Webbläsaren som du använder stöds inte av denna webbplats. Alla versioner av Internet Explorer stöds inte längre, av oss eller Microsoft (läs mer här: * https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Var god och använd en modern webbläsare för att ta del av denna webbplats, som t.ex. nyaste versioner av Edge, Chrome, Firefox eller Safari osv.

Cost-effectiveness of varenicline compared with nicotine patches for smoking cessation--results from four European countries.

In English

Författare

  • Kristian Bolin
  • Koo Wilson
  • Hicham Benhaddi
  • Enrico de Nigris
  • Sophie Marbaix
  • Ann-Christin Mork
  • Henri-Jean Aubin

Summary, in English

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the cost-effectiveness of varenicline with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking cessation in four European countries (Belgium, France, Sweden and the UK). METHODS: Markov simulations, using the Benefits of Smoking Cessation on Outcomes (BENESCO) model, were performed. We simulated the incidence of four smoking-related morbidities: lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease and stroke. The model computes quality-adjusted life-years gained and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Incremental cost-utility ratios were calculated, adopting a lifetime perspective. Efficacy data were obtained from a randomized open-label trial: Week 52 continuous abstinence rates were 26.1% for varenicline and 20.3% for NRT. RESULTS: The analyses imply that for countries analysed, smoking cessation using varenicline versus NRT was associated with reduced smoking-related morbidity and mortality. The number of morbidities avoided, per 1000 smokers attempting to quit, ranged from 9.7 in Belgium to 6.5 in the UK. The number of quality-adjusted life-years gained, per 1000 smokers, was 23 (Belgium); 19.5 (France); 29.9 (Sweden); and 23.7 (UK). In all base-case simulations (except France), varenicline dominated (more effective and cost saving) NRT regarding costs per quality-adjusted life-year gained; for France the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 2803. CONCLUSION: This cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrated that since varenicline treatment was more effective, the result was increased healthcare cost savings in Belgium, Sweden and the UK. Our results suggest that funding varenicline as a smoking cessation aid is justifiable from a healthcare resource allocation perspective.

Publiceringsår

2009

Språk

Engelska

Sidor

650-654

Publikation/Tidskrift/Serie

European Journal of Public Health

Volym

19

Issue

6

Dokumenttyp

Artikel i tidskrift

Förlag

Oxford University Press

Ämne

  • Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology

Nyckelord

  • nicotine replacement therapy
  • cost-effectiveness
  • smoking cessation
  • varenicline

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Övrigt

  • ISSN: 1101-1262