VALIDATED ECONOMIC TOOL TO MEASURE THE DIRECT COSTS FOR PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC PULMONARY ARTERIAL HYPERTENSION (IPAH) AND CHRONIC THROMBOEMBOLIC PULMONARY HYPERTENSION (CTEPH) IN COLOMBIA
Author(s)
Claudia A. López-Cabra, MD, MSc1, Fernando E. Salcedo Mejía, BEc, MSc2, Nelson José Alvis Zakzuk, MSc3, Maria Romero, BEcon4, Caroll Delgado, MD, MSc1, Nelson Alvis-Guzman, MPH, PhD5;
1Bayer, Bogota, Colombia, 2ALZAK - Universidad Tecnologica de Bolivar, Cartagena, Colombia, 3Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Colombia, 4ALZAK, Cartagena, Colombia, 5ALZAK - Universidad de Cartagena, Cartagena, Colombia
1Bayer, Bogota, Colombia, 2ALZAK - Universidad Tecnologica de Bolivar, Cartagena, Colombia, 3Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Colombia, 4ALZAK, Cartagena, Colombia, 5ALZAK - Universidad de Cartagena, Cartagena, Colombia
OBJECTIVES: To validate a tool that estimates the direct care costs of patients with IPAH and CTEPH in Colombia, classifying mortality risk and categorizing Healthcare Resource Utilization (HRU) in three areas: procedures, complications, and pharmacological treatments
METHODS: An economic model was developed to calculate the annual cost of an average patient with IPAH and CTEPH. This model estimates the cost of a complete cohort, considering the utilization of HRU according to risk stratification. Technology costs are calculated by weighing the use of monotherapy, dual therapy, and triple therapy by risk category using SISMED prices. For complications, macro-costing and micro-costing techniques were employed. Procedures costs are calculated per proportion of use by risk stratification per unit cost. Surveys were conducted with five experts: four pulmonologists and one health economist. The responses were summarized in average values and percentages, considering consensus on a parameter if it reached 50% + 1
RESULTS: The experts' assessment of the methodology of the tool was satisfactory, especially in the stratification by risk groups. The frequencies of service use showed no significant differences between the values of the tool and those reported by the experts. All experts agreed on including hospitalization events related and not related to right heart failure, using macro and micro-costing approaches. Additionally, the experts agreed to group treatments of ERAs and iPDE5 but suggested evaluating patients with IPAH and CTEPH separately
CONCLUSIONS: The experts consider the economic tool satisfactory for estimating the direct cost of patients with over 90% accuracy. It is recommended to model the IPAH and CTEPH groups separately and to consider future variations in the use of health services based on the therapeutic response of patients
METHODS: An economic model was developed to calculate the annual cost of an average patient with IPAH and CTEPH. This model estimates the cost of a complete cohort, considering the utilization of HRU according to risk stratification. Technology costs are calculated by weighing the use of monotherapy, dual therapy, and triple therapy by risk category using SISMED prices. For complications, macro-costing and micro-costing techniques were employed. Procedures costs are calculated per proportion of use by risk stratification per unit cost. Surveys were conducted with five experts: four pulmonologists and one health economist. The responses were summarized in average values and percentages, considering consensus on a parameter if it reached 50% + 1
RESULTS: The experts' assessment of the methodology of the tool was satisfactory, especially in the stratification by risk groups. The frequencies of service use showed no significant differences between the values of the tool and those reported by the experts. All experts agreed on including hospitalization events related and not related to right heart failure, using macro and micro-costing approaches. Additionally, the experts agreed to group treatments of ERAs and iPDE5 but suggested evaluating patients with IPAH and CTEPH separately
CONCLUSIONS: The experts consider the economic tool satisfactory for estimating the direct cost of patients with over 90% accuracy. It is recommended to model the IPAH and CTEPH groups separately and to consider future variations in the use of health services based on the therapeutic response of patients
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
EE496
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies
Disease
SDC: Rare & Orphan Diseases, SDC: Respiratory-Related Disorders (Allergy, Asthma, Smoking, Other Respiratory)