METHODS: In the first part of the analysis costs attributable to cervical cancer and precancerous lesions were estimated; epidemiologic data were sourced from the WHO GLOBOCAN database and Malaysian national data sources. In the second part, a prevalence-based model was used to estimate the potential annual number of cases of cervical cancer and precancerous lesions that could be prevented and subsequent HPV-related treatment costs averted with the bivalent (HPV 16/18) and the quadrivalent (HPV 16/18/6/11) vaccines, at the population level, at steady state. A vaccine efficacy of 98% was assumed against HPV types included in both vaccines. Effectiveness against other oncogenic HPV types was based on the latest results from each vaccine's respective clinical trials.
RESULTS: In Malaysia there are an estimated 4,696 prevalent cases of cervical cancer annually and 1,372 prevalent cases of precancerous lesions, which are associated with a total direct cost of RM 39.2 million with a further RM 12.4 million in indirect costs owing to lost productivity. At steady state, vaccination with the bivalent vaccine was estimated to prevent 4,199 cervical cancer cases per year versus 3,804 cases for the quadrivalent vaccine. Vaccination with the quadrivalent vaccine was projected to prevent 1,721 cases of genital warts annually, whereas the annual number of cases remained unchanged with the bivalent vaccine. Furthermore, vaccination with the bivalent vaccine was estimated to avert RM 45.4 million in annual HPV-related treatment costs (direct+indirect) compared with RM 42.9 million for the quadrivalent vaccine.
CONCLUSION: This analysis showed that vaccination against HPV 16/18 can reduce the clinical and economic burden of cervical cancer and precancerous lesions in Malaysia. The greatest potential economic benefit was observed using the bivalent vaccine in preference to the quadrivalent vaccine.
Patients and methods: An observational study was conducted at four different intensive care units of an academic medical institution. Demographic characteristics, disease-management casemix information, cost and outcome of the high costing decile, and the rest of the cases were compared.
Results: A total of 3,220 discharges were included in the study. The high-cost group contributed 35.4% of the ICU stays and 38.8% of the total ICU expenditure. Diseases of the central nervous system had higher odds to be in the top decile of costly patients whereas the cardiovascular system was more likely to be in the non-high cost category. The high-cost patients were more likely to have death as an outcome (19.2% vs 9.3%; p<0.001). The most common conditions that were in the high-cost groups were craniotomy, other ear, nose, mouth, and throat operations, simple respiratory system operations, complex intestinal operations, and septicemia. These five diagnostic groups made up 43% of the high-cost decile.
Conclusion: High-cost patients utilized almost 40% of the ICU cost although they were only 10% of the ICU patients. The chances of admission to the ICU increased with older age and severity level of the disease. Central nervous system diseases were the major problem of patients aged 46-69 years old. In addition to cost reduction strategies at the treatment level, detailed analysis of these cases was needed to explore and identify pre-event stage prevention strategies.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study of patients requiring ICU admissions in a teaching hospital in Malaysia from 2013 to 2015 was conducted. The cost at the ICU was estimated using the step down approach. Factors that determined the cost and LOS at the ICU were also explored by using multivariate regression analysis.
RESULTS: Each day of stay cost $427 (USD) at the pediatric intensive care unit and $1324 at the general intensive care unit. The mean LOS at the ICU was 5.7 days (standard deviation [SD]: 8.4) with a median of 4 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 1-16.7 days). Average cost of care at the ICU per episode of care was $5473 (SD $6499), and the median was $3463. ICU patients spent 29.3% of the total stay and 47.2% of the cost at ICU units. Upon multivariate regression analysis, severity, case base-group, and type of ICU that the patient was admitted to were associated with the cost and LOS at ICU.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with critical care practices in hospitals from more developed nations, a Malaysian teaching hospital required a longer length of ICU stay. Hence, implementations of strategies that can reduce the length of stay and hospital costs without compromising healthcare quality are required.
METHODS: A Markov cohort model reflecting the natural history of HPV infection accounting for oncogenic and low-risk HPV was adapted for 13 year old Malaysian girls cohort (n = 274,050). Transition probabilities, utilities values, epidemiological and cost data were sourced from published literature and local data. Vaccine effectiveness was based on overall efficacy reported from 3-doses clinical trials, with the assumption that the 2-doses is non-inferior to the 3-doses allowing overall efficacy to be inferred from the 3-doses immunogenicity data. Price parity and life-long protection were assumed. The payer perspective was adopted, with appropriate discounting for costs (3 %) and outcomes (3 %). One way sensitivity analysis was conducted. The sensitivity analysis on cost of vaccine, vaccine coverage and discount rate with a 2-doses protocol was performed.
RESULT: The 3-doses and 2-doses regimes showed same number of Cervical Cancers averted (361 cases); QALYs saved at 7,732,266. However, the lifetime protection under the 2-doses regime, showed a significant cost-savings of RM 36, 722,700 compared to the 3-doses scheme. The MOH Malaysia could vaccinate 137,025 more girls in this country using saving 2-doses regime vaccination programme. The model predicted that 2-doses HPV vaccination schemes can avoid additional 180 Cervical Cancers and 63 deaths compare to 3-doses.
CONCLUSION: A 2-doses HPV vaccination scheme may enable Malaysian women to be protected at a lower cost than that achievable under a 3-doses scheme, while avoiding the same number of Cervical Cancer cases and deaths. Using the saving money with 2-doses, more Cervical Cancers and deaths can be avoided.