SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Quality-Adjusted Life Years”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

9 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2025

Costs and cost-effectiveness of returning secondary findings from genomic sequencing based on the return of additional findings in the 100,000 Genomes Project.

PURPOSE: To assess costs and cost-effectiveness of returning additional findings from genome sequencing using data from the 100,000 Genomes Project (100kGP). METHODS: A model-based cost-utility analysis combining yield, consent rates, and cost data from the 100kGP with published estimates of downstream costs and quality-adjusted life years expected to accrue over a lifetime, after the identification of a pathogenic variant. RESULTS: The cost of returning additional findings to participants in the 100kGP was £7.1m or £81 per participant, with a yield of 0.85% for consented participants. The estimated lifetime incremental cost per participant was £125 and quality-adjusted life years 0.004, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £28,830. Implementing a policy of returning additional findings is unlikely to be cost-effective (ie, 13%) at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000. A short-term cost of returning findings of £43 per participant or lower (compared with the base case of £81) would result in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of less than £20,000. Alternatively, cost-effectiveness may be improved by returning additional findings to younger patient populations. CONCLUSION: Return of additional findings following genome sequencing for this group of conditions may not be a cost-effective use of health care system resources. Our cost-effectiveness outcomes rely on published estimates and should be validated through long-term follow-up data.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Lp(a) testing for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in high-income countries: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cost-effectiveness of Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] testing is not established. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Lp(a) testing in the cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention population from healthcare and societal perspectives. METHODS: We constructed and validated a multi-state microsimulation Markov model for a population of 10,000 individuals aged between 40 and 69 years without CVD, selected randomly from the UK Biobank. The model evaluated Lp(a) testing in individuals not initially classified as high-risk based on age, diabetes status, or the SCORE-2 algorithm. Those with an Lp(a) level ≥105 nmol/L (50 mg/dL) were treated as high risk (initiation of a statin plus blood pressure lowering). The Lp(a) testing intervention was compared to standard of care. The primary analyses were conducted from the Australian and UK healthcare perspectives in 2023AUD/GBP. A cost adaptation method estimated cost-effectiveness in multiple European countries, Canada, and the USA. RESULTS: Among 10,000 individuals, 1,807 had their treatment modified from Lp(a) testing. This led to 217 and 255 quality-adjusted life years gained in Australia and the UK, respectively, with corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of 12,134 (cost-effective) and -3,491 (cost-saving). From a societal perspective, Lp(a) testing saved $85 and £263 per person in Australia and the UK, respectively. Lp(a) testing was cost-saving among all countries tested in the cost adaptation analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Lp(a) testing in the primary prevention population to reclassify CVD risk and treatment is cost-saving and warranted to prevent CVD.

Humans↗

PubMed2024

Cost-effectiveness of population-wide genomic screening for Lynch Syndrome and polygenic risk scores to inform colorectal cancer screening.

PURPOSE: Genomic screening to identify individuals with Lynch Syndrome (LS) and those with a high polygenic risk score (PRS) promises to personalize colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Understanding its clinical and economic impact is needed to inform screening guidelines and reimbursement policies. METHODS: We developed a Markov model to simulate individuals over a lifetime. We compared LS+PRS genomic screening with standard of care (SOC) for a cohort of US adults at age 30. The Markov model included health states of no CRC, CRC stages (A-D), and death. We estimated incidence, mortality, and discounted economic outcomes of the population under different interventions. RESULTS: Screening 1000 individuals for LS+PRS resulted in 1.36 fewer CRC cases and 0.65 fewer deaths compared with SOC. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $124,415 per quality-adjusted life year; screening had a 69% probability of being cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/quality-adjusted life year . Setting the PRS threshold at the 90th percentile of the LS+PRS screening program to define individuals at high risk was most likely to be cost-effective compared with 95th, 85th, and 80th percentiles. CONCLUSION: Population-level LS+PRS screening is marginally cost-effective, and a threshold of 90th percentile is more likely to be cost-effective than other thresholds.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a virtually administered pain coping skills training intervention in women with breast cancer in underserved areas.

