K. Banz et al., ECONOMIC-EVALUATION OF IMMUNOPROPHYLAXIS IN CHILDREN WITH RECURRENT EAR, NOSE AND THROAT INFECTIONS, PharmacoEconomics, 6(5), 1994, pp. 464-477
This study compares the costs of immunoprophylaxis versus no immunopro
phylaxis in children with recurrent ear, nose and throat (ENT) infecti
ons (otitis media and rhinopharyngitis) using ribosomal immunotherapy
('Ribomunyl'). The per-patient cost of ribosomal immunotherapy (FF297)
is offset by direct savings garnered through the prevention of many a
cute infectious episodes. The net 6-month per-patient savings associat
ed with immunoprophylaxis range from FF272 to FF1704, depending on the
indication and the type of treatment-cost estimate. Saved healthcare
resources include physician consultations and visits, laboratory tests
, medicotechnical services (audiometric tests) and antibiotic therapy.
Sensitivity analysis of efficacy and treatment-cost estimates enabled
threshold ranges of incremental efficacy to be identified. Cost-equiv
alence between the 2 treatment options was found to exist when the inc
remental efficacy of immunoprophylaxis lay between 7.4 and 17.5% (recu
rrent otitis media), and between 8.9 and 26.1% (recurrent rhinopharyng
itis). Thus, even when clearly lower incremental efficacy rates than t
hose reported in controlled clinical trials (approximately 40 to 60%)
are assumed, ribosomal immunotherapy can still be expected to be cost
effective. An analysis of the perspectives of the various payers in th
e French healthcare system demonstrated that net savings occurred for
all payers involved. However, social security insurance would gain mos
t from an immunoprophylaxis programme. Based on the evidence presented
here for France, physicians and payers should give increased attentio
n to this treatment option.