Cost-Utility Analysis of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Azathioprine Based Regimens for Maintenance Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis

Background/Aims. We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and azathioprine (AZA) as maintenance therapy for patients with Class III and Class IV lupus nephritis (LN), from a United States (US) perspective. Methods. Using a Markov model, we conducted a cost-utility an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Robert Nee, Ian Rivera, Dustin J. Little, Christina M. Yuan, Kevin C. Abbott
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2015-01-01
Series:International Journal of Nephrology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/917567
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849691509813673984
author Robert Nee
Ian Rivera
Dustin J. Little
Christina M. Yuan
Kevin C. Abbott
author_facet Robert Nee
Ian Rivera
Dustin J. Little
Christina M. Yuan
Kevin C. Abbott
author_sort Robert Nee
collection DOAJ
description Background/Aims. We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and azathioprine (AZA) as maintenance therapy for patients with Class III and Class IV lupus nephritis (LN), from a United States (US) perspective. Methods. Using a Markov model, we conducted a cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective over a lifetime horizon. The modeled population comprised patients with proliferative LN who received maintenance therapy with MMF (2 gm/day) versus AZA (150 mg/day) for 3 years. Risk estimates of clinical events were based on a Cochrane meta-analysis while costs and utilities were retrieved from other published sources. Outcome measures included costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), and net monetary benefit. Results. The base-case model showed that, compared with AZA strategy, the ICER for MMF was $2,630,592/QALY at 3 years. Over the patients’ lifetime, however, the ICER of MMF compared to AZA was $6,454/QALY. Overall, the ICER results from various sensitivity and subgroup analyses did not alter the conclusions of the model simulation. Conclusions. In the short term, an AZA-based regimen confers greater value than MMF for the maintenance therapy of proliferative LN. From a lifelong perspective, however, MMF is cost-effective compared to AZA.
format Article
id doaj-art-e83e017556464c0e9769da0b7e763394
institution DOAJ
issn 2090-214X
2090-2158
language English
publishDate 2015-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series International Journal of Nephrology
spelling doaj-art-e83e017556464c0e9769da0b7e7633942025-08-20T03:21:01ZengWileyInternational Journal of Nephrology2090-214X2090-21582015-01-01201510.1155/2015/917567917567Cost-Utility Analysis of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Azathioprine Based Regimens for Maintenance Therapy of Proliferative Lupus NephritisRobert Nee0Ian Rivera1Dustin J. Little2Christina M. Yuan3Kevin C. Abbott4Department of Nephrology, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, 8901 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20889-5600, USADepartment of Nephrology, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, 8901 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20889-5600, USADepartment of Nephrology, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, 8901 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20889-5600, USADepartment of Nephrology, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, 8901 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20889-5600, USADepartment of Nephrology, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, 8901 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20889-5600, USABackground/Aims. We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and azathioprine (AZA) as maintenance therapy for patients with Class III and Class IV lupus nephritis (LN), from a United States (US) perspective. Methods. Using a Markov model, we conducted a cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective over a lifetime horizon. The modeled population comprised patients with proliferative LN who received maintenance therapy with MMF (2 gm/day) versus AZA (150 mg/day) for 3 years. Risk estimates of clinical events were based on a Cochrane meta-analysis while costs and utilities were retrieved from other published sources. Outcome measures included costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), and net monetary benefit. Results. The base-case model showed that, compared with AZA strategy, the ICER for MMF was $2,630,592/QALY at 3 years. Over the patients’ lifetime, however, the ICER of MMF compared to AZA was $6,454/QALY. Overall, the ICER results from various sensitivity and subgroup analyses did not alter the conclusions of the model simulation. Conclusions. In the short term, an AZA-based regimen confers greater value than MMF for the maintenance therapy of proliferative LN. From a lifelong perspective, however, MMF is cost-effective compared to AZA.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/917567
spellingShingle Robert Nee
Ian Rivera
Dustin J. Little
Christina M. Yuan
Kevin C. Abbott
Cost-Utility Analysis of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Azathioprine Based Regimens for Maintenance Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis
International Journal of Nephrology
title Cost-Utility Analysis of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Azathioprine Based Regimens for Maintenance Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis
title_full Cost-Utility Analysis of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Azathioprine Based Regimens for Maintenance Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis
title_fullStr Cost-Utility Analysis of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Azathioprine Based Regimens for Maintenance Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis
title_full_unstemmed Cost-Utility Analysis of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Azathioprine Based Regimens for Maintenance Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis
title_short Cost-Utility Analysis of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Azathioprine Based Regimens for Maintenance Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis
title_sort cost utility analysis of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine based regimens for maintenance therapy of proliferative lupus nephritis
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/917567
work_keys_str_mv AT robertnee costutilityanalysisofmycophenolatemofetilversusazathioprinebasedregimensformaintenancetherapyofproliferativelupusnephritis
AT ianrivera costutilityanalysisofmycophenolatemofetilversusazathioprinebasedregimensformaintenancetherapyofproliferativelupusnephritis
AT dustinjlittle costutilityanalysisofmycophenolatemofetilversusazathioprinebasedregimensformaintenancetherapyofproliferativelupusnephritis
AT christinamyuan costutilityanalysisofmycophenolatemofetilversusazathioprinebasedregimensformaintenancetherapyofproliferativelupusnephritis
AT kevincabbott costutilityanalysisofmycophenolatemofetilversusazathioprinebasedregimensformaintenancetherapyofproliferativelupusnephritis