OBJECTIVES: Women with cancer who live in medically underserved areas could benefit from behavioral pain interventions, but access is limited. A randomized trial reported that a 4-session virtual program incorporating pain coping skills training (mPCST) was effective in improving pain outcomes compared to an attention-control condition. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of mPCST vs. control. METHODS: Data on medical resource use, therapist time, and participants' attendance at intervention sessions and time associated with travel and using a mobile app were collected. The 5-level EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D-5L), a preference-weighted measure of health-related quality of life (HRQOL), was administered at baseline, after the intervention period, and 3 and 6 months later. Medicare payments were used to value medical resource use and therapist time to deliver mPCST. Patient time was valued using the average US wage. RESULTS: Medical resource utilization was similar for both groups, but hospitalizations trended higher in the mPCST group. EQ-5D-5L preference weights were higher by an average of 0.066 (p = 0.04) with mPCST across the follow-up period, representing an incremental gain of 0.04 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (95% CI: 0.00-0.08). When including the base-case cost of mPCST of \$500 vs. \$0 for the control group, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was \$12,725 per QALY (95% CI: 5,566-69,343). Including the value of patient time added \$303 to mPCST costs resulting in an ICER of \$20,438 per QALY (95% CI: 9,051-111,403). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: mPCST is a cost-effective program that improves HRQOL for women with cancer living in medically underserved areas.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of 3D Total-Body Photography for People at High Risk of Melanoma.

IMPORTANCE: Greater use of novel digital technologies could be associated with improved health outcomes and save health care costs by detecting smaller melanomas earlier (needing less treatment) or benign tumors (needing no treatment). OBJECTIVE: To compare costs and health effects of 3-dimensional (3D) total-body photography (TBP) and sequential digital dermoscopy imaging (SDDI) vs usual care for early detection of melanoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prespecified cost-effectiveness analysis using randomized clinical trial (n = 309) data with 2 years of follow-up was conducted at a research hospital in Brisbane, Australia, and took a health system perspective. It included adults 18 years or older at high risk of developing a primary or subsequent melanoma. INTERVENTION: The intervention group received usual care plus clinical skin examinations by junior clinicians at baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months with 3D TBP-SDDI reviewed by a teledermatologist. The control group continued to receive usual care and completed online surveys every 6 months. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Government health care costs, patient out-of-pocket costs, numbers of benign and malignant skin tumor excisions, and quality-adjusted life-years. Skin biopsy, excisions, pathology, and their costs were collected using administrative claims data. Quality of life was collected using the EuroQol-5D-5L. RESULTS: The trial included 314 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.6 [12.8] years; 194 female individuals [62%]) who completed all of the study procedures (158 in the intervention and 156 in the control groups). Compared with controls, intervention group participants had fewer melanoma excisions, more keratinocyte carcinomas and benign excisions, and more biopsy specimens. Over 24 months, mean per-person costs (analyzed in Australian dollars and converted to US$) for the intervention group were $1708 (95% CI, $1455-$1961) vs $763 (95% CI, $655-$870) for controls, an incremental cost of $945 (95% CI, $738-$1157) to provide the intervention. Total quality-adjusted life-years per person were similar for the intervention (1.84; 95% CI, 1.82-1.86) and control groups (1.84; 95% CI, 1.83-1.86). The incremental cost per additional malignant skin tumor excised was $40 (95% CI, $34-$48). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Over 2 years of the trial, the 3D TBP-SDDI model by junior clinicians and teledermatologist review generated higher costs and detected similar numbers of malignant tumors than usual care in a high-risk melanoma cohort. Cost-effectiveness is a necessary but not sufficient consideration for implementation. Other benefits of 3D TBP-SDDI may arise once artificial intelligence clinician support systems are integrated, and more research is needed to understand factors associated with costs and whether there are other benefits of 3D TBP-SDDI.

Adult↗

PubMed2025

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder in Pregnancy and Its Impact on Birth Outcomes.

