EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Combination Therapies for Visceral Leishmaniasis in the Indian Subcontinent

Filip Meheus, Manica Balasegaram, Piero Olliaro, Shyam Sundar, Suman Rijal, Md Abul Faiz and Marleen Boelaert

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 2010, vol. 4, issue 9, 1-9

Abstract: Background: Visceral leishmaniasis is a systemic parasitic disease that is fatal unless treated. We assessed the cost and cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis in the Indian subcontinent. In particular we examined whether combination therapies are a cost-effective alternative compared to monotherapies. Methods and Findings: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of all possible mono- and combination therapies for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis in the Indian subcontinent (India, Nepal and Bangladesh) from a societal perspective using a decision analytical model based on a decision tree. Primary data collected in each country was combined with data from the literature and an expert poll (Delphi method). The cost per patient treated and average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios expressed as cost per death averted were calculated. Extensive sensitivity analysis was done to evaluate the robustness of our estimations and conclusions. With a cost of US$92 per death averted, the combination miltefosine-paromomycin was the most cost-effective treatment strategy. The next best alternative was a combination of liposomal amphotericin B with paromomycin with an incremental cost-effectiveness of $652 per death averted. All other strategies were dominated with the exception of a single dose of 10mg per kg of liposomal amphotericin B. While strategies based on liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) were found to be the most effective, its current drug cost of US$20 per vial resulted in a higher average cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis showed the conclusion to be robust to variations in the input parameters over their plausible range. Conclusions: Combination treatments are a cost-effective alternative to current monotherapy for VL. Given their expected impact on the emergence of drug resistance, a switch to combination therapy should be considered once final results from clinical trials are available. Author Summary: Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a serious health problem in the Indian subcontinent affecting the rural poor. It has a significant economic impact on concerned households. The development of drug resistance is a major problem and threatens control efforts under the VL elimination initiative. With an unprecedented choice of antileishmanial drugs (but no newer compound in clinical development), policies that protect these drugs against the emergence of resistance are required. A possible strategy that has been successfully used for malaria and tuberculosis is the use of combination therapies. This study is the first comprehensive assessment of the cost-effectiveness of all possible mono- and combination therapies for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis in the Indian subcontinent. The analysis was done from the societal perspective, including both health provider and household costs. The present work shows that combination treatments are a cost-effective alternative to current monotherapy for VL. Given their expected impact on emergence of drug resistance, the use of combination therapy should be considered in the context of the VL elimination programme in the Indian subcontinent.

Date: 2010
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0000818 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id ... 00818&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pntd00:0000818

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000818

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosntds ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0000818