Premium
Ciclosporin compared with prednisolone therapy for patients with pyoderma gangrenosum: cost‐effectiveness analysis of the STOP GAP trial
Author(s) -
Mason J.M.,
Thomas K.S.,
Ormerod A.D.,
Craig F.E.,
Mitchell E.,
Norrie J.,
Williams H.C.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
british journal of dermatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.304
H-Index - 179
eISSN - 1365-2133
pISSN - 0007-0963
DOI - 10.1111/bjd.15561
Subject(s) - medicine , ciclosporin , prednisolone , pyoderma gangrenosum , cost effectiveness , quality adjusted life year , randomized controlled trial , confidence interval , quality of life (healthcare) , surgery , transplantation , disease , risk analysis (engineering) , nursing
Summary Background Pyoderma gangrenosum ( PG ) is a painful, ulcerating skin disease with poor evidence for management. Prednisolone and ciclosporin are the most commonly used treatments, although not previously compared within a randomized controlled trial ( RCT ). Objectives To compare the cost‐effectiveness of ciclosporin and prednisolone‐initiated treatment for patients with PG . Methods Quality of life (QoL, EuroQoL five dimensions three level questionnaire, EQ ‐5D‐3L) and resource data were collected as part of the STOP GAP trial: a multicentre, parallel‐group, observer‐blind RCT . Within‐trial analysis used bivariate regression of costs and quality‐adjusted life years ( QALY s), with multiple imputation of missing data, informing a probabilistic assessment of incremental treatment cost‐effectiveness from a health service perspective. Results In the base case analysis, when compared with prednisolone, ciclosporin was cost‐effective due to a reduction in costs [net cost: −£1160; 95% confidence interval ( CI ) −2991 to 672] and improvement in QoL (net QALY s: 0·055; 95% CI 0·018–0·093). However, this finding appears driven by a minority of patients with large lesions (≥ 20 cm 2 ) (net cost: −£5310; 95% CI −9729 to −891; net QALY s: 0·077; 95% CI 0·004–0·151). The incremental cost‐effectiveness of ciclosporin for the majority of patients with smaller lesions was £23 374/ QALY , although the estimate is imprecise: the probability of being cost‐effective at a willingness‐to‐pay of £20 000/ QALY was 43%. Conclusions Consistent with the clinical findings of the STOP GAP trial, patients with small lesions should receive treatment guided by the side‐effect profiles of the drugs and patient preference – neither strategy is clearly a preferred use of National Health Service resources. However, ciclosporin‐initiated treatment may be more cost‐effective for patients with large lesions.