cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28588419.v1
title: Cost-effectiveness analysis of bispecific antibody faricimab for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema in Japan

description: Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of faricimab versus other anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) drugs for treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME) in Japan, while considering societal burden associated with treatment. Methods A Markov model for cost-effectiveness analysis of anti-VEGF treatment in patients with nAMD and DME was applied based on cost and utility value data from Japan. Faricimab administered through a treat-and-extend (T&E) regimen was compared with ranibizumab administered pro re nata (PRN) and T&E, aflibercept T&E, brolucizumab T&E, and best supportive care (BSC). Further to treatment costs (public payer perspective), the societal burden (societal perspective), including costs of travel, informal care, and productivity, was assessed. Results In treatment of nAMD, lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained were highest with faricimab (faricimab T&E: 6.92, ranibizumab PRN: 6.88, ranibizumab T&E: 6.91, aflibercept T&E: 6.89, brolucizumab T&E: 6.89, BSC: 5.99). From the public payer perspective, the lifetime total cost for faricimab T&E was lower than those for ranibizumab (PRN T&E) and brolucizumab, was comparable to aflibercept T&E, and higher than BSC (incremental costs: 158,385 and 6,475,511 JPY, respectively). As a result, faricimab was cost-effective or dominant in the treatment of nAMD, excluding BSC. From the societal perspective, faricimab was dominant against all comparators in nAMD. In treatment of DME, QALYs gained were highest with faricimab (faricimab T&E: 8.51, ranibizumab PRN: 8.17, aflibercept PRN: 8.36, ranibizumab T&E: 8.13, BSC: 5.16). From both the public payer and societal perspectives, faricimab was dominant against all comparators in DME. Conclusions When societal burdens were considered, faricimab was dominant in both nAMD and DME against all comparators, suggesting that the extended dosing interval associated with faricimab treatment may alleviate societal burdens and consequently improve patient outcomes.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.29616978
title: Cost-minimisation analysis of anti-VEGF therapies in neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular oedema in Switzerland

description: This study compares the direct healthcare costs of anti-VEGF therapies, including treat-and-extend (T&E) and other durable regimens, for unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular oedema (DMO) in Switzerland. An adapted cost-minimisation model estimated healthcare costs over two years for aflibercept 2 mg, aflibercept 8 mg, faricimab, ranibizumab, and ranibizumab biosimilars using clinical trial injection frequencies. Break-even analyses identified the medication prices and injection frequencies required for higher-cost therapies to achieve cost parity with the least expensive options. A one-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA) assessed key drivers of cost outcomes. Aflibercept 8 mg was estimated to be associated with the lowest treatment costs for both indications (CHF 11,814 for nAMD; CHF 11,242 for DMO). Faricimab (CHF 13,737) and aflibercept 2 mg (CHF 15,243) followed in nAMD and DMO. Ranibizumab and its biosimilars incurred the highest costs: for nAMD, biosimilars ranged from CHF 16,243 to CHF 17,497 and the reference product reached CHF 18,424; for DMO, biosimilars ranged from CHF 18,187 to CHF 19,596, with the reference product at CHF 20,637. Break-even analyses for nAMD showed that prices would need to drop by −22% (faricimab, CHF 644) to −64% (ranibizumab reference, CHF 218) relative to aflibercept 8 mg. For DMO, reductions ranged from −42% (aflibercept 2 mg, CHF 493) to −81% (ranibizumab reference, CHF 114). The OWSA highlighted medication price and injection frequency as primary cost drivers. This study estimated that the potentially minimized injection frequency of aflibercept 8 mg in a clinical trial regimen may result in the lowest treatment costs for nAMD and DMO, followed by faricimab and aflibercept 2 mg, respectively.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.29616978.v1
title: Cost-minimisation analysis of anti-VEGF therapies in neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular oedema in Switzerland

