Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
OBJECTIVES: Infertility imposes considerable clinical and economic burden, and the high costs of fertility care are a major barrier to payers. This study assessed the cost differences of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (HP-hMG) versus recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocols in predicted high-responders from the US payer perspective. METHODS: A discrete event simulation model was built to perform a cost-comparison analysis of HP-hMG versus rFSH in a cohort of predicted high-responders undergoing up to three embryo transfer cycles, informed by efficacy data from the MEGASET-HR trial. The model considered an event-based treatment pathway and transition probabilities were derived from MEGASET-HR. A variable time horizon was employed, and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses conducted. RESULTS: Subjects undergoing COS with HP-hMG and rFSH demonstrated comparable live birth rates following three in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, with 161 live births with HP-hMG and 152 live births with rFSH, per 310 high-responders. The total cost saving per live birth in subjects receiving HP-hMG versus rFSH was US3024. These cost savings were largely driven by the need for fewer embryo transfers to achieve similar efficacy outcomes and a reduced rate of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Following deterministic sensitivity analysis, HP-hMG remained cost saving in all baseline parameter variations. No parameters led to rFSH providing cost savings when compared with HP-hMG. CONCLUSION: Comparable clinical outcomes can be achieved at a lower cost when using HP-hMG versus rFSH based COS protocols in a cohort of predicted high-responders. Such cost savings may reduce the economic burden infertility currently presents to US healthcare providers and those seeking fertility care.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Andrew F. Khair
Tray Brown
Marie Markert
PharmacoEconomics - Open
Health Economics and Outcomes Research (United Kingdom)
Ferring Pharmaceuticals (Denmark)
Ferring Pharmaceuticals (United States)
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Khair et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0d00c73e45a41523cc8f8c — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-023-00429-8
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: