BackgroundAnnual trivalent influenza vaccines (TIV) containing three influenza strains (A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and one B) have been recommended for the prevention of influenza. However, worldwide co-circulation of two distinct B lineages (Victoria and Yamagata) and difficulties in predicting which lineage will predominate each season have led to the development of quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIV), which include both B lineages. Our analysis evaluates the public health benefit and associated influenza-related costs avoided which would have been obtained by using QIV rather than TIV in Australia over the period 2002–2012.MethodsA static model stratified by age group was used, focusing on people at increased risk of influenza as defined by the Australian vaccination recommendations. B-lineage cross-protection was accounted for. We calculated the potential impact of QIV compared with TIV over the seasons 2002–2012 (2009 pandemic year excluded) using Australian data on influenza circulation, vaccine coverage, hospitalisation and mortality rates as well as unit costs, and international data on vaccine effectiveness, influenza attack rate, GP consultation rate and working days lost. Third-party payer and societal influenza-related costs were estimated in 2014 Australian dollars. Sensitivity analyses were conducted.ResultsUsing QIV instead of TIV over the period 2002–2012 would have prevented an estimated 68,271 additional influenza cases, 47,537 GP consultations, 3,522 hospitalisations and 683 deaths in the population at risk of influenza. These results translate into influenza-related societal costs avoided of $46.5 million. The estimated impact of QIV was higher for young children and the elderly. The overall impact of QIV depended mainly on vaccine effectiveness and the influenza attack rate attributable to the mismatched B lineage.ConclusionThe broader protection offered by QIV would have reduced the number of influenza infections and its related complications, leading to substantial influenza-related costs avoided.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3297-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Annual trivalent influenza vaccines (TIV) containing 2 A strains and one B lineage have been recommended for the prevention of influenza in most of Latin American countries. However, the circulation of 2 B lineages (Victoria and Yamagata) and difficulties in predicting the predominating lineage have led to the development of quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIV), including both B lineages. Thus, the objective was to estimate the public health impact and influenza-related costs if QIV would have been used instead of TIV in 3 Latin American countries. We used a static model over the seasons 2010–2014 in Brazil, 2007–2014 in Colombia and 2006–2014 in Panama, focusing on population groups targeted by local vaccination recommendations: young children, adults with risk factors and the elderly. In Brazil, between 2010 and 2014, using QIV instead of TIV would have avoided US$ 6,200 per 100,000 person-years in societal costs, based on 168 influenza cases, 89 consultations, 3.2 hospitalizations and 0.38 deaths per 100,000 person-years. In Colombia and Panama, these would have ranged from US$ 1,000 to 12,700 (based on 34 cases, 13–25 consultations, 0.6–8.9 hospitalizations and 0.04–1.74 deaths) and from US$ 3,000 to 33,700 (based on 113 cases, 55–82 consultations, 0.5–27.8 hospitalizations and 0.08–6.87 deaths) per 100,000 person-years, respectively. Overall, the broader protection offered by QIV would have reduced the influenza humanistic and economic burden in the 3 countries. Despite the lack of local data leading to several extrapolations, this study is the first to give quantitative estimates of the potential benefits of QIV in Latin America.

ObjectivesLittle is known about the economic burden of influenza‐related hospitalizations in Japan. This study sought to identify the factors that contribute to the total healthcare costs (THCs) associated with hospitalizations due to influenza in the Japanese population.Study designA retrospective cross‐sectional database analysis study.MethodsA structural equation modelling approach was used to analyse a nationwide Japanese hospital claims data. This study included inpatients with at least 1 confirmed diagnosis of influenza and with a hospital stay of at least 2 days, who were admitted between April 2014 and March 2015.ResultsA total of 5261 Japanese inpatients with a diagnosis of influenza were included in the final analysis. The elderly (≥65 years) and the young (≤15 years) comprised more than 85% of patients. The average length of stay (LOS) was 12.5 days, and the mean THC was 5402 US dollars (US$) per hospitalization. One additional hospital day increased the THC by 314 US$. Intensive care unit hospitalizations were linked to higher costs (+4957 US$) compared to regular hospitalizations. The biggest procedure‐related cost drivers, which were also impacted by LOS, were blood transfusions (+6477 US$), tube feedings (+3501 US$) and dialysis (+2992 US$).ConclusionsIn Japan, the economic burden due to influenza‐related hospitalizations for both children and the elderly is considerable and is further impacted by associated comorbidities, diagnostic tests and procedures that prolong the LOS.

Aim: The approved indication for denosumab (120 mg) was expanded in 2018 to include skeletalrelated event (SRE) prevention in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Therefore, a cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing denosumab with zoledronic acid (ZA) for SRE prevention in patients with MM from the national healthcare system perspective in a representative sample of European countries: Austria, Belgium, Greece, and Italy. Methods: The XGEVA global economic model for patients with MM was used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for denosumab vs ZA over a lifetime horizon. Clinical inputs were derived from the denosumab vs ZA randomized, phase 3 study ("20090482") in patients newly-diagnosed with MM, and comprised real-world adjusted SRE rates, serious adverse event (SAE) rates, treatment duration, dose intensity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Economic inputs comprised country-specific denosumab and ZA acquisition and administration costs, SRE and SAE management costs, and discount rates. Health utility decrements associated with MM disease progression, SRE and SAE occurrence, and route of administration were included. Results: Estimated ICERs (cost per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) for denosumab vs ZA in Austria, Belgium, Greece, and Italy were e26,294, e17,737, e6,982, and e27,228, respectively. Using 1-3 times gross domestic product (GDP) per capita per QALY as willingness to pay thresholds, denosumab was 69-94%, 84-96%, 79-96%, and 50-92% likely to be cost-effective vs ZA, respectively. Limitations: Economic inputs were derived from various sources, and time to event inputs were extrapolated from 20090482 study data. Conclusions: Denosumab is cost-effective vs ZA for SRE prevention in patients with MM in Austria, Belgium, Greece, and Italy, based on often-adopted World Health Organization thresholds. This conclusion is robust to changes in model parameters and assumptions. Cost-effectiveness estimates varied across the four countries, reflecting differences in healthcare costs and national economic evaluation guidelines.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT), is the third most common acute cardiovascular disease and represents an important burden for patients and payers.Objective: The aim was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of edoxaban, a non-VKA oral anticoagulant vs. warfarin, the currently most prescribed treatment for VTE in the UK.Study design: A Markov model was built using data from the Hokusai-VTE randomised controlled trial to estimate the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in patients with VTE treated with edoxaban or warfarin over a lifetime horizon, from the UK National Health Services perspective. The model included VTE recurrences, VTE-related complications (post-thrombotic syndrome and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension), and several types of bleeds associated with anticoagulation treatment. Patients were treated during a period of 6 months after the first VTE event, followed by flexible treatment duration (from 6 months to lifetime) after recurrence, i.e., tertiary prevention.Results: Edoxaban was found dominant vs. warfarin with 0.033 additional QALY and £55 less costs. The reduction of patient management costs, specifically monitoring costs, outweighed the higher drug costs. Edoxaban was dominant in all subgroups (index DVT only, all PE cases (PE with or without DVT), PE without DVT and PE with DVT). Cost-savings ranged from £54 to £81 while additional QALYs ranged from 0.031 to 0.046. Edoxaban was found dominant in 88.6% of cases and cost-effective in additional 10.9% of cases considering a £20,000 threshold in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis.Conclusion: Edoxaban may improve patients’ quality of life in a lifetime horizon without additional costs for the healthcare system due to lower bleeding risk and no monitoring cost compared to warfarin.