TY - JOUR
T1 - A pharmacoeconomic analysis from Italian guidelines for the management of prolactinomas
AU - Basile, Michele
AU - Valentini, Ilaria
AU - Attanasio, Roberto
AU - Cozzi, Renato
AU - Persichetti, Agnese
AU - Samperi, Irene
AU - Scoppola, Alessandro
AU - Auriemma, Renata Simona
AU - De Menis, Ernesto
AU - Esposito, Felice
AU - Ferrante, Emanuele
AU - Iatì, Giuseppe
AU - Mazzatenta, Diego
AU - Poggi, Maurizio
AU - Rudà, Roberta
AU - Tortora, Fabio
AU - Cruciani, Fabio
AU - Mitrova, Zuzana
AU - Saulle, Rosella
AU - Vecchi, Simona
AU - Cappabianca, Paolo
AU - Paoletta, Agostino
AU - Bozzao, Alessandro
AU - Caputo, Marco
AU - Doglietto, Francesco
AU - Ferraù, Francesco
AU - Lania, Andrea Gerardo
AU - Laureti, Stefano
AU - Lello, Stefano
AU - Locatelli, Davide
AU - Maffei, Pietro
AU - Minniti, Giuseppe
AU - Peri, Alessandro
AU - Ruini, Chiara
AU - Settanni, Fabio
AU - Silvani, Antonio
AU - Veronese, Nadia
AU - Grimaldi, Franco
AU - Papini, Enrico
AU - Cicchetti, Americo
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - Background: Prolactinoma, the most common pituitary adenoma, is usually treated with dopamine agonist (DA) therapy like cabergoline. Surgery is second-line therapy, and radiotherapy is used if surgical treatment fails or in relapsing macroprolactinoma. Objective: This study aimed to provide economic evidence for the management of prolactinoma in Italy, using a cost-of-illness and cost-utility analysis that considered various treatment options, including cabergoline, bromocriptine, temozolomide, radiation therapy, and surgical strategies. Methods: The researchers conducted a systematic literature review for each research question on scientific data- bases and surveyed a panel of experts for each therapeutic procedure's specific drivers that contributed to its total cost. Results: The average cost of the first year of treatment was euro2,558.91 and euro3,287.40 for subjects with micro- prolactinoma and macroprolactinoma, respectively. Follow-up costs from the second to the fifth year after ini- tial treatment were euro798.13 and euro1,084.59 per year in both groups. Cabergoline had an adequate cost-utility profile, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of euro3,201.15 compared to bromocriptine, based on a willingness-to-pay of euro40,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the reference economy. Endoscopic sur- gery was more cost-effective than cabergoline, with an ICER of euro44,846.64. Considering a willingness-to-pay of euro40,000/QALY, the baseline findings show cabergoline to have high cost utility and endoscopic surgery just a tad above that. Conclusions: Due to the favorable cost-utility profile and safety of surgical treatment, pituitary surgery should be considered more frequently as the initial therapeutic approach. This management choice could lead to better outcomes and an appropriate allocation of healthcare resources.
AB - Background: Prolactinoma, the most common pituitary adenoma, is usually treated with dopamine agonist (DA) therapy like cabergoline. Surgery is second-line therapy, and radiotherapy is used if surgical treatment fails or in relapsing macroprolactinoma. Objective: This study aimed to provide economic evidence for the management of prolactinoma in Italy, using a cost-of-illness and cost-utility analysis that considered various treatment options, including cabergoline, bromocriptine, temozolomide, radiation therapy, and surgical strategies. Methods: The researchers conducted a systematic literature review for each research question on scientific data- bases and surveyed a panel of experts for each therapeutic procedure's specific drivers that contributed to its total cost. Results: The average cost of the first year of treatment was euro2,558.91 and euro3,287.40 for subjects with micro- prolactinoma and macroprolactinoma, respectively. Follow-up costs from the second to the fifth year after ini- tial treatment were euro798.13 and euro1,084.59 per year in both groups. Cabergoline had an adequate cost-utility profile, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of euro3,201.15 compared to bromocriptine, based on a willingness-to-pay of euro40,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the reference economy. Endoscopic sur- gery was more cost-effective than cabergoline, with an ICER of euro44,846.64. Considering a willingness-to-pay of euro40,000/QALY, the baseline findings show cabergoline to have high cost utility and endoscopic surgery just a tad above that. Conclusions: Due to the favorable cost-utility profile and safety of surgical treatment, pituitary surgery should be considered more frequently as the initial therapeutic approach. This management choice could lead to better outcomes and an appropriate allocation of healthcare resources.
KW - Bromocriptine
KW - Cabergoline
KW - Cost-utility
KW - ICER
KW - Prolactinoma
KW - Bromocriptine
KW - Cabergoline
KW - Cost-utility
KW - ICER
KW - Prolactinoma
UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10807/277284
U2 - 10.33393/grhta.2024.2601
DO - 10.33393/grhta.2024.2601
M3 - Article
SN - 2284-2403
VL - 11
SP - 1
EP - 16
JO - Global and Regional Health Technology Assessment
JF - Global and Regional Health Technology Assessment
ER -