We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Cost savings from intravenous immunoglobulin manufactured from chromotography/caprylate (IGIV-C) in persons with primary humoral immunodeficiency disorder.
OBJECTIVE: Human intravenous immunoglobulin manufactured with chromatography and caprylate methods (IGIV-C, 10%) was associated with a reduction in validated infections (pneumonia and sinusitis) compared with treatment with a licensed immunoglobulin product manufactured using standard solvent-detergent methods (IGIV-SD, 10%) in participants with primary humoral immunodeficiency disorder (PIDD). Our objective was to determine the cost-consequences of using IGIV-C instead of IGIV-SD.
METHODS: Economic analysis of a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial was used. Participants were randomly assigned to IGIV-C (N = 87) or IGIV-SD (N = 85) and monitored for the development of validated infections over the course of 9 months. Consumed resources were enumerated including cost of physician and emergency room visits, medications (prescription and over-the-counter), work productivity losses, and hospitalizations. Resource data was obtained from case report forms, patient diaries and the trial medication database. Because the amount of IGIV-SD used exceeded that of IGIV-C (nonstatistically significant difference) and the products are equivalently priced, we conservatively excluded investigational product acquisition cost to avoid artificially biasing incremental cost differences. We used a societal perspective with indirect costs, measured in 2003 US dollars. Pricing of both IGIV products is anticipated to be equivalent.
RESULTS: In a multivariate analysis, annual mean per participant costs were significantly lower between those receiving IGIV-C compared with IGIV-SD for prescription medications [-US 302 dollars, 95% confidence interval (CI) -US 598 dollars to -US 6 dollars], hospitalization (-US 1454 dollars, 95% CI -US 1828 dollars to -US 1080 dollars) and total costs (-US 1304 dollars, 95% CI -US 1867 dollars to -US 742 dollars). Costs associated with lost work productivity and physician visits were similar in both groups (P > 0.10). In sensitivity analyses, varying costs of concomitant medications, hospitalization and outpatient care, did not significantly change our results.
CONCLUSION: IGIV-C is cost-saving compared with IGIV-SD among persons with PIDD.
METHODS: Economic analysis of a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial was used. Participants were randomly assigned to IGIV-C (N = 87) or IGIV-SD (N = 85) and monitored for the development of validated infections over the course of 9 months. Consumed resources were enumerated including cost of physician and emergency room visits, medications (prescription and over-the-counter), work productivity losses, and hospitalizations. Resource data was obtained from case report forms, patient diaries and the trial medication database. Because the amount of IGIV-SD used exceeded that of IGIV-C (nonstatistically significant difference) and the products are equivalently priced, we conservatively excluded investigational product acquisition cost to avoid artificially biasing incremental cost differences. We used a societal perspective with indirect costs, measured in 2003 US dollars. Pricing of both IGIV products is anticipated to be equivalent.
RESULTS: In a multivariate analysis, annual mean per participant costs were significantly lower between those receiving IGIV-C compared with IGIV-SD for prescription medications [-US 302 dollars, 95% confidence interval (CI) -US 598 dollars to -US 6 dollars], hospitalization (-US 1454 dollars, 95% CI -US 1828 dollars to -US 1080 dollars) and total costs (-US 1304 dollars, 95% CI -US 1867 dollars to -US 742 dollars). Costs associated with lost work productivity and physician visits were similar in both groups (P > 0.10). In sensitivity analyses, varying costs of concomitant medications, hospitalization and outpatient care, did not significantly change our results.
CONCLUSION: IGIV-C is cost-saving compared with IGIV-SD among persons with PIDD.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app