The cost-effectiveness of population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment: a Markov model using economic data from a randomized controlled trial

J Mason; A T R Axon; D Forman; S Duffett; M Drummond; W Crocombe; R Feltbower; S Mason; J Brown; P Moayyedi; Leeds Help Study Grp

The cost-effectiveness of population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment: a Markov model using economic data from a randomized controlled trial

J Mason, A T R Axon, D Forman, S Duffett, M Drummond, W Crocombe, R Feltbower, S Mason, J Brown, P Moayyedi, Leeds Help Study Grp

Centre for Health Economics

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Background: Economic models have suggested that population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment may be a cost-effective method of reducing mortality from gastric cancer. These models are conservative as they do not consider that the programme may reduce health service peptic ulcer and other dyspepsia costs. We have evaluated the economic impact of population H. pylori screening and treatment over 2 year's in a randomized controlled trial and have incorporated the results into an economic model exploring the impact of H. pylori eradication on peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer.

Methods: Subjects between the ages of 40 and 49 years were randomly invited to attend their local primary care centre. H. pylori status was evaluated by C-13-urea breath test and infected individuals were randomized to receive omeprazole, 20 mg b.d., clarithromycin, 250 mg b.d., and tinidazole, 500 mg b.d., for 7 days or identical placebos. Economic data on health service costs for dyspepsia were obtained from a primary care note review for the 2 years following randomization. These data were incorporated into a Markov model comparing population H. pylori screening and treatment with no intervention.

Results: A total of 2 329 of 8407 subjects were H. pylori positive: 1161 were randomized to receive eradication therapy and 1163 to receive placebo. The cost difference favoured the intervention group 2 years after randomization, but this did not reach statistical significance (pound11.42 per subject cost saving: 95% confidence interval, pound30.04 to -pound7.19: P=0.23). Analysis by gender suggested a statistically significant dyspepsia cost saving in men (pound27.17 per subject: 95% confidence interval. pound50.01 to pound4.32: P = 0.02), with no benefit in women (-pound4.46 per subject; 95% confidence interval. -pound33.85 to pound24.93). Modelling of these data suggested that population H. pylori screening and treatment for 1 000 000 45-year-olds would save over pound6 000 000 and 1300 years of life. The programme would cost pound14 200 per life year saved if the health service dyspepsia cost savings were the lower limit of the 95% confidence intervals and H. pylori eradication had only a 10% efficacy in reducing mortality from distal gastric cancer and peptic ulcer disease.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	559-568
Number of pages	10
Journal	ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY
Volume	16
Issue number	3
Publication status	Published - Mar 2002

Keywords

NONSTEROIDAL ANTIINFLAMMATORY DRUGS
PREVENT GASTRIC-CANCER
PEPTIC-ULCER
ERADICATION
INFECTION
COMMUNITY
DYSPEPSIA
MORTALITY
DISEASE
THERAPY

Cite this

@article{258da22ded80415399415e7e4fb51d91,

title = "The cost-effectiveness of population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment: a Markov model using economic data from a randomized controlled trial",

abstract = "Background: Economic models have suggested that population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment may be a cost-effective method of reducing mortality from gastric cancer. These models are conservative as they do not consider that the programme may reduce health service peptic ulcer and other dyspepsia costs. We have evaluated the economic impact of population H. pylori screening and treatment over 2 year's in a randomized controlled trial and have incorporated the results into an economic model exploring the impact of H. pylori eradication on peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer.Methods: Subjects between the ages of 40 and 49 years were randomly invited to attend their local primary care centre. H. pylori status was evaluated by C-13-urea breath test and infected individuals were randomized to receive omeprazole, 20 mg b.d., clarithromycin, 250 mg b.d., and tinidazole, 500 mg b.d., for 7 days or identical placebos. Economic data on health service costs for dyspepsia were obtained from a primary care note review for the 2 years following randomization. These data were incorporated into a Markov model comparing population H. pylori screening and treatment with no intervention.Results: A total of 2 329 of 8407 subjects were H. pylori positive: 1161 were randomized to receive eradication therapy and 1163 to receive placebo. The cost difference favoured the intervention group 2 years after randomization, but this did not reach statistical significance (pound11.42 per subject cost saving: 95% confidence interval, pound30.04 to -pound7.19: P=0.23). Analysis by gender suggested a statistically significant dyspepsia cost saving in men (pound27.17 per subject: 95% confidence interval. pound50.01 to pound4.32: P = 0.02), with no benefit in women (-pound4.46 per subject; 95% confidence interval. -pound33.85 to pound24.93). Modelling of these data suggested that population H. pylori screening and treatment for 1 000 000 45-year-olds would save over pound6 000 000 and 1300 years of life. The programme would cost pound14 200 per life year saved if the health service dyspepsia cost savings were the lower limit of the 95% confidence intervals and H. pylori eradication had only a 10% efficacy in reducing mortality from distal gastric cancer and peptic ulcer disease.",

keywords = "NONSTEROIDAL ANTIINFLAMMATORY DRUGS, PREVENT GASTRIC-CANCER, PEPTIC-ULCER, ERADICATION, INFECTION, COMMUNITY, DYSPEPSIA, MORTALITY, DISEASE, THERAPY",

author = "J Mason and Axon, {A T R} and D Forman and S Duffett and M Drummond and W Crocombe and R Feltbower and S Mason and J Brown and P Moayyedi and {Leeds Help Study Grp}",

year = "2002",

month = mar,

language = "English",

volume = "16",

pages = "559--568",

journal = "ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY",

issn = "0269-2813",

publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The cost-effectiveness of population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment: a Markov model using economic data from a randomized controlled trial

AU - Mason, J

AU - Axon, A T R

AU - Forman, D

AU - Duffett, S

AU - Drummond, M

AU - Crocombe, W

AU - Feltbower, R

AU - Mason, S

AU - Brown, J

AU - Moayyedi, P

AU - Leeds Help Study Grp

PY - 2002/3

Y1 - 2002/3

N2 - Background: Economic models have suggested that population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment may be a cost-effective method of reducing mortality from gastric cancer. These models are conservative as they do not consider that the programme may reduce health service peptic ulcer and other dyspepsia costs. We have evaluated the economic impact of population H. pylori screening and treatment over 2 year's in a randomized controlled trial and have incorporated the results into an economic model exploring the impact of H. pylori eradication on peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer.Methods: Subjects between the ages of 40 and 49 years were randomly invited to attend their local primary care centre. H. pylori status was evaluated by C-13-urea breath test and infected individuals were randomized to receive omeprazole, 20 mg b.d., clarithromycin, 250 mg b.d., and tinidazole, 500 mg b.d., for 7 days or identical placebos. Economic data on health service costs for dyspepsia were obtained from a primary care note review for the 2 years following randomization. These data were incorporated into a Markov model comparing population H. pylori screening and treatment with no intervention.Results: A total of 2 329 of 8407 subjects were H. pylori positive: 1161 were randomized to receive eradication therapy and 1163 to receive placebo. The cost difference favoured the intervention group 2 years after randomization, but this did not reach statistical significance (pound11.42 per subject cost saving: 95% confidence interval, pound30.04 to -pound7.19: P=0.23). Analysis by gender suggested a statistically significant dyspepsia cost saving in men (pound27.17 per subject: 95% confidence interval. pound50.01 to pound4.32: P = 0.02), with no benefit in women (-pound4.46 per subject; 95% confidence interval. -pound33.85 to pound24.93). Modelling of these data suggested that population H. pylori screening and treatment for 1 000 000 45-year-olds would save over pound6 000 000 and 1300 years of life. The programme would cost pound14 200 per life year saved if the health service dyspepsia cost savings were the lower limit of the 95% confidence intervals and H. pylori eradication had only a 10% efficacy in reducing mortality from distal gastric cancer and peptic ulcer disease.

AB - Background: Economic models have suggested that population Helicobacter pylori screening and treatment may be a cost-effective method of reducing mortality from gastric cancer. These models are conservative as they do not consider that the programme may reduce health service peptic ulcer and other dyspepsia costs. We have evaluated the economic impact of population H. pylori screening and treatment over 2 year's in a randomized controlled trial and have incorporated the results into an economic model exploring the impact of H. pylori eradication on peptic ulcer disease and gastric cancer.Methods: Subjects between the ages of 40 and 49 years were randomly invited to attend their local primary care centre. H. pylori status was evaluated by C-13-urea breath test and infected individuals were randomized to receive omeprazole, 20 mg b.d., clarithromycin, 250 mg b.d., and tinidazole, 500 mg b.d., for 7 days or identical placebos. Economic data on health service costs for dyspepsia were obtained from a primary care note review for the 2 years following randomization. These data were incorporated into a Markov model comparing population H. pylori screening and treatment with no intervention.Results: A total of 2 329 of 8407 subjects were H. pylori positive: 1161 were randomized to receive eradication therapy and 1163 to receive placebo. The cost difference favoured the intervention group 2 years after randomization, but this did not reach statistical significance (pound11.42 per subject cost saving: 95% confidence interval, pound30.04 to -pound7.19: P=0.23). Analysis by gender suggested a statistically significant dyspepsia cost saving in men (pound27.17 per subject: 95% confidence interval. pound50.01 to pound4.32: P = 0.02), with no benefit in women (-pound4.46 per subject; 95% confidence interval. -pound33.85 to pound24.93). Modelling of these data suggested that population H. pylori screening and treatment for 1 000 000 45-year-olds would save over pound6 000 000 and 1300 years of life. The programme would cost pound14 200 per life year saved if the health service dyspepsia cost savings were the lower limit of the 95% confidence intervals and H. pylori eradication had only a 10% efficacy in reducing mortality from distal gastric cancer and peptic ulcer disease.

KW - NONSTEROIDAL ANTIINFLAMMATORY DRUGS

KW - PREVENT GASTRIC-CANCER

KW - PEPTIC-ULCER

KW - ERADICATION

KW - INFECTION

KW - COMMUNITY

KW - DYSPEPSIA

KW - MORTALITY

KW - DISEASE

KW - THERAPY

M3 - Article

SN - 0269-2813

VL - 16

SP - 559

EP - 568

JO - ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY

JF - ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY

IS - 3

ER -