IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v14y2016i6d10.1007_s40258-016-0259-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Evaluation of Three Frequently Used Gonadotrophins in Assisted Reproduction Techniques in the Management of Infertility in the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • Vassilis Fragoulakis

    (National School of Public Health)

  • Chris P. Pescott

    (Merck KgaA)

  • Jesper M. J. Smeenk

    (St Elisabeth Ziekenhuis)

  • Evert J. P. Santbrink

    (Reinier de Graaf Groep)

  • G. Jur E. Oosterhuis

    (St Antonius Ziekenhuis)

  • Frank J. M. Broekmans

    (Universitair Medisch Centrum Utrecht)

  • Nikos Maniadakis

    (National School of Public Health)

Abstract

Background and Objective Subfertility represents a multidimensional problem associated with significant distress and impaired social well-being. In the Netherlands, an estimated 50,000 couples visit their general practitioner and 30,000 couples seek medical specialist care for subfertility. We conducted an economic evaluation comparing recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (follitropin alfa, r-hFSH, Gonal-F®) with two classes of urinary gonadotrophins—highly purified human menopausal gonadotrophin (hp-HMG, Menopur®) and urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (uFSH, Fostimon®)—for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment in the Netherlands. Methods A pharmacoeconomic model was developed, simulating each step in the IVF protocol from the start of therapy until either a live birth, a new IVF treatment cycle or cessation of IVF, following a long down-regulation protocol. A decision tree combined with a Markov model details progress through each health state, including ovum pickup, fresh embryo transfer, up to two subsequent cryo-preserved embryo transfers, and (ongoing) pregnancy or miscarriage. A health insurer perspective was chosen, and the time horizon was set at a maximum of three consecutive treatment cycles, in accordance with Dutch reimbursement policy. Transition probabilities and costing data were derived from a real-world observational outcomes database (from Germany) and official tariff lists (from the Netherlands). Adverse events were considered equal among the comparators and were therefore excluded from the economic analysis. A Monte Carlo simulation of 5000 iterations was undertaken for each strategy to explore uncertainty and to construct uncertainty intervals (UIs). All cost data were valued in 2013 Euros. The model’s structure, parameters and assumptions were assessed and confirmed by an external clinician with experience in health economics modelling, to inform on the appropriateness of the outcomes and the applicability of the model in the chosen setting. Results The mean total treatment costs were estimated as €5664 for follitropin alfa (95 % UI €5167–6151), €5990 for hp-HMG (95 % UI €5498–6488) and €5760 for uFSH (95 % UI €5256–6246). The probability of a live birth was estimated at 36.1 % (95 % UI 27.4–44.3 %), 33.9 % (95 % UI 26.2–41.5 %) and 34.1 % (95 % UI 25.9–41.8 %) for follitropin alfa, hp-HMG and uFSH, respectively. The costs per live birth estimates were €15,674 for follitropin alfa, €17,636 for hp-HMG and €16,878 for uFSH. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a probability of 72.5 % that follitropin alfa is cost effective at a willingness to pay of €20,000 per live birth. The probabilistic results remained constant under several analyses. Conclusion The present analysis shows that follitropin alfa may represent a cost-effective option in comparison with uFSH and hp-HMG for IVF treatment in the Netherlands healthcare system.

Suggested Citation

  • Vassilis Fragoulakis & Chris P. Pescott & Jesper M. J. Smeenk & Evert J. P. Santbrink & G. Jur E. Oosterhuis & Frank J. M. Broekmans & Nikos Maniadakis, 2016. "Economic Evaluation of Three Frequently Used Gonadotrophins in Assisted Reproduction Techniques in the Management of Infertility in the Netherlands," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(6), pages 719-727, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:14:y:2016:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-016-0259-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-016-0259-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-016-0259-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-016-0259-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul Barriere & Géraldine Porcu-Buisson & Samir Hamamah, 2018. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Gonadotropin Treatments HP-hMG and rFSH for Assisted Reproductive Technology in France: A Markov Model Analysis," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 65-77, February.
    2. Astrid Van Muylder & Thomas D’Hooghe & Jeroen Luyten, 2023. "Economic Evaluation of Medically Assisted Reproduction: A Methodological Systematic Review," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(7-8), pages 973-991, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:14:y:2016:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-016-0259-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.