description: This study compares the direct healthcare costs of anti-VEGF therapies, including treat-and-extend (T&E) and other durable regimens, for unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular oedema (DMO) in Switzerland. An adapted cost-minimisation model estimated healthcare costs over two years for aflibercept 2 mg, aflibercept 8 mg, faricimab, ranibizumab, and ranibizumab biosimilars using clinical trial injection frequencies. Break-even analyses identified the medication prices and injection frequencies required for higher-cost therapies to achieve cost parity with the least expensive options. A one-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA) assessed key drivers of cost outcomes. Aflibercept 8 mg was estimated to be associated with the lowest treatment costs for both indications (CHF 11,814 for nAMD; CHF 11,242 for DMO). Faricimab (CHF 13,737) and aflibercept 2 mg (CHF 15,243) followed in nAMD and DMO. Ranibizumab and its biosimilars incurred the highest costs: for nAMD, biosimilars ranged from CHF 16,243 to CHF 17,497 and the reference product reached CHF 18,424; for DMO, biosimilars ranged from CHF 18,187 to CHF 19,596, with the reference product at CHF 20,637. Break-even analyses for nAMD showed that prices would need to drop by −22% (faricimab, CHF 644) to −64% (ranibizumab reference, CHF 218) relative to aflibercept 8 mg. For DMO, reductions ranged from −42% (aflibercept 2 mg, CHF 493) to −81% (ranibizumab reference, CHF 114). The OWSA highlighted medication price and injection frequency as primary cost drivers. This study estimated that the potentially minimized injection frequency of aflibercept 8 mg in a clinical trial regimen may result in the lowest treatment costs for nAMD and DMO, followed by faricimab and aflibercept 2 mg, respectively.
DOI: 10.15468/dl.pgzkwm
title: Occurrence Download

description: A dataset containing 6 species occurrences available in GBIF matching the query:
{
 "TaxonKey" : [
 "is Ageratina yaharana"
 ]
}

 The dataset includes 6 records from 2 constituent datasets; see https://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/download/0003267-260120142942310/datasets/export for details.
 
Data from some individual datasets included in this download may be licensed under less restrictive terms.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28172997
title: Cost-effectiveness of finerenone therapy for patients with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes in England & Wales: results of the FINE-CKD model

description: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is the leading cause of kidney failure, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The FIDELIO-DKD trial demonstrated that finerenone lowered the risk of renal and CV events in patients with CKD and T2D, regardless of cardiovascular disease history. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of finerenone added to background treatment (finerenone + BT) versus background treatment (BT) alone in patients with CKD and T2D from the perspective of the National Health Service in England and Wales. A lifetime Markov model assessed the indicated usage of finerenone for the treatment of stage 3 or 4 CKD with albuminuria associated with T2D in adults, as per the relevant marketing authorization. The model structure considered kidney disease progression and CV risk, with health states encompassing patients’ kidney disease stage and CV event profiles, using patient-level data from the FIDELIO-DKD trial. Model outcomes were life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), per-patient costs, incremental costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity and scenario analysis were performed, including an analysis exploring the impact of real-world data which suggests more frequent sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor use in the United Kingdom since FIDELIO-DKD. Patients receiving finerenone experienced kidney and CV benefits, including reduced rates of nonfatal CV events and CV deaths, translating to improvements in survival and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 6.11 and 5.97 per patient for finerenone + BT versus BT, respectively. Total discounted per-patient costs were £48,940 for finerenone + BT and £47,716 for BT alone, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £8,808 per QALY gained for finerenone + BT versus BT. Sensitivity and scenario analyses, including more frequent SGLT2 inhibitor use consistent with real-world data, indicate a robust ICER that remains within the bounds of what is typically considered cost-effective.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28172997.v2
title: Cost-effectiveness of finerenone therapy for patients with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes in England & Wales: results of the FINE-CKD model

description: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is the leading cause of kidney failure, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The FIDELIO-DKD trial demonstrated that finerenone lowered the risk of renal and CV events in patients with CKD and T2D, regardless of cardiovascular disease history. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of finerenone added to background treatment (finerenone + BT) versus background treatment (BT) alone in patients with CKD and T2D from the perspective of the National Health Service in England and Wales. A lifetime Markov model assessed the indicated usage of finerenone for the treatment of stage 3 or 4 CKD with albuminuria associated with T2D in adults, as per the relevant marketing authorization. The model structure considered kidney disease progression and CV risk, with health states encompassing patients’ kidney disease stage and CV event profiles, using patient-level data from the FIDELIO-DKD trial. Model outcomes were life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), per-patient costs, incremental costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity and scenario analysis were performed, including an analysis exploring the impact of real-world data which suggests more frequent sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor use in the United Kingdom since FIDELIO-DKD. Patients receiving finerenone experienced kidney and CV benefits, including reduced rates of nonfatal CV events and CV deaths, translating to improvements in survival and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 6.11 and 5.97 per patient for finerenone + BT versus BT, respectively. Total discounted per-patient costs were £48,940 for finerenone + BT and £47,716 for BT alone, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £8,808 per QALY gained for finerenone + BT versus BT. Sensitivity and scenario analyses, including more frequent SGLT2 inhibitor use consistent with real-world data, indicate a robust ICER that remains within the bounds of what is typically considered cost-effective.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28172997.v1
title: Cost-effectiveness of finerenone therapy for patients with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes in England & Wales: results of the FINE-CKD model

