Cost-consequence analysis for human recombinant growth hormone (r-hGH) treatment administered via different devices in children with growth hormone deficiency in Italy

Abstract

Jason Foo,1 Mohamad Maghnie,2 Annamaria Colao,3 Ioanna Vlachaki,4 Giorgio Colombo5,61Global Health Economics, Mapi Group (An ICON plc Company), Houten, The Netherlands; 2Department of Pediatrics, IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini Institute, University of Genova, Genova, Italy; 3Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University Federico II of Naples, 80131 Napoli, Italy; 4Global Health Economics, ICON plc, London, UK; 5Department of Drug Science, Pavia University, Pavia, Italy; 6SAVE Studi – Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Milan, ItalyCorrespondence: Jason FooGlobal Health Economics, Mapi Group (An ICON PLC Company), De Molen 84, Houten 3995 AX, The NetherlandsEmail [email protected]: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-consequence of recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) administered via the easypod auto-injector (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) versus conventional devices in children with growth hormone deficiency in Italy.Methods: A patient-level simulation, decision-analytical model was developed to estimate the average height gains and growth hormone treatment costs for a cohort of boys and girls until their bone maturation age. The calculations were performed using listed growth hormone drug prices (base case) and a scenario analysis was also conducted using published tender prices. Costs were discounted at 3%.Results: Due to improved adherence and earlier identification of poor responders, patients receiving somatropin with easypod gained, on average, 3.2 cm more than patients receiving other r-hGH treatments. Somatropin with easypod had the second highest total cost including wastage (€96,710), but had the second lowest cost per cm gained (€7699/cm). In the scenario analysis, somatropin with easypod had the lowest cost per cm gained (€4708/cm) amongst all of the compared treatments.Conclusion: Somatropin with easypod can be cost-saving versus all other r-hGH treatments except Omnitrope when listed drug prices are considered and can be cost-saving versus all other r-hGH treatments when tender drug prices are considered. The easypod device also facilitates cost savings in terms of reduced wastage.Keywords: easypod, growth hormone treatment, growth hormone deficiency, cost-consequence analysis

Keywords

• easypod
• growth hormone treatment
• growth hormone deficiency
• cost-consequence analysis