Back to Journals » ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research » Volume 11

Cost-consequence analysis for human recombinant growth hormone (r-hGH) treatment administered via different devices in children with growth hormone deficiency in Italy

Authors Foo J, Maghnie M, Colao A, Vlachaki I, Colombo G

Received 20 November 2018

Accepted for publication 6 April 2019

Published 22 August 2019 Volume 2019:11 Pages 525—537


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Professor Dean Smith

Jason Foo,1 Mohamad Maghnie,2 Annamaria Colao,3 Ioanna Vlachaki,4 Giorgio Colombo5,6

1Global Health Economics, Mapi Group (An ICON plc Company), Houten, The Netherlands; 2Department of Pediatrics, IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini Institute, University of Genova, Genova, Italy; 3Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University Federico II of Naples, 80131 Napoli, Italy; 4Global Health Economics, ICON plc, London, UK; 5Department of Drug Science, Pavia University, Pavia, Italy; 6SAVE Studi – Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Milan, Italy

Correspondence: Jason Foo
Global Health Economics, Mapi Group (An ICON PLC Company), De Molen 84, Houten 3995 AX, The Netherlands

Background: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-consequence of recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) administered via the easypod auto-injector (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) versus conventional devices in children with growth hormone deficiency in Italy.
Methods: A patient-level simulation, decision-analytical model was developed to estimate the average height gains and growth hormone treatment costs for a cohort of boys and girls until their bone maturation age. The calculations were performed using listed growth hormone drug prices (base case) and a scenario analysis was also conducted using published tender prices. Costs were discounted at 3%.
Results: Due to improved adherence and earlier identification of poor responders, patients receiving somatropin with easypod gained, on average, 3.2 cm more than patients receiving other r-hGH treatments. Somatropin with easypod had the second highest total cost including wastage (€96,710), but had the second lowest cost per cm gained (€7699/cm). In the scenario analysis, somatropin with easypod had the lowest cost per cm gained (€4708/cm) amongst all of the compared treatments.
Conclusion: Somatropin with easypod can be cost-saving versus all other r-hGH treatments except Omnitrope when listed drug prices are considered and can be cost-saving versus all other r-hGH treatments when tender drug prices are considered. The easypod device also facilitates cost savings in terms of reduced wastage.

Keywords: easypod, growth hormone treatment, growth hormone deficiency, cost-consequence analysis

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]