description: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is the leading cause of kidney failure, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The FIDELIO-DKD trial demonstrated that finerenone lowered the risk of renal and CV events in patients with CKD and T2D, regardless of cardiovascular disease history. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of finerenone added to background treatment (finerenone + BT) versus background treatment (BT) alone in patients with CKD and T2D from the perspective of the National Health Service in England and Wales. A lifetime Markov model assessed the indicated usage of finerenone for the treatment of stage 3 or 4 CKD with albuminuria associated with T2D in adults, as per the relevant marketing authorization. The model structure considered kidney disease progression and CV risk, with health states encompassing patients’ kidney disease stage and CV event profiles, using patient-level data from the FIDELIO-DKD trial. Model outcomes were life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), per-patient costs, incremental costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity and scenario analysis were performed, including an analysis exploring the impact of real-world data which suggests more frequent SGLT2 inhibitor use in the United Kingdom since FIDELIO-DKD. Patients receiving finerenone experienced kidney and CV benefits, including reduced rates of nonfatal CV events and CV deaths, translating to improvements in survival and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 6.11 and 5.97 per patient for finerenone + BT versus BT, respectively. Total discounted per-patient costs were £48,940 for finerenone + BT and £47,716 for BT alone, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £8,808 per QALY gained for finerenone + BT versus BT. Sensitivity and scenario analyses, including more frequent SGLT2 inhibitor use consistent with real-world data, indicate a robust ICER that remains within the bounds of what is typically considered cost-effective.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.30135109
title: Budget impact of introducing an omalizumab biosimilar in 23 European countries

description: Omalizumab, a monoclonal antibody indicated for severe persistent allergic asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), imposes a financial burden on European healthcare systems due to its high cost, with expenditures exceeding €787 million across 23 countries in 2024. Introducing an omalizumab biosimilar offers a promising avenue to reduce expenditure while maintaining clinical outcomes. To evaluate the budgetary impact of introducing an omalizumab biosimilar for severe persistent allergic asthma, CSU, and CRSwNP across 23 European countries from a payer’s perspective. A biosimilar market share uptake-based budget impact model (BIM) was developed in Microsoft Excel to compare two scenarios over 5 years: one without biosimilar introduction and one with gradual adoption. Market share evolution was modeled using country-specific biosimilar uptake as a proxy, while omalizumab usage growth was estimated from historical compound annual growth rates. Drug acquisition costs came from national price databases, assuming a 30% discount for the biosimilar. Sensitivity analysis applying 50% and 70% discount rates was conducted to reflect reimbursed cost from the payer’s perspective. Introducing an omalizumab biosimilar is projected to save €40 million in the first year at a 30% discounted price compared with using only the originator across 23 countries. Over 5 years, cumulative savings could reach €640 million, potentially enabling treatment for ∼96,000 additional patients from the derived budget savings. These estimates are a conservative baseline because the model does not incorporate competitive price erosion of the originator following biosimilar entry; in real-world settings, savings are typically higher when originator prices decline in response to competition. Adopting an omalizumab biosimilar in European healthcare systems could yield substantial cost savings, enhance patient access, and reduce fiscal pressure. This analysis supports biosimilars as a strategic tool for sustainable biologic therapy access in Europe.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.30135109.v1
title: Budget impact of introducing an omalizumab biosimilar in 23 European countries

description: Omalizumab, a monoclonal antibody indicated for severe persistent allergic asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU), and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), imposes a financial burden on European healthcare systems due to its high cost, with expenditures exceeding €787 million across 23 countries in 2024. Introducing an omalizumab biosimilar offers a promising avenue to reduce expenditure while maintaining clinical outcomes. To evaluate the budgetary impact of introducing an omalizumab biosimilar for severe persistent allergic asthma, CSU, and CRSwNP across 23 European countries from a payer’s perspective. A biosimilar market share uptake-based budget impact model (BIM) was developed in Microsoft Excel to compare two scenarios over 5 years: one without biosimilar introduction and one with gradual adoption. Market share evolution was modeled using country-specific biosimilar uptake as a proxy, while omalizumab usage growth was estimated from historical compound annual growth rates. Drug acquisition costs came from national price databases, assuming a 30% discount for the biosimilar. Sensitivity analysis applying 50% and 70% discount rates was conducted to reflect reimbursed cost from the payer’s perspective. Introducing an omalizumab biosimilar is projected to save €40 million in the first year at a 30% discounted price compared with using only the originator across 23 countries. Over 5 years, cumulative savings could reach €640 million, potentially enabling treatment for ∼96,000 additional patients from the derived budget savings. These estimates are a conservative baseline because the model does not incorporate competitive price erosion of the originator following biosimilar entry; in real-world settings, savings are typically higher when originator prices decline in response to competition. Adopting an omalizumab biosimilar in European healthcare systems could yield substantial cost savings, enhance patient access, and reduce fiscal pressure. This analysis supports biosimilars as a strategic tool for sustainable biologic therapy access in Europe.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28683543
title: Cost of invasive pneumococcal disease, all-cause pneumonia, and all-cause otitis media among commercial-insured US children

