Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
PharmacoEconomics
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 5/2001

01-05-2001 | Original Research Article

Cost Effectiveness of Nasal Calcitonin in Postmenopausal Women

Use of Cochrane Collaboration Methods for Meta-Analysis Within Economic Evaluation

Authors: Prof. Douglas Coyle, Ann Cranney, Karen M. Lee, Vivian Welch, Peter Tugwell

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 5/2001

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of nasal calcitonin (Miacalcin®) compared with no therapy, alendronate or etidronate in the treatment of postmenopausal women with previous osteoporotic fracture.
Design and setting: Meta-analysis followed by economic analysis.
Perspective: A Canadian provincial Ministry of Health.
Methods: The meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials was based on the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. Economic analysis was conducted within a Markov model using probabilities and costs derived from Canadian sources.
Results: The meta-analysis found evidence of the positive effect of both nasal calcitonin and alendronate in reducing the risks of hip, wrist and vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women. However, there was a lack of evidence of the effect of etidronate on hip and wrist fractures. For a 65-year-old woman, with 5 years’ therapy, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for nasal calcitonin was 46 500 Canadian dollars ($Can) compared with no therapy and $Can32 600 compared with etidronate (1998 values). Comparison with alendronate was highly sensitive to the inclusion of one specific trial.
Conclusions: Given the results of the analysis, based on current evidence, nasal calcitonin can be considered at themargins of being cost effectiv ewhen compared with no therapy. Compared with active therapy, nasal calcitonin can be considered more cost effective than etidronate, but its cost effectiveness versus alendronate is inconclusive.
Literature
1.
Anonymous. Consensus Development Conference: Diagnosis, prophylaxis and treatment of osteoporosis. Am J Med 1993; 94: 646–50
2.
Kanis JA, Melton LJI, Christiansen C, et al. The diagnosis of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 1994; 9: 1137–41PubMedCrossRef
3.
WHO study group. Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1994
4.
Cooper C. Population-based study of survival after osteoporotic fracture. Am J Epidemiol 1993; 137: 1001–5PubMed
5.
Cummings SR. Lifetime risks of hip, Colles’ or vertebral fracture rate and coronary heart disease among white postmenopausal women. Arch Intern Med 1989; 149: 2445–8PubMedCrossRef
6.
Cummings SR. Bone density at various sites for prediction of hip fractures. Lancet 1993; 341: 72–5PubMedCrossRef
7.
Reginster JY. Effect of calcitonin on bone mass and fracture rates. Am J Med 1991; 91: 5B–22SCrossRef
8.
Reginster JY. Calcitonin for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Am J Med 1993;: 5A–47S
9.
Wallach S. Effects of calcitonin on bone quality and osteoblastic function. Calcif Tissue Int 1993; 52: 335–9PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
Cranney A, Coyle D, Welch V, et al. A review of economic evaluations in osteoporosis. Arthritis Care Res 1999 12: 425–34PubMedCrossRef
12.
Tosteson ANA, Rosenthal DI, Melton J, et al. Cost effectiveness of screening perimenopausal white women for osteoporosis: bone densitometry and hormone replacement therapy. Ann Int Med 1990; 113: 594–603PubMed
13.
Tosteson ANA, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness of hormone replacement therapy after the menopause. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol 1991; 5: 943–57PubMedCrossRef
14.
US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Effectiveness and costs of osteoporosis screening and hormone replacement therapy. Volume 1: Cost-effectiveness analysis. OTA-BP-H-160. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1995
15.
Ankjaer-Jensen A, Johnell O. Prevention of osteoporosis: cost-effectiveness of different pharmaceutical treatments. Osteoporos Int 1996; 6: 265–75PubMedCrossRef
16.
