OBJECTIVES

As Sickle Cell disease (SCD) management is an important cost driver to health systems, the intent of this research was to compare the cost effectiveness of different transfusion modalities. More specifically, we wanted to perform this evaluation in England as 0.02% of the population is suffering from this disease representing 14000 patients, which makes it the most frequent genetic disorder. We wanted to compare the following transfusion types: Automated red blood cell exchange (aRBCX), Top-up transfusion and Manual red blood cell exchange (mRBCX).

METHODS

Variables which drive costs and outcomes have been collected to populate a comprehensive de Novo health economic model. The most important drivers we took into consideration were: disease incidence, cost blood transfusion, medical equipment, disposables, complications, chelation therapy, hospitalization, lives lost.

RESULTS

Our results reflect a 5-year overview demonstrating the trend in the cost of care. We found that aRBCX is dominant over all other transfusion modalities. Yearly intervention cost per patient in pounds: [Top-up 5031; Manual 6229; aRBCX 10448]. The yearly cost of treatment choice related cost: [58727.26,30656.13,17833.74]. Cost of disease complications: [ 26594;26925;23748]. Cost of lives lost per patient: [ 6758;6619;5659). Total yearly cost per patient estimated: [97110;70429;57728]

CONCLUSIONS

aRBCX is cost effective when compared to Top-up transfusion (68%) and mRBCX (38%). aRBCX promotes reduction in overall resources, disease burden, bed retention and chelation Therapy.