BackgroundMalaria causes significant mortality and morbidity in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), especially among children less than five years of age (U5 children). Although the economic burden of malaria in this region has been assessed previously, the extent and variation of this burden remains unclear. This study aimed to estimate the economic costs of malaria in U5 children in three countries (Ghana, Tanzania and Kenya).MethodsHealth system and household costs previously estimated were integrated with costs associated with co-morbidities, complications and productivity losses due to death. Several models were developed to estimate the expected treatment cost per episode per child, across different age groups, by level of severity and with or without controlling for treatment-seeking behaviour. Total annual costs (2009) were calculated by multiplying the treatment cost per episode according to severity by the number of episodes. Annual health system prevention costs were added to this estimate.ResultsHousehold and health system costs per malaria episode ranged from approximately US$ 5 for non-complicated malaria in Tanzania to US$ 288 for cerebral malaria with neurological sequelae in Kenya. On average, up to 55% of these costs in Ghana and Tanzania and 70% in Kenya were assumed by the household, and of these costs 46% in Ghana and 85% in Tanzania and Kenya were indirect costs. Expected values of potential future earnings (in thousands) lost due to premature death of children aged 0–1 and 1–4 years were US$ 11.8 and US$ 13.8 in Ghana, US$ 6.9 and US$ 8.1 in Tanzania, and US$ 7.6 and US$ 8.9 in Kenya, respectively. The expected treatment costs per episode per child ranged from a minimum of US$ 1.29 for children aged 2–11 months in Tanzania to a maximum of US$ 22.9 for children aged 0–24 months in Kenya. The total annual costs (in millions) were estimated at US$ 37.8, US$ 131.9 and US$ 109.0 nationwide in Ghana, Tanzania and Kenya and included average treatment costs per case of US$ 11.99, US$ 6.79 and US$ 20.54, respectively.ConclusionThis study provides important insight into the economic burden of malaria in SSA that may assist policy makers when designing future malaria control interventions.

Benralizumab is an interleukin-5 receptor α-directed cytolytic monoclonal antibody that directly depletes eosinophils. Its relative efficacy versus other IL-5-targeted treatments for patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma is not yet fully characterised.We performed a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of benralizumab versus mepolizumab and reslizumab. Trials were selected through systematic review and evaluation of trial methods. Benralizumab patient-level data were weighted to match treatment-effect-modifying patient characteristics of comparator trials before indirect efficacy comparisons.After matching adjustment, benralizumab and mepolizumab reduced exacerbations versus placebo by 52% and 49%, respectively (rate ratio [RR] 0.94, 95% CI 0.78–1.13; n=1524) and reduced the rate of exacerbations requiring hospitalisation/emergency department visit by 52% and 52%, respectively (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.57–1.75; n=1524). Benralizumab and mepolizumab similarly improved pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s at 32 weeks (difference 0.03 L, 95% CI −0.06–0.12; n=1443). Benralizumab and reslizumab patient populations were too dissimilar to generate a sufficient effective sample size to produce a reliable estimate for MAIC.MAIC is a robust way to indirectly compare treatment efficacies from trials with heterogeneous patient populations. When baseline patient characteristics were matched across asthma trials, benralizumab and mepolizumab yielded similar efficacy.

BackgroundAclidinium bromide is a new long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) indicated for maintenance bronchodilator treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy of aclidinium was compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium, using a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in moderate-to-severe COPD patients.MethodsA systematic review was performed to identify RCTs evaluating aclidinium 400 μg twice daily (BID), glycopyrronium 50 μg once daily (OD), tiotropium 18 μg OD, or tiotropium 5 μg OD in adults with moderate-to-severe COPD. The outcomes of interest were: trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1); St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and proportion of patients achieving ≥4 unit change; Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) focal score and proportion of patients achieving ≥1 point change. The results were synthesized by means of a Bayesian NMA.ResultsTwenty-one studies (22,542 patients) were included: aclidinium 400 μg BID (three studies); tiotropium 5 μg OD (three studies); tiotropium 18 μg OD (13 studies); and glycopyrronium 50 μg OD (two studies). Regarding trough FEV1 at 24 weeks, aclidinium demonstrated comparable efficacy to tiotropium 5 μg (difference in change from baseline [CFB]), (0.02 L [95% credible interval CrI −0.05, 0.09]); tiotropium 18 μg (0.02 L [95% CrI −0.05, 0.08]); and glycopyrronium (0.00 L [95% CrI −0.07, 0.07]). Aclidinium resulted in higher improvement in SGRQ score at 24 weeks, compared to tiotropium 5 μg (difference in CFB, −2.44 [95% CrI −4.82, −0.05]); and comparable results to tiotropium 18 μg (−1.80 [95% CrI −4.52, 0.14]) and glycopyrronium (−1.52 [95% CrI −4.08, 1.03]). Improvements in TDI score were comparable for all treatments.ConclusionMaintenance treatment with aclidinium 400 μg BID is expected to produce similar improvements in lung function, health-related quality of life, and dyspnea compared to tiotropium 5 μg OD; tiotropium 18 μg OD; and glycopyrronium 50 μg OD.

Antipsychotic agents haloperidol and risperidone are more cost-effective than olanzapine. Strategies prioritizing the use of antipsychotics with better cost-effectiveness could optimize resource allocation without necessarily compromising the health of patients treated through the Sistema Unico de Saúde.

No abstract