description: Invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), pneumonia (PNE), and otitis media (OM) are significant causes of morbidity among children in the United States (US). While studies have evaluated the economic burden of these conditions, recent data on episodic costs of IPD, PNE, and OM requiring hospitalization or ambulatory care only among US children by age and comorbidity profile are currently not available. This study was undertaken to address this evidence gap. A retrospective observational cohort design and data (2015–2019) from Optum’s de-identified Clinformatics<sup>®</sup> Data Mart Database were employed. Episodes of IPD, all-cause PNE, and all-cause OM were ascertained on a monthly basis during the follow-up period and stratified by care setting (hospital vs. ambulatory); all-cause OM was alternatively stratified by disease severity (acute, persistent, tympanostomy tube placement) and, for acute/persistent, by complexity (simple, complex). Mean episodic costs of disease were estimated for children aged &lt;1, 1-&lt;2, 2-&lt;6, and 6-&lt;18 years, respectively, overall and by comorbidity profile (with vs. without ≥1 medical condition). Mean age-specific cost of IPD hospitalization ranged from $40,575-$95,607; IPD requiring care in an emergency department (ED), from $2,013-$5,606; and IPD requiring care in other ambulatory settings, from $619-$1,103. Mean cost of all-cause PNE ranged from $16,631-$21,429 for hospitalized cases; $2,462-$2,685 for ED cases; and $424-$473 for other ambulatory cases. Corresponding ranges for all-cause OM were $14,599-$16,341; $1,190-$2,083; and $253-$514. Children with (vs. without) comorbidities had higher mean costs of PNE episodes across all ages and care settings; mean cost of all-cause OM was largely invariant by comorbidity profile and was highest for episodes involving TTP. Costs of IPD, all-cause PNE, and all-cause OM are high, particularly in the hospital setting. All-cause PNE, one of the most common causes of hospitalization for children, is particularly costly for children with comorbidities.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.28683543.v1
title: Cost of invasive pneumococcal disease, all-cause pneumonia, and all-cause otitis media among commercial-insured US children

description: Invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), pneumonia (PNE), and otitis media (OM) are significant causes of morbidity among children in the United States (US). While studies have evaluated the economic burden of these conditions, recent data on episodic costs of IPD, PNE, and OM requiring hospitalization or ambulatory care only among US children by age and comorbidity profile are currently not available. This study was undertaken to address this evidence gap. A retrospective observational cohort design and data (2015–2019) from Optum’s de-identified Clinformatics<sup>®</sup> Data Mart Database were employed. Episodes of IPD, all-cause PNE, and all-cause OM were ascertained on a monthly basis during the follow-up period and stratified by care setting (hospital vs. ambulatory); all-cause OM was alternatively stratified by disease severity (acute, persistent, tympanostomy tube placement) and, for acute/persistent, by complexity (simple, complex). Mean episodic costs of disease were estimated for children aged &lt;1, 1-&lt;2, 2-&lt;6, and 6-&lt;18 years, respectively, overall and by comorbidity profile (with vs. without ≥1 medical condition). Mean age-specific cost of IPD hospitalization ranged from $40,575-$95,607; IPD requiring care in an emergency department (ED), from $2,013-$5,606; and IPD requiring care in other ambulatory settings, from $619-$1,103. Mean cost of all-cause PNE ranged from $16,631-$21,429 for hospitalized cases; $2,462-$2,685 for ED cases; and $424-$473 for other ambulatory cases. Corresponding ranges for all-cause OM were $14,599-$16,341; $1,190-$2,083; and $253-$514. Children with (vs. without) comorbidities had higher mean costs of PNE episodes across all ages and care settings; mean cost of all-cause OM was largely invariant by comorbidity profile and was highest for episodes involving TTP. Costs of IPD, all-cause PNE, and all-cause OM are high, particularly in the hospital setting. All-cause PNE, one of the most common causes of hospitalization for children, is particularly costly for children with comorbidities.