IMPORTANCE: For the first time in nearly 2 decades, the US infant mortality rate has increased, coinciding with a rise in overdose-related deaths as a leading cause of pregnancy-associated mortality in some states. Prematurity and low birth weight-often linked to opioid use in pregnancy-are major contributors. OBJECTIVE: To assess the health and economic impact of perinatal opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment on maternal and postpartum health, infant health in the first year of life, and infant long-term health. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a cost-effectiveness, population-based analysis using a stochastic time-to-event discrete-event simulation model to simulate the clinical progression and outcomes for hypothetical pregnant individuals with OUD who initiate treatment during pregnancy. In addition, a scenario analysis was conducted assuming that individuals were stable taking OUD treatment before pregnancy and continued treatment during pregnancy. Data were analyzed from May to September 2024. EXPOSURES: Study exposures included outpatient methadone, buprenorphine monotherapy, and buprenorphine-naloxone; outpatient methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone after inpatient-managed withdrawal; and inpatient-managed withdrawal with and without an intensive behavioral component. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Outcomes included return to illicit use; fatal and nonfatal overdose; incremental discounted costs; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), which are a combined measure of mortality and morbidity; net health benefit; infant mortality within the first year of life; preterm birth; low birth weight; and neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS). RESULTS: In this economic evaluation of a hypothetical cohort of 100 000 pregnant individuals (mean [SD] starting age, 29 [5.6] years), in the pregnancy and postpartum simulation, buprenorphine dominated all strategies, yet methadone was a viable alternative. In the combined infant lifetime model, compared with methadone, buprenorphine showed an incremental effect of 0.262 QALYs per person, totaling 20 960 QALYs for 80 000 Medicaid-affected mother-infant dyads (IQR uncertainty interval [UI] 25th to 75th percentiles, 14 880-27 040 QALYs); mean cost savings of $21 512 per person, totaling $1.72 billion (IQR UI, $1.46-1.98 billion). Compared with naltrexone, buprenorphine showed an incremental effect ranging from 0.228 to 0.229 QALYs per person; 18 240 of 18 320 total QALYs for 80 000 mother-infant dyads (IQR UI, 13 840-22 720 QALYs; naltrexone-oral; IQR UI, 13 760-22 880 QALYs; naltrexone-extended release [XR]). Mean cost savings ranged from $25 316 per person ($2.03 billion; IQR UI, $1.83-$2.21 billion; naltrexone-oral) to $46 437 per person ($3.71 billion; IQR UI, $3.47-$3.96 billion; naltrexone-XR). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Results of this analysis suggest that both methadone and buprenorphine remained viable options for managing OUD during pregnancy and post partum; however, buprenorphine offered the greatest benefits in the lifetime models that account for infant outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Meta-analysis and pharmacoeconomic study of rasagiline versus selegiline in the treatment of Parkinson's disease.

