|



From *the Division of Nephrology, London Health Sciences Centre, and
the Department of Medicine, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.;
the Division of Nephrology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.;
the Department of Physiotherapy, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.; and ¶the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, Ont.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods: A decision analysis tree was created to demonstrate the progression of type I diabetes with macroproteinuria from the point of prescription of ACE inhibitor therapy through to ESRF management, with a 21-year follow-up. Drug compliance, cost of ESRF treatment, utilities and survival data were taken from Canadian sources and used in the cost-utility analysis. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the findings.
Results: Compared with a no-payment strategy, provincial payment of ACE inhibitor therapy was found to be highly cost-effective: it resulted in an increase of 0.147 in the number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and an annual cost savings of $849 per patient. The sensitivity analyses indicated that the cost-effectiveness depends on compliance, effect of benefit and the cost of drug therapy. Changes in the compliance rate from 67% to 51% could result in a swing in cost-effectiveness from a savings of $899 to an expenditure of more than $1 million per additional QALY. A 50% reduction in the cost of ACE inhibitors would result in a cost savings of $299 per additional QALY with compliance rates as low as 58% in the provincial payment strategy.
Interpretation: Provincial coverage of ACE inhibitor therapy for type I diabetes with macroproteinuria improves patient outcomes, with a decrease in cost for ESRF services.
This economic barrier to drug compliance may result in higher overall treatment costs. In the United States and Canada ESRF services are covered by the state or province/territory. We performed a cost-utility analysis from the government's perspective to see whether the province or territory should pay for ACE inhibitors on the assumption that cost is the main barrier to compliance with this important therapy.13-15 Three possible outcomes were considered - dialysis, renal transplantation and death - in patients with type I diabetes and macroproteinuria with and without ACE inhibitor therapy.
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We assumed that the long-term compliance rate was 50% among patients in the no-payment arm and 67% in the provincial payment arm.10-14 The change from 50% to 67% represents a 34% cost barrier to compliance, which is similar to that noted in the study by Brand and associates.14
The cost of ACE inhibitor therapy was derived from a 1-year cost analysis of initial antihypertensive therapy in patients with newly diagnosed moderate hypertension.16 We included the cost not only of the ACE inhibitor itself but also of supplemental drugs, laboratory monitoring, clinic visits and treatment because of side effects.17
The costs for hospital hemodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis, reported by Goeree and colleagues,18 were derived from fully allocated cost analysis in 1993 Canadian dollars for patients treated by the same dialysis modality for a full year. This measurement included in-patient and out-patient costs, over-head costs, personnel, supplies, medication costs and physician fees.19
The costs of ACE inhibitor therapy and ESRF treatments were converted to 1996 Canadian dollars using the Consumer Price Index for Canada.17,19
The transplantation costs reported in a cost-utility analysis by Laupacis and colleagues20 for diabetics include in-patient hospitalization, out-patient visits including dialysis, transplant clinic visits, medications, laboratory tests and physician fees (nephrectomy of the living-related donor), the transplant program and patient-borne costs.20 Costs for all subsequent years were assumed to be the same as those for the second year.19
The ESRF costs and utilities were corrected for annual mortality using the CORR survival curves. In the "long" dialysis and transplantation arms, a cumulative 10-year survival rate was applied to treatment costs and utilities; in the "short" dialysis and transplantation arms a 3-year survival rate was applied.
In our analysis, we discounted all costs and all utility values by 5% per year in accordance with Canadian guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals.21 Discounting attempts to correct for differential timing of costs and effects and accounts for the time value of money or the universal preference for funds now rather than later.22
For the basic decision analysis we used the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for ESRF therapy reported by Churchill and associates23 to quantify patient outcomes. The QALYs were constructed using the time trade-off technique determined from 272 ESRF patient interviews. Evidence for construct validity was based on correlation with the Spitzer Quality of Life Index and a provider visual analogue scale. Patients in an ESRF program were asked to estimate quality of life using the time trade-off for a year of hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis or transplantation. The baseline time trade-off values were 1 for a year of full health and 0 for death. The terminal nodes of the decision analysis are an accumulation of the utilities (QALYs) over the time patients are taking or not taking ACE inhibitors plus the years in ESRF corrected for annual mortality.
To test the robustness of our results, we conducted cost-effective sensitivity analyses. We varied estimates of drug and treatment costs and of compliance rates from baseline values and time benefit of compliance to see if the optimal strategy changed. All of our assumptions were constructed with conservative probabilities derived from the literature, which would favour the nopayment strategy.11-15
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
In our sensitivity analysis, varying the drug compliance rate from 67% to 65% in the payment arm resulted in a marginally cost-effective strategy of $4091 per QALY gained (Table 1). With a compliance rate of less than 63% the payment strategy would cost more than Can$20 000 per QALY gained. If the drug cost were increased by 10% the provincial payment strategy would still be highly cost-effective at a compliance rate of 66%. If the drug cost were reduced by 50% the payment strategy would still be highly cost-effective at a compliance rate of 58%; at a compliance rate of 67% the cost savings would be $6761 with an additional 0.147 QALYs (Table 1). Our findings indicate that increasing the length of survival with the use of ACE inhibitor therapy before the start of ESRF would improve cost-effectiveness at lower rates of compliance; with shorter survival times, higher rates of compliance would be needed to establish cost-effective strategies.
