, a drug which favors hypercalcemia and/or hyperphosphatemia, hindering the control of SHPT. Another option is paricalcitol, which causes parathormone (PTH) suppression faster than calcitriol, with minor changes in calcium-phosphorus product and calcium and phosphorus serum levels. Objective: This study aims to develop a cost-effectiveness analysis of paricalcitol versus calcitriol for patients in dialytic treatment with SHPT, from the SUS perspective. Methods: A Markov decision model was developed for patients ≥ 50 years old with end stage renal disease in dialytic treatment and SHPT. Quarterly cycles and a lifetime time horizon were considered. Life years (LY) gained were assessed as clinical outcome. Clinical and economic inputs were obtained from systematic literature review and official databases. Costs are presented in Brazilian real (BRL), for the year 2014. Results: In the base case: paricalcitol generated a clinical benefit of 16.28 LY gained versus 14.11 LY gained with calcitriol, total costs of BRL 131,064 and BRL 114,262, respectively, determining an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of BRL 7,740 per LY gained. The data robustness was confirmed by the sensitivity analysis. Conclusions: According to cost-effectiveness threshold recommended by the World Health Organization for 2013, the treatment of SHPT in patients on dialysis with paricalcitol is cost-effective when compared to calcitriol, from the public healthcare system perspective, in Brazil.
Resumo Introdução: O hiperparatireoidismo secundário (HPTS) é uma consequência da doença renal crônica. O tratamento no SUS é realizado com calcitriol, que favorece a hipercalcemia e/ou hiperfosfatemia, dificultando o controle do HPTS. Uma opção clinicamente relevante é o paricalcitol, que ocasiona a supressão do paratormônio (PTH) de forma mais rápida que o calcitriol e com menores alterações nas taxas séricas de cálcio, fósforo e do produto cálcio-fósforo. Objetivo: Este trabalho tem como objetivo desenvolver uma análise de custo-efetividade de paricalcitol versus calcitriol para pacientes em diálise com HPTS, perspectiva do SUS. Métodos: Foi desenvolvido um modelo de decisão de Markov para a população ≥ 50 anos, com DRC em diálise e HPTS. Foram considerados ciclos trimestrais e um horizonte temporal lifetime. O desfecho clínico avaliado foram os anos de vida ganhos. Dados foram obtidos a partir de revisão sistemática da literatura e bases de dados oficiais. Custos em reais (R$), ano de 2014. Resultados: No caso base: paricalcitol gerou benefício clínico de 16,28 anos de vida ganhos versus 14,11 anos de vida ganhos com calcitriol, custos totais de R$ 131.064 e R$ 114.262, respectivamente. A razão de custo-efetividade incremental de R$ 7.740 por ano de vida salvo. Dados robustos confirmados pela análise de sensibilidade. Conclusão: De acordo com o limiar de custo-efetividade recomendado pela Organização Mundial de Saúde para o ano de 2013, o tratamento de pacientes com HPTS em diálise com paricalcitol é custo-efetivo, comparado ao calcitriol, perspectiva SUS.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Calcitriol/economia , Calcitriol/uso terapêutico , Análise Custo-Benefício , Conservadores da Densidade Óssea/economia , Conservadores da Densidade Óssea/uso terapêutico , Brasil , Ergocalciferóis/economia , Ergocalciferóis/uso terapêutico , Diálise Renal , Atenção à Saúde , Hiperparatireoidismo Secundário/economia , Hiperparatireoidismo Secundário/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a disorder with high morbidity and mortality worldwide whose complications generate multiple costs. In Ecuador, only a few healthcare institutions have implemented management protocols aimed to reduce costs and to improve the quality of life of patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the short-term (1-year) and long-term (5-year) costs and savings in the management of secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) of hemodialyzed CKD patients by comparing calcitriol and paricalcitol in a large social security hospital in Quito, Ecuador. METHODS: The estimation model assessed the resources used in the management of SHPT by comparing prospectively the cost savings within 1-year and 5-year time horizon with calcitriol and paricalcitol. Hospitalization, erythropoietin (EPO), treatment doses, intravenous iron consumption, and medical supplies were estimated according international references, based on the initial parathormone level (iPTH) of patients. The Ecuadorian National Reference costs (2014-2015) and institutional costs were used to calculate treatment costs. A statistical sensitivity analysis was also performed. RESULTS: The study was based on data from 354 patients of whom 147 (41.4 %) had a value of iPTH in the range 300-600 pg/ml, 45 (12.8 %) in the range 601-800 pg/ml, and 162 (45.7 %) over 800 pg/ml. The 1-year estimated costs per patient for calcitriol and paricalcitol, respectively, were: medication, 63.88 USD and 1,123.44 USD; EPO, 19,522.95 USD and 16,478 USD; intravenous iron 143.21 USD and 187.76 USD. Yearly hospitalization costs per patient were 11,647.99 USD with calcitriol and 8,019.41 USD with paricalcitol. Total yearly costs per patient amounted to 31,378.02 USD with calcitriol and 25,809.50 USD with paricalcitol. Total savings using paricalcitol were 5,568.52 USD per patient compared with calcitriol. The 5-year cumulative medication costs were 319 USD for calcitriol and 2,403 USD for paricalcitol; EPO with calcitriol was 97,615 USD and with paricalcitol 82,394 USD; intravenous iron with calcitriol was 716 USD and paricalcitol 939 USD. Hospitalization costs for patients with calcitriol and paricalcitol were 43,095 USD and 62,595 USD, respectively. Total savings using paricalcitol amounted 32,414 USD per patient compared with calcitriol. CONCLUSIONS: Paricalcitol use generated more cost savings than calcitriol after 1 and 5 years.