Cost-effectiveness analysis of expectant versus active management for treatment of persistent pregnancies of unknown location

Persistent pregnancies of unknown location (PUL) are defined by abnormally trending serum human chorionic gonadotropin with nondiagnostic ultrasound. There is no consensus on optimal management. This study was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness between three primary management strategies for...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2024-03
Hauptverfasser: Walter, Jessica R, Barnhart, Kurt T, Koelper, Nathanael C, Santoro, Nanette F, Zhang, Heping, Thomas, Tracey R, Huang, Hao, Harvie, Heidi S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
container_volume
creator Walter, Jessica R
Barnhart, Kurt T
Koelper, Nathanael C
Santoro, Nanette F
Zhang, Heping
Thomas, Tracey R
Huang, Hao
Harvie, Heidi S
description Persistent pregnancies of unknown location (PUL) are defined by abnormally trending serum human chorionic gonadotropin with nondiagnostic ultrasound. There is no consensus on optimal management. This study was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness between three primary management strategies for persistent pregnancies of unknown location: (1) expectant management, (2) empirical two-dose methotrexate, (3) uterine evacuation followed by methotrexate, if indicated. We conducted a prospective economic evaluation performed concurrently with the Expectant versus Active Management for Treatment of Persistent Pregnancies of Unknown Location (ACT or NOT) multicenter randomized trial conducted from July 2014 to June 2019. Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to expectant management, two-dose methotrexate, or uterine evacuation. The analysis was from the healthcare sector perspective with a 6-week time horizon following randomization. Costs were expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the rate of salpingectomy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the analysis. Methotrexate had the lowest mean cost, $875, followed by expectant management $1085, and uterine evacuation $1902 (p=0.001). Expectant management had the highest mean QALY (0.1043) followed by methotrexate (0.1031) and uterine evacuation (0.0992) (p=0.0001). Salpingectomy rate was higher for expectant management compared to methotrexate (9.4% vs 1.2%; p=0.02) and expectant management compared to uterine evacuation (9.4% vs 8.1%; p=0.04). Uterine evacuation, with highest costs and lowest QALYs, was dominated by both expectant management and methotrexate. In the base case analysis, expectant management was not cost-effective compared to methotrexate at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY given an ICER of $175,083/QALY gained (95% CI, -$1,666,825-2,676,375). Threshold analysis demonstrated methotrexate administration would have to cost $214 (an increase of $16 or 8%) to favor expectant management. Expectant management would also be favorable in lower risk patient populations with rates of laparoscopic surgical management for ectopic pregnancy not exceeding 4% of pregnancies of unknown location. Based on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, the probability expectant management was cost-effective compared to meth
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.03.035
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>pubmed</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_38552817</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>38552817</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-pubmed_primary_385528173</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFjkFOwzAQRS0k1BbKBVggXyDBdkiarisQB2BfDWEcOSRjy-MUuuDumAjWSCONvt6b0RfiVqtSK93cDyUMvi-NMg-lqvLUF2Kj1X5XNG3TrsUV86CUMmZvVmJdtXVtWr3biK-D51Sgtdgld0JCZgkE45kdS28lfoZMgJI8YeQ5w8WTU5Z6nDAD66NMESEtKd-EbDpOPylE7Amoc7h8m-md_AfJ0XeQnKetuLQwMt787mtx9_T4cnguwvw64dsxRDdBPB__-lb_Ct9n41U4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Index Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost-effectiveness analysis of expectant versus active management for treatment of persistent pregnancies of unknown location</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Walter, Jessica R ; Barnhart, Kurt T ; Koelper, Nathanael C ; Santoro, Nanette F ; Zhang, Heping ; Thomas, Tracey R ; Huang, Hao ; Harvie, Heidi S</creator><creatorcontrib>Walter, Jessica R ; Barnhart, Kurt T ; Koelper, Nathanael C ; Santoro, Nanette F ; Zhang, Heping ; Thomas, Tracey R ; Huang, Hao ; Harvie, Heidi S ; NICHD Reproductive Medicine Network</creatorcontrib><description>Persistent pregnancies of unknown location (PUL) are defined by abnormally trending serum human chorionic gonadotropin with nondiagnostic ultrasound. There is no consensus on optimal management. This study was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness between three primary management strategies for persistent pregnancies of unknown location: (1) expectant management, (2) empirical two-dose methotrexate, (3) uterine evacuation followed by methotrexate, if indicated. We conducted a prospective economic evaluation performed concurrently with the Expectant versus Active Management for Treatment of Persistent Pregnancies of Unknown Location (ACT or NOT) multicenter randomized trial conducted from July 2014 to June 2019. Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to expectant management, two-dose methotrexate, or uterine evacuation. The analysis was from the healthcare sector perspective with a 6-week time horizon following randomization. Costs were expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the rate of salpingectomy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the analysis. Methotrexate had the lowest mean cost, $875, followed by expectant management $1085, and uterine evacuation $1902 (p=0.001). Expectant management had the highest mean QALY (0.1043) followed by methotrexate (0.1031) and uterine evacuation (0.0992) (p=0.0001). Salpingectomy rate was higher for expectant management compared to methotrexate (9.4% vs 1.2%; p=0.02) and expectant management compared to uterine evacuation (9.4% vs 8.1%; p=0.04). Uterine evacuation, with highest costs and lowest QALYs, was dominated by both expectant management and methotrexate. In the base case analysis, expectant management was not cost-effective compared to methotrexate at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY given an ICER of $175,083/QALY gained (95% CI, -$1,666,825-2,676,375). Threshold analysis demonstrated methotrexate administration would have to cost $214 (an increase of $16 or 8%) to favor expectant management. Expectant management would also be favorable in lower risk patient populations with rates of laparoscopic surgical management for ectopic pregnancy not exceeding 4% of pregnancies of unknown location. Based on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, the probability expectant management was cost-effective compared to methotrexate at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY gained was 50%. Results were dependent on the cost of surgical intervention, and the expected rate of methotrexate failure. Management of pregnancies of unknown location with a two-dose methotrexate protocol may be cost-effective compared to expectant management and uterine evacuation. While uterine evacuation was dominated, expectant management versus methotrexate results were sensitive to modest changes in treatment costs of both methotrexate and surgical management.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6868</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.03.035</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38552817</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><ispartof>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2024-03</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38552817$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Walter, Jessica R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barnhart, Kurt T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koelper, Nathanael C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santoro, Nanette F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Heping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Tracey R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harvie, Heidi S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>NICHD Reproductive Medicine Network</creatorcontrib><title>Cost-effectiveness analysis of expectant versus active management for treatment of persistent pregnancies of unknown location</title><title>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</title><addtitle>Am J Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>Persistent pregnancies of unknown location (PUL) are defined by abnormally trending serum human chorionic gonadotropin with nondiagnostic ultrasound. There is no consensus on optimal management. This study was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness between three primary management strategies for persistent pregnancies of unknown location: (1) expectant management, (2) empirical two-dose methotrexate, (3) uterine evacuation followed by methotrexate, if indicated. We conducted a prospective economic evaluation performed concurrently with the Expectant versus Active Management for Treatment of Persistent Pregnancies of Unknown Location (ACT or NOT) multicenter randomized trial conducted from July 2014 to June 2019. Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to expectant management, two-dose methotrexate, or uterine evacuation. The analysis was from the healthcare sector perspective with a 6-week time horizon following randomization. Costs were expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the rate of salpingectomy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the analysis. Methotrexate had the lowest mean cost, $875, followed by expectant management $1085, and uterine evacuation $1902 (p=0.001). Expectant management had the highest mean QALY (0.1043) followed by methotrexate (0.1031) and uterine evacuation (0.0992) (p=0.0001). Salpingectomy rate was higher for expectant management compared to methotrexate (9.4% vs 1.2%; p=0.02) and expectant management compared to uterine evacuation (9.4% vs 8.1%; p=0.04). Uterine evacuation, with highest costs and lowest QALYs, was dominated by both expectant management and methotrexate. In the base case analysis, expectant management was not cost-effective compared to methotrexate at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY given an ICER of $175,083/QALY gained (95% CI, -$1,666,825-2,676,375). Threshold analysis demonstrated methotrexate administration would have to cost $214 (an increase of $16 or 8%) to favor expectant management. Expectant management would also be favorable in lower risk patient populations with rates of laparoscopic surgical management for ectopic pregnancy not exceeding 4% of pregnancies of unknown location. Based on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, the probability expectant management was cost-effective compared to methotrexate at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY gained was 50%. Results were dependent on the cost of surgical intervention, and the expected rate of methotrexate failure. Management of pregnancies of unknown location with a two-dose methotrexate protocol may be cost-effective compared to expectant management and uterine evacuation. While uterine evacuation was dominated, expectant management versus methotrexate results were sensitive to modest changes in treatment costs of both methotrexate and surgical management.</description><issn>1097-6868</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFjkFOwzAQRS0k1BbKBVggXyDBdkiarisQB2BfDWEcOSRjy-MUuuDumAjWSCONvt6b0RfiVqtSK93cDyUMvi-NMg-lqvLUF2Kj1X5XNG3TrsUV86CUMmZvVmJdtXVtWr3biK-D51Sgtdgld0JCZgkE45kdS28lfoZMgJI8YeQ5w8WTU5Z6nDAD66NMESEtKd-EbDpOPylE7Amoc7h8m-md_AfJ0XeQnKetuLQwMt787mtx9_T4cnguwvw64dsxRDdBPB__-lb_Ct9n41U4</recordid><startdate>20240327</startdate><enddate>20240327</enddate><creator>Walter, Jessica R</creator><creator>Barnhart, Kurt T</creator><creator>Koelper, Nathanael C</creator><creator>Santoro, Nanette F</creator><creator>Zhang, Heping</creator><creator>Thomas, Tracey R</creator><creator>Huang, Hao</creator><creator>Harvie, Heidi S</creator><scope>NPM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240327</creationdate><title>Cost-effectiveness analysis of expectant versus active management for treatment of persistent pregnancies of unknown location</title><author>Walter, Jessica R ; Barnhart, Kurt T ; Koelper, Nathanael C ; Santoro, Nanette F ; Zhang, Heping ; Thomas, Tracey R ; Huang, Hao ; Harvie, Heidi S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-pubmed_primary_385528173</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Walter, Jessica R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barnhart, Kurt T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koelper, Nathanael C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santoro, Nanette F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Heping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Tracey R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harvie, Heidi S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>NICHD Reproductive Medicine Network</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><jtitle>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Walter, Jessica R</au><au>Barnhart, Kurt T</au><au>Koelper, Nathanael C</au><au>Santoro, Nanette F</au><au>Zhang, Heping</au><au>Thomas, Tracey R</au><au>Huang, Hao</au><au>Harvie, Heidi S</au><aucorp>NICHD Reproductive Medicine Network</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost-effectiveness analysis of expectant versus active management for treatment of persistent pregnancies of unknown location</atitle><jtitle>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>2024-03-27</date><risdate>2024</risdate><eissn>1097-6868</eissn><abstract>Persistent pregnancies of unknown location (PUL) are defined by abnormally trending serum human chorionic gonadotropin with nondiagnostic ultrasound. There is no consensus on optimal management. This study was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness between three primary management strategies for persistent pregnancies of unknown location: (1) expectant management, (2) empirical two-dose methotrexate, (3) uterine evacuation followed by methotrexate, if indicated. We conducted a prospective economic evaluation performed concurrently with the Expectant versus Active Management for Treatment of Persistent Pregnancies of Unknown Location (ACT or NOT) multicenter randomized trial conducted from July 2014 to June 2019. Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to expectant management, two-dose methotrexate, or uterine evacuation. The analysis was from the healthcare sector perspective with a 6-week time horizon following randomization. Costs were expressed in 2018 U.S. dollars. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the rate of salpingectomy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the analysis. Methotrexate had the lowest mean cost, $875, followed by expectant management $1085, and uterine evacuation $1902 (p=0.001). Expectant management had the highest mean QALY (0.1043) followed by methotrexate (0.1031) and uterine evacuation (0.0992) (p=0.0001). Salpingectomy rate was higher for expectant management compared to methotrexate (9.4% vs 1.2%; p=0.02) and expectant management compared to uterine evacuation (9.4% vs 8.1%; p=0.04). Uterine evacuation, with highest costs and lowest QALYs, was dominated by both expectant management and methotrexate. In the base case analysis, expectant management was not cost-effective compared to methotrexate at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY given an ICER of $175,083/QALY gained (95% CI, -$1,666,825-2,676,375). Threshold analysis demonstrated methotrexate administration would have to cost $214 (an increase of $16 or 8%) to favor expectant management. Expectant management would also be favorable in lower risk patient populations with rates of laparoscopic surgical management for ectopic pregnancy not exceeding 4% of pregnancies of unknown location. Based on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves, the probability expectant management was cost-effective compared to methotrexate at a willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY gained was 50%. Results were dependent on the cost of surgical intervention, and the expected rate of methotrexate failure. Management of pregnancies of unknown location with a two-dose methotrexate protocol may be cost-effective compared to expectant management and uterine evacuation. While uterine evacuation was dominated, expectant management versus methotrexate results were sensitive to modest changes in treatment costs of both methotrexate and surgical management.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>38552817</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ajog.2024.03.035</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1097-6868
ispartof American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2024-03
issn 1097-6868
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmed_primary_38552817
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
title Cost-effectiveness analysis of expectant versus active management for treatment of persistent pregnancies of unknown location
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T14%3A01%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost-effectiveness%20analysis%20of%20expectant%20versus%20active%20management%20for%20treatment%20of%20persistent%20pregnancies%20of%20unknown%20location&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20obstetrics%20and%20gynecology&rft.au=Walter,%20Jessica%20R&rft.aucorp=NICHD%20Reproductive%20Medicine%20Network&rft.date=2024-03-27&rft.eissn=1097-6868&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ajog.2024.03.035&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed%3E38552817%3C/pubmed%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/38552817&rfr_iscdi=true