| Interpretation |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The CORR database provides actual survival data for diabetic patients receiving ESRF treatments. A major drawback in the use of this database is that it does not differentiate between type I and type II diabetes. However, a recent survey of 28 hemodialysis units across Germany noted that, although there were more patients with type II diabetes than with type I diabetes (66% v. 34%), their 45-month survival rates were similar (50% and 57% respectively).27
The costs of dialysis used in our study were reported by Goeree and colleagues18 and applied not only to diabetic patients but to all patients with ESRF. They indicated that the variable costs were about 44% greater for diabetic patients than for average ESRF patients. Therefore, the cost-effectiveness of the provincial payment strategy in our decision analysis is likely higher for the cost-effectiveness already noted for the provincial payment arm of the decision analysis.
The drug costs for ACE inhibitor therapy are high, but they would be expected to decline as the patent for these drugs expires. In our study we used not only the cost of acquisition of the ACE inhibitor but also the cost of supplemental antihypertensive drugs.16 Thus, the true long-term costs of ACE inhibitors are likely much lower than projected. Because we used US sources for our ACE inhibitor costs, we included the US costs for laboratory monitoring, clinic visits and treatment of side effects, which for the period 1985-1992 would have likely been greater than the comparable Canadian costs. The 50% reduction in drug cost in our sensitivity analysis may be more reflective of a Canadian analysis and would result in a highly cost-effective strategy for provincial payment at a 58% compliance rate.
In our analysis we presumed that noncompliance would be a major factor in assessing the renal protective effects of ACE inhibitor therapy in the diabetic population. Most reviews of the literature and a recent randomized controlled study have indicated that at least 50% of hypertensive patients take less than 80% of their antihypertensive therapy after 1 year.10-13 If compliance in usual practice is less than 50%, it would further strengthen the cost-effectiveness of a provincial payment strategy for ACE inhibitor therapy.
At present we do not have direct evidence that patients who comply with ACE inhibitor therapy are more likely to comply with all parts of their medical care and thus have the potential for better health and longer survival. In our analysis we assumed that the life span was similar between the 2 groups; however, there is a strong possibility that the compliant patients have increased longevity and therefore spend more years using some type of renal replacement therapy. This would result in an increase in both discounted benefits (QALYs) and costs, which would have little overall effect on the current payment strategy.
| Conclusion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We thank Dr. C. David Naylor for his critical review of this paper.
Competing interests: None declared for David Churchill, Lorie Forwell, Graeme Macdonald and Susan Foster. William Clark has received speaker fees from Merck Frosst Canada Inc.
| Footnotes |
|---|
Reprint requests to: Dr. William F. Clark, Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre, 375 South St., London ON N6A 4G5; fax 519 667-6758; william.clark{at}lhsc.on.ca
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
N. M. Goldenberg and M. Silverman Rab34 and its effector munc13-2 constitute a new pathway modulating protein secretion in the cellular response to hyperglycemia Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, October 1, 2009; 297(4): C1053 - C1058. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. B. Rosen, M. B. Hamel, M. C. Weinstein, D. M. Cutler, A. M. Fendrick, and S. Vijan Cost-Effectiveness of Full Medicare Coverage of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors for Beneficiaries with Diabetes Ann Intern Med, July 19, 2005; 143(2): 89 - 99. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. J. Palmer, D. M. D. Tucker, W. J. Valentine, S. Roze, S. Gabriel, and D. J. Cordonnier Cost-effectiveness of irbesartan in diabetic nephropathy: a systematic review of published studies Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., June 1, 2005; 20(6): 1103 - 1109. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. A Elliott, N. Barber, and R. Horne Cost-Effectiveness of Adherence-Enhancing Interventions: A Quality Assessment of the Evidence Ann. Pharmacother., March 1, 2005; 39(3): 508 - 515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. J. Palmer, L. Annemans, S. Roze, M. Lamotte, P. Lapuerta, R. Chen, S. Gabriel, P. Carita, R. A. Rodby, D. de Zeeuw, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Early Irbesartan Treatment Versus Control (Standard Antihypertensive Medications Excluding ACE Inhibitors, Other Angiotensin-2 Receptor Antagonists, and Dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blockers) or Late Irbesartan Treatment in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes, Hypertension, and Renal Disease Diabetes Care, August 1, 2004; 27(8): 1897 - 1903. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Tonelli, L. Moye, F. M. Sacks, T. Cole, and G. C. Curhan Effect of Pravastatin on Loss of Renal Function in People with Moderate Chronic Renal Insufficiency and Cardiovascular Disease J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., June 1, 2003; 14(6): 1605 - 1613. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Patient compliance with drug therapy for diabetic nephropathy Can. Med. Assoc. J., May 1, 2000; 162(11): 1553 - 1553. |
||||
![]() |
Patient compliance with drug therapy for diabetic nephropathy Can. Med. Assoc. J., May 1, 2000; 162(11): 1553 - 1554. |
||||
![]() |
Corrections Can. Med. Assoc. J., April 1, 2000; 162(7): 973 - 973. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||