OBJECTIVE: Given the persistent absence of direct head-to-head trials, this study aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of rasagiline versus selegiline as early-stage monotherapy for Parkinson's disease (PD), informing clinical selection and healthcare policies in China. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to April 2026. Focusing on short-term outcomes (10-16 weeks), an adjusted indirect treatment comparison (ITC) using placebo as a common anchor evaluated symptom improvement (UPDRS total scores) and adverse event (AE) incidence. For economic evaluation, a 2-year Markov model was constructed from a Chinese healthcare-system perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated alongside robust sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Ten RCTs (rasagiline: 6; selegiline: 4) were included. The ITC revealed no statistically significant differences between rasagiline and selegiline in short-term symptomatic relief (Mean Difference = -0.82, 95% CI [-2.08, 0.44], p = 0.203) or AE risk (Odds Ratio = 0.83, 95% CI [0.50, 1.38], p = 0.475). The overall evidence certainty was rated as moderate. Economically, the base-case simulation indicated rasagiline yielded a marginal benefit of 0.0088 QALYs over selegiline but incurred an additional 17,111.10 Yuan. This resulted in an ICER of 1,951,505.55 Yuan/QALY, substantially exceeding the conventional willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSION: Supported by moderate-certainty evidence, rasagiline and selegiline provide comparable short-term efficacy and safety for early-stage PD monotherapy. However, at its current pricing, rasagiline is not cost-effective. Significant price reductions or definitive proof of long-term superiority are required to justify its economic value.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Cost-effectiveness of alternative cascade screening strategies for familial hypercholesterolemia with realistic cascade screening acceptance rates and use of novel treatment.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cascade screening (CS) for familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) has been found to be cost-effective in many published studies. However, most existing studies (i) ignored or overstated first-degree relative (FDR) participation rate (as 60-100 %), (ii) did not consider novel and expensive therapies, e.g. PCSK9 inhibitors (PCSK9i), and (iii) were conducted outside of Asia. This study, conducted in Singapore, where FDR participation rate is about 25 % among probands who have known pathogenic variants, aims to identify drivers of cost-effectiveness of CS protocols for FH. METHODS: Four CS protocols, which vary in the application of genetic tests, were examined using a hybrid decision tree-Markov model. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify drivers of cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Cascade acceptance rates are key drivers of cost-effectiveness. Other drivers include age of proband, prevalence of FH among probands, health-related quality of life loss with cardiovascular disease, timeliness of starting treatment post-screening, treatment effectiveness, cost of PCSK9i and discount rate for cost and QALY. With cascade acceptance rates observed in Singapore, among various screening protocols examined, probabilities of being cost-effective ranged from 86 % to 95 % when no access to PCSK9i and ranged from 75 % to 98 % when PCSK9i are provided. The most cost-effective protocol differs depending on cascade acceptance rates and whether PCSK9i is provided. CONCLUSION: For better cost-effectiveness of CS for FH, health systems need to look for ways to improve proband's willingness to share contact of their relatives and relatives' willingness to be screened and to lower the cost of novel treatment. Other ways to improve cost-effectiveness include to select age groups for proband screening, improve screening detection rate among probands, and start timely treatment post-screening.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Health-Related quality of life (HRQoL) and health state utility values (HSUV) in patients with head and neck Cancer: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancer (HNC) and its treatment can substantially impair speech, swallowing, eating, appearance, and social functioning, resulting in persistent reductions in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although the EuroQol 5-Dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) is widely used to assess generic HRQoL and derive health state utility values (HSUVs), EQ-5D-based evidence in HNC has not been comprehensively synthesized. This study aimed to summarize EQ-5D-based HRQoL and HSUVs in HNC, estimate pooled utility and EQ-VAS scores, explore subgroup differences, and identify predictors of poorer HRQoL. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261307907). PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched from inception to February 10, 2026. Studies reporting baseline EQ-5D utility values and/or EQ-VAS scores in patients with HNC were included. Random-effects meta-analyses using the DerSimonian-Laird (DL) estimator with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) adjustment were performed to pool mean scores. Between-study variance (τ2) and 95 % prediction intervals (PI) were calculated to capture parameter dispersion. Subgroup analyses were conducted across clinical and methodological vectors. RESULTS: Twenty studies involving 7,403 patients were included. The pooled mean EQ-5D utility score was 0.79 (95 % CI: 0.75-0.83; τ2 = 0.0011; 95 % PI: 0.72-0.86). The pooled mean EQ-VAS score was 69.36 (95 % CI: 65.71-73.01; τ2 = 38.4586; 95 % PI: 55.11-83.61). Extreme heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 96.4 % and 97.1 %, respectively). Utility values were significantly higher in studies utilizing the EQ-5D-5 L than the EQ-5D-3 L version (0.82 vs. 0.76). By tumor subsite, nasopharyngeal cancer showed the highest utility value (0.85, exploratory), whereas oral cancer demonstrated the lowest (0.73). Adjusted multivariable models revealed that advanced stage, high treatment intensity, severe pharyngolaryngeal pain, dysphagia, malnutrition, and older age were robust predictors of poorer HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HNC experience substantial and persistent HRQoL impairment, with meaningful variations driven by tumor subsites and instrument versions. In light of the extreme heterogeneity, these pooled findings establish a macro-level, broad reference estimate rather than a fixed target. These parameters directly inform localized survivorship care planning, health technology evaluations, and cost-utility decision-making modeling in head and neck oncology.

Humans↗