Predicting the intervention threshold for initiating osteoporosis treatment among postmenopausal women in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis based on real-world data.
Chinese
FRAX
Markov
cost-effectiveness
osteoporosis
zoledronate
Journal
Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA
ISSN: 1433-2965
Titre abrégé: Osteoporos Int
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9100105
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
13
02
2019
accepted:
18
09
2019
pubmed:
23
11
2019
medline:
5
2
2021
entrez:
23
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study built a micro-simulation Markov model to determine the treatment threshold of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women in Mainland China. Treatment with zoledronate is cost-effective when FRAX-based (Fracture risk assessment tool) fracture probability is over 7%. The purpose of this study is to estimate FRAX-based fracture probabilities in Mainland China using real-world data, at which intervention could be cost-effective. We developed a micro-simulation Markov model to capture osteoporosis states and relevant morbidities including hip fracture, vertebral fracture, and wrist fracture. Baseline characteristics including incidences of osteoporosis and distribution of risk factors were derived from the Peking Vertebral Fracture study, the largest prospective cohort study of postmenopausal women in Mainland China. We projected incidences of fractures and deaths by age groups under two treatment scenarios: 1) no treatment, and 2) zoledronate. We also projected total quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and total costs including fracture management and osteoporosis drugs for cost-effectiveness analysis. Cost-effective intervention thresholds were calculated based on the Chinese FRAX model. Treatment with zoledronate was cost-effective when the 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture based on FRAX was above 7%. The FRAX threshold increased by age from 51 to 65 years old, and decreased in elder age groups, ranging from 4% to 9%. Using real-world data, our model indicated that widespread use of zoledronate was of both clinical and economic benefit among Chinese postmenopausal women. Using a FRAX-based intervention threshold of 7% with zoledronate should permit cost-effective access to therapy to patients and contribute to reducing the disease burden of osteoporosis in Mainland China.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31754756
doi: 10.1007/s00198-019-05173-6
pii: 10.1007/s00198-019-05173-6
pmc: PMC7010623
doi:
Substances chimiques
Bone Density Conservation Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
307-316Subventions
Organisme : Postdoctoral Research Foundation of China
ID : 2018M631396
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : No. 81070687, 81170805 and 81670714
Organisme : Beijing Natural Science Foundation
ID : No. 7121012
Organisme : National Key Program of Clinical Science
ID : WBYZ2011-873
Organisme : Collaborative Innovation Team Project of Medical and Health Science and Technology Innovation Project of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences
ID : No.2016-I2M-3-003
Références
Bone. 2012 Apr;50(4):917-24
pubmed: 22270056
Calcif Tissue Int. 2016 Aug;99(2):131-41
pubmed: 27016370
N Engl J Med. 1995 Nov 30;333(22):1437-43
pubmed: 7477143
Osteoporos Int. 2012 Mar;23(3):871-8
pubmed: 21562875
Pharmacoeconomics. 2013 May;31(5):361-7
pubmed: 23529207
Bone. 2008 Jan;42(1):4-15
pubmed: 18156107
Osteoporos Int. 2012 Mar;23(3):879-85
pubmed: 21461720
Value Health. 2008 Jan-Feb;11(1):44-7
pubmed: 18237359
Clin Ther. 2013 Jul;35(7):1005-15
pubmed: 23831360
Qual Life Res. 2011 Apr;20(3):309-20
pubmed: 21042861
Endocrine. 2014 Mar;45(2):195-7
pubmed: 24146412
Osteoporos Int. 2012 Nov;23(11):2579-89
pubmed: 22222755
Arch Osteoporos. 2016 Dec;11(1):30
pubmed: 27679503
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Jun;19(6):781-6
pubmed: 17985071
Osteoporos Int. 2015 Jul;26(7):1949-57
pubmed: 25740208
JAMA. 2009 Feb 4;301(5):513-21
pubmed: 19190316
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Dec 6;155(11):751-61
pubmed: 22147714
N Engl J Med. 2007 May 3;356(18):1809-22
pubmed: 17476007
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23;(1):CD001155
pubmed: 18253985
Osteoporos Int. 2017 Feb;28(2):529-538
pubmed: 27581955
Health Technol Assess. 2002;6(29):1-146
pubmed: 12654239
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Apr;19(4):437-47
pubmed: 18292976
J Bone Miner Metab. 2011 Nov;29(6):744-51
pubmed: 21644058
Osteoporos Int. 2014 Aug;25(8):1987-97
pubmed: 24562840
J Bone Miner Metab. 2016 Nov;34(6):714-722
pubmed: 26590159
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Dec 20;155(12):827-38
pubmed: 22184690
Menopause. 2011 Nov;18(11):1237-43
pubmed: 21747303
Osteoporos Int. 2015 May;26(5):1477-89
pubmed: 25567776
Osteoporos Int. 2014 Mar;25(3):1017-23
pubmed: 24196720
Menopause. 2014 May;21(5):515-21
pubmed: 24045674
Osteoporos Int. 2014 Jul;25(7):1853-60
pubmed: 24691649
J Bone Miner Metab. 2014 Mar;32(2):206-14
pubmed: 23784553
Osteoporos Int. 2016 Dec;27(12):3599-3606
pubmed: 27392466
Osteoporos Int. 2016 Jul;27(7):2259-2269
pubmed: 26815042
Osteoporos Int. 2015 Jul;26(7):1929-37
pubmed: 25761729
Value Health. 2014 Jul;17(5):597-604
pubmed: 25128053
Osteoporos Int. 2019 Jan;30(1):45-57
pubmed: 30382319
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Oct;19(10):1395-408
pubmed: 18751937
J Clin Densitom. 2007 Jul-Sep;10(3):276-84
pubmed: 17604665
J Bone Miner Res. 1997 Jan;12(1):16-23
pubmed: 9240721
Osteoporos Int. 2017 Sep;28(9):2583-2590
pubmed: 28560474