학술논문

The potential cost-effectiveness of novel cord blood therapies in children with autism spectrum disorder.
Document Type
Article
Source
PLoS ONE. 4/18/2023, Vol. 17 Issue 4, p1-14. 14p.
Subject
*CORD blood
*CHILDREN with autism spectrum disorders
*AUTISM spectrum disorders
Language
ISSN
1932-6203
Abstract
Objective: To model the long-term clinical and economic outcomes of potential cord blood therapy in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Study design: Markov microsimulation of ASD over the lifespan was used to compare two strategies: 1) standard of care (SOC), including behavioral and educational interventions, and 2) novel cord blood (CB) intervention in addition to SOC. Input data reflecting behavioral outcomes included baseline Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale (VABS-3), monthly VABS-3 changes, and CB intervention efficacy on adaptive behavior based on a randomized, placebo-controlled trial (DukeACT). Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were correlated to VABS-3. Costs for children with ASD ($15,791, ages 2–17 years) and adults with ASD ($56,559, ages 18+ years), and the CB intervention (range $15,000–45,000) were incorporated. Alternative CB efficacy and costs were explored. Results: We compared model-projected results to published data on life-expectancy, mean VABS-3 changes, and lifetime costs. Undiscounted lifetime QALYs in the SOC and CB strategies were 40.75 and 40.91. Discounted lifetime costs in the SOC strategy were $1,014,000, and for CB ranged from $1,021,000-$1,058,000 with CB intervention cost ($8,000-$45,000). At $15,000 cost, CB was borderline cost-effective (ICER = $105,000/QALY). In one-way sensitivity analysis, CB cost and efficacy were the most influential parameters on CB ICER. CB intervention was cost-effective at costs<$15,000 and efficacies ≥2.0. Five-year healthcare payer projected budgetary outlays at a $15,000 CB cost were $3.847B. Conclusions: A modestly effective intervention designed to improve adaptive behavior in autism can be cost-effective under certain circumstances. Intervention cost and efficacy most affected the cost-effectiveness results and should be targeted to increase economic efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]