Garton MJ, Cooper C, Reid D. Perimenopausal bone density screening — will it help prevent osteoporosis? Maturitas 1997; 26: 35–43PubMedCrossRef
17.
Geelhoed E, Harris A, Prince R. Cost-effectiveness analysis of hormone replacement therapy and lifestyle intervention for hip fracture. Aust J Public Health 1994; 18: 153–60PubMedCrossRef
18.
Norlund A. Prevention of osteoporosis — a cost-effectiveness analysis regarding fractures. Scand J Rheumatol 1996; 25: 42–5CrossRef
19.
Eddy DM, Johnstone Jr CC, Cummings SR, et al. Osteoporosis: review of the evidence for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment and cost-effectiveness analysis. Osteoporos Int 1998; Suppl. 4: S1–S80
20.
Haynes RB, Wilczynski N, McKibbon KA, et al. Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound studies in MEDLINE. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1994; 1: 447–58PubMedCrossRef
21.
Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomised clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1–12PubMedCrossRef
22.
Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals. Ottawa: CCOHTA, 1997
23.
Papadimitropoulous EA, Coyte PC, Josse RG, et al. Current and projected rates of hip fracture in Canada. CMAJ 1997; 157: 1357–63
24.
Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment. Bisphosphonates in osteoporosis. Ottawa: CCOHTA, 2001, In Press
25.
Melton LJ III, Atkinson EJ, Cooper C, et al. Vertebral fractures predict subsequent fractures. Osteoporos Int 10 1999; 3: 214–21CrossRef
26.
Hillner BE, Hollenberg JP, Pauker SG. Postmenopausal estrogens in prevention of osteoporosis. Am J Med 1986; 80: 1115–27PubMedCrossRef
27.
Miller CW. Survival and ambulation following hip fractures. J Bone Joint Surg 1978; 60A: 930–3
28.
Statistics Canada. Life Tables, Canada and Provinces, 1990–92; 84–537 Occasional. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1995
29.
Gold M, Siegel JE, Russell LB, et al. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996
30.
Cranney A, Coyle D, Pham B, et al. The psychometric properties of patient preferences in osteoporosis. J Rheumatol. 2001; 28: 132–7PubMed
31.
Bennett KJ, Torrance GW. Measuring health state preferences and utilities: rating scale, time trade-off and standard gamble techniques. In: Spilker B, ed. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1996: 253–65
32.
Karagas MR, Lu-Yao GL, Barrett JA, et al. Heterogeneity of hip fracture: age, race, sex, and geographic patterns of femoral neck and trochanteric fractures among the US elderly. Am J Epidemiol 1996; 143: 677–82PubMedCrossRef
33.
Donaldson LJ, Cook A, Thomson RG. Incidence of fractures in a geographically defined population. J Epidemiol Community Health 1990; 44: 241–5PubMedCrossRef
34.
35.
O’Brien B, Goerree R, Hunt R, et al. Economic evaluation of alternative therapies in the long term management of peptic ulcer disease and gastroesophageal reflux disease. Ottawa: CCOHTA, 1996
36.
Goeree R, O’Brien B, Pettitt D, et al. An assessment of the burden of illness due to osteoporosis in Canada. Journal SOGC 1996; 18 (Suppl.): 15–22
37.
Pun KK. Analgesic effect of intranasal salmon calcitonin in the treatment of osteoporotic fractures. Clin Ther 1989; 11: 205–9PubMed
38.
Kado DM, Browner WS, Palermo L, et al. Vertebral fracture and mortality in older women. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 1215–20PubMedCrossRef
39.
Overgaard K. Effect of calcitonin given intranasally on bone mass and fracture rates in established osteoporosis: a dose-response study. BMJ 1992; 305: 556–61PubMedCrossRef
40.
Chestnut C, Silverman SL, Andriano K, et al. A randomized trial of nasal spray salmon calcitonin in postmenopausal women with established osteoporosis: the Prevent Recurrence of Osteoporotic Fractures study. Am J Med 2000; 109: 267–76CrossRef
41.
Montessori ML, Scheele WH, Netelenbos JC, et al. The use of etidronate and calcium versus calcium alone in the treatment of postmenopausal osteopenia: results of three years of treatment. Osteoporos Int 1997; 7: 52–8PubMedCrossRef
42.
Pacifici R, McMurtry C, Vered I, et al. Coherence therapy does not prevent axial bone loss in osteoporotic women: a preliminary comparative study. J Clin Endocrin Metab 1988; 66: 747–53CrossRef
43.
Storm T, Thamsborg G, Steiniche T, et al. Effect of intermittent cyclical etidronate therapy on bone mass and fracture rate in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 1990; 322: 1265–71PubMedCrossRef
44.
Watts NB, Harris ST, Genant HK, et al. Intermittent cyclical etidronate treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 1990; 323: 73–9PubMedCrossRef
45.
Wimalawansa SJ. A four-year randomized controlled trial of hormone replacement and bisphosphonate alone or in combination in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Am J Med 1998; 104: 219–26PubMedCrossRef
46.
Adami S, Passeri M, Ortolani S, et al. Effects of oral alendronate and intranasal salmon calcitonin on bone mass and biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Bone 1995; 17: 383–90PubMedCrossRef
47.
Black D, Cummings S, Karpf D, et al. Randomised trial of effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with existing vertebral fractures. Fracture Intervention Trial Research Group. Lancet 1996; 348: 1535–41PubMedCrossRef
48.
Chesnut CH, McClung MR, Ensrud KE, et al. Alendronate treatment of the postmenopausal osteoporotic woman: effect of multiple dosages on bone mass and bone remodeling. Am J Med 1995; 99: 144–52PubMedCrossRef
49.
Liberman UA, Weiss SR, Broll J, et al. Effect of oral alendronate on bone mineral density and the incidence of fractures in postmenopausal osteoporosis. The Alendronate Phase III Osteoporosis Treatment Study Group. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1437–43PubMedCrossRef
50.
Greenspan SL, Parker RA, Ferguson L, et al. Early changes in biochemical markers of bone turnover predict the long-term response to alendronate therapy in representative elderly women: a randomized clinical trial. J Bone Miner Res 1998; 13: 1431–8PubMedCrossRef
51.
Pols HAP, Felsenberg D, Hanley D, et al. Multinational placebo controlled, randomized trial of effects of alendronate on bone density and fracture risk in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. Results of the FOSIT study. Osteoporos Int 1999; 8: 461–8CrossRef
52.
Cummings SR, Black DM, Thompson DE, et al. Effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with low bone density but without vertebral fractures — results from the fracture intervention trial. JAMA 1998; 280: 2077–82PubMedCrossRef
53.
Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, et al. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ 1992; 146: 473–81PubMed
54.
Churchill DN, Lemon DC, Torrance GW. Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis to hospital hemodialysis. Med Decis Making 1984; 4: 489–500CrossRef
55.
Goel V, Deber RB, Detsky AS. Nonionic contrast media: economic analysis and health policy development. CMAJ 1989; 140: 389–95PubMed
56.
Naylor CD, Baigrie RS, Goldman BS, et al. Assessment of priority for coronary revascularization procedures. Lancet 1990; 335: 1070–73PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Cost Effectiveness of Nasal Calcitonin in Postmenopausal Women
Use of Cochrane Collaboration Methods for Meta-Analysis Within Economic Evaluation
Authors
Prof. Douglas Coyle
Ann Cranney
Karen M. Lee
Vivian Welch
Peter Tugwell
Publication date
01-05-2001
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 5/2001
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200119050-00010

Other articles of this Issue 5/2001

PharmacoEconomics 5/2001 Go to the issue

Original Research Article

The Lifetime Cost of Bipolar Disorder in the US

Original Research Article

Economic Evaluation of Systemic Treatments for Cytomegalovirus Retinitis in Patients with AIDS

Original Research Article

The Cost Effectiveness of Tapered versus Abrupt Discontinuation of Oral Cyclosporin Microemulsion for the Treatment of Psoriasis

Original Research Article

Cost Effectiveness of Selective Decontamination of the Digestive Tract in Liver Transplant Patients

Review Article

Hip Fracture Prevention

Original Research Article

Cost Effectiveness of Desirudin Compared with a Low Molecular Weight Heparin in the Prevention of Deep Vein Thrombosis after Total Hip Replacement Surgery