VII CONGRESS WITH INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION «DEVELOPMENT OF PHARMACOECONOMICS AND PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY IN RUSSIAN FEDERATION»

The EUnetHTA Core Model is an electronic system of standardized health technology assessment, currently under development by EUnetHTA. The system is designed to be used within the EUnetHTA program countries (which include Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia and others). The Core Model software is currently under development, along with research and reporting methods. The HTA Core Model aim is to create a single database on health technologies, which might be used for new technologies assessment wherever the program is applicable. HTA Core Model is based on the principal of dividing given information into standardized thematic chapters, organized from common to precise. By this, a common assessment technology for any health technology is created to make possible a maximum precise compartment of competing technologies by selected key values. Research, made by the HTA Core Model, are unified, and are mostly designed for health technology assessment in EU zone. For utilizing in healthcare environment beyond EU, they may be localized (completely or partly, depending on local healthcare detail).

Pharmacoeconomic study of treatment primary open-angle glaucoma with carbonic anhydrise inhibitors by mean of costefficacy and budget impact analysis. Results have shown, that Azopt has benefits compare with Dorzopt and Trusopt from cost-efficacy perspective and can be claimed dominant. Futhermore Azopt in comparison with Trusopt provides cost-saving and advantage in terms of budget impact analysis.

Comparative pharmacoeconomic analysis of two therapeutic strategy (the strategy A and the strategy B), which differ with the expansion of access to ART was conducted using deterministic model. The aim of this research was to optimize the therapy of HIV-infected people and determine the most effective therapeutic strategy. On the basis of obtained epidemiological data model determines the advantages of therapeutic strategy with higher access to ART (strategy B). In particular, the results of simulation showed that the application of ART allows to significantly reduce new HIV infections and deaths related to the virus. Use of ART allows to optimize the costs, the value of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) is growing, which makes it advisable to use ART in health care on larger scale.

Goal: to develop the model of of type 2 diabetes mellitus outcomes validated in Russian clinical conditions and to perform pharmacoeconomic evaluation of glucose lowering therapies. Materials and methods: Existing type 2 DM models were evaluated. Risk equations for type 2 DM complications were compiled. Demographic, biochemical etc. patient parameters were used as input parameters. Glucose lowering drug’s effectiveness were incorporated into the model as its ability to modify input parameters (HbA1c, lipids, etc.). Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed. Results: The developed model allows to assess the risk of type 2 DM complications in 5 years in patient with predefined risk factors. Among comparing strategies of type 2 DM therapies liraglutide (Victoza®) was considered as the cost-effective strategy with ICER/QALY – 470 120.40 RUR, which is 51% of the willingness-to-pay threshold in Russia. With the lowest complication treatment costs inside the total direct costs, liraglutide monotherapy demonstrated the most long-term sustainable glycemic control and HbA1c goal parameters.

Annually, all over the world there are 300 000 new patients with leukemia (approximately 3% of all oncology diseases), and mortality due to leukemia is 220 000 patients. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of this pathology contributes to the improvement of approaches to treatment policy of this group of patients. We performed cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of two tyrosine kinase inhibitors in Russian Federation – nilotinib (Tasigna) and imatinib (Gleevec) in CML in the chronic phase (CP) treatment as firstline therapy. Treatment with Tasigna compared with Gleevec characterizes as dominant according to used 1-year time horizons.