These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Cost-utility analysis of oral deferasirox versus infusional deferoxamine in transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia patients.
    Author: Keshtkaran A, Javanbakht M, Salavati S, Mashayekhi A, Karimi M, Nuri B.
    Journal: Transfusion; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1722-9. PubMed ID: 23241074.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Deferasirox (DFX) is a novel iron chelator that has been shown to have similar efficacy and safety compared with deferoxamine (DFO) in patients with β-thalassemia. The aim of this study was to determine the cost utility of DFX versus DFO in β-thalassemia major patients from Iran's society perspective. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A Markov model has been developed to determine lifetime cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients. To estimate the annual cost of each method, a cross-sectional study was conducted among two groups of patients who received DFO and DFX (n = 100 and n = 45, respectively). Also a time trade-off method was used to estimate the utility of two strategies. Finally a one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine the strength of the results. RESULTS: Our base-case analysis showed that estimated total lifetime costs per patient for DFX and DFO were 47,029 international dollar ($Int) and $Int143,522, respectively, while the estimated total discounted QALYs per person were 12.28 and 7.76, respectively. Calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio showed that DSX is a dominant therapy and its estimated lifetime net monetary benefit was $Int273,528. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the use of DFX instead of DFO represents a cost-effective use of resources for treatment of iron overload in patients with β-thalassemia from Iran's society perspective.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]