An economic evaluation of the randomized controlled trial of topical corticosteroid and home-based narrowband ultraviolet B for active and limited vitiligo (the HI-Light Vitiligo Trial)

Sach, Tracey, Thomas, K. S., Batchelor, J. