Cost effectiveness analysis for commonly used human cell and tissue products in the management of diabetic foot ulcers

Author:

Nherera Leo M.1ORCID,Banerjee Jaideep2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Global Market Access; Smith + Nephew 5600 Clearfork Main St Fort Worth 76107 TX USA

2. Medical Science Liaisons and Clinical Strategy Global Clinical Affairs, R&D 5600 Clearfork Main St Fort Worth 76107 TX USA

Abstract

AbstractBackground and AimsThis study considers the cost‐effectiveness of commonly used cellular, acellular, and matrix‑like products (CAMPs) of human origin also known as human cell and tissue products (HCT/Ps) in the management of diabetic foot ulcers.MethodsWe developed a 1‐year economic model assessing six CAMPs [cryopreserved placental membrane with viable cells (vCPM), bioengineered bilayered living cellular construct (BLCC), human fibroblast dermal substitute (hFDS), dehydrated human amnion chorion membrane (dHACM), hypothermically stored amniotic membrane (HSAM) and human amnion membrane allograft (HAMA) which had randomized controlled trial evidence compared with standard of care (SoC). CAMPs were compared indirectly and ranked in order of cost‐effectiveness using SoC as the baseline, from a CMS/Medicare's perspective.ResultsThe mean cost, healed wounds (hw) and QALYs per patient for vCPM is $10,907 (0.914 hw, 0.783 QALYs), for HAMA $11,470 (0.903 hw, 0.780 QALYs), for dHACM $15,862 (0.828 hw, 0.764 QALYs), for BLCC $18,430 (0.816 hw, 0.763 QALYs), for hFDS $19,498 (0.775 hw, 0.757 QALYs), for SoC $19,862 (0.601 hw, 0.732 QALYs) and $24, 214 (0.829, 0.763 QALYs) for HSAM respectively. Over 1 year, vCPM results in cheaper costs overall and better clinical outcomes compared to other CAMPs. Following probabilistic sensitivity analysis, vCPM has a 60%, HAMA 40% probability of being cost‐effective then dHACM, hFDS, BLCC, and lastly HSAM using a $100,000/healed wound or QALY threshold.ConclusionsAll CAMPs were shown to be cost‐effective when compared to SoC in managing DFUs. However, vCPM appears to be the most cost‐effective CAMP over the modelled 52 weeks followed by HAMA, dHACM, hFDS, BLCC, and HSAM. We urge caution in interpreting the results because we currently lack head‐to‐head evidence comparing all these CAMPs and therefore suggest that this analysis be updated when more direct evidence of CAMPs becomes available.

Publisher

Wiley

Reference40 articles.

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.National Diabetes Statistics Report 2020.Estimates of diabetes and its burden in the United States.https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-diabetes-statistics-report.pdf(Accessed 15 October 2023)

2. Economic Costs of Diabetes in the U.S. in 2017

3. Risk factors for lower extremity amputation in patients with diabetic foot ulcers: a hospital-based case–control study

4. Health economics for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: a cost-effectiveness analysis of eight skin substitutes

5. An Economic Evaluation of the Impact, Cost, and Medicare Policy Implications of Chronic Nonhealing Wounds

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3