» Articles » PMID: 20384980

Incorporating Equity-efficiency Interactions in Cost-effectiveness Analysis-three Approaches Applied to Breast Cancer Control

Overview
Journal Value Health
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2010 Apr 14
PMID 20384980
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The past decade, medical technology assessment focused on cost-effectiveness analysis, yet there is an increasing need to consider equity implications of health interventions as well. This article addresses three equity-efficiency trade-off methods proposed in the literature. Moreover, it demonstrates their impact on cost-effectiveness analyses in current breast cancer control options for women of different age groups.

Methods: We adapted an existing breast cancer model to estimate cost-effectiveness and equity effects of breast cancer interventions. We applied three methods to quantify the equity-efficiency trade-offs: 1) targeting specific groups, comparing disparities at baseline and in different intervention scenarios; 2) equity weighting, valuing low and high health gains differently; and 3) multicriteria decision analysis, weighing multiple equity and efficiency criteria. We compared the resulting composite league tables of all approaches.

Results: The approaches show that a comprehensive breast cancer program, including screening, for women below 75 years of age was most attractive in both the group targeting approach and the equity weighting approach. Such control programs would reduce disparities with 56% and at euro1908 per equity quality-adjusted life-year gained. In the multicriteria approach, a comprehensive treatment program for women below 75 years of age and treatment in stage III breast cancer were most attractive, with both an 82% selection probability, followed by screening programs for the two age groups.

Conclusion: In the three equity weighing approaches, targeting women below 75 years of age was more cost-effective and led to more equitable distributions of health. This likely is similar in other fatal diseases with similar age distributions. The approaches may lead to different outcomes in nonfatal disease.

Citing Articles

Health Equity Considerations in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Insights from an Umbrella Review.

Muir J, Radhakrishnan A, Ozer Stillman I, Sarri G Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2024; 16:581-596.

PMID: 39184340 PMC: 11344546. DOI: 10.2147/CEOR.S471827.


From Race to Racism and Disparities to Equity: An Actionable Biopsychosocial Approach to Breast Cancer Outcomes.

Reeder-Hayes K, Roberson M, Wheeler S, Abdou Y, Troester M Cancer J. 2023; 29(6):316-322.

PMID: 37963365 PMC: 10651167. DOI: 10.1097/PPO.0000000000000677.


How National Health Insurance Coverage Policy Affected the Use of Trastuzumab and Rituximab in China: A Bicentric Retrospective Study.

Shang L, Lin Y, Fang W, Liu Y, Bao Y, Li X Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2023; 16:1739-1753.

PMID: 37692767 PMC: 10488736. DOI: 10.2147/RMHP.S420899.


Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment.

Meusel V, Mentzakis E, Baji P, Fiorentini G, Paolucci F Int J Health Econ Manag. 2023; 23(3):411-431.

PMID: 37184821 PMC: 10462569. DOI: 10.1007/s10754-023-09347-y.


Extending analytic methods for economic evaluation in implementation science.

OLeary M, Hassmiller Lich K, Frerichs L, Leeman J, Reuland D, Wheeler S Implement Sci. 2022; 17(1):27.

PMID: 35428260 PMC: 9013084. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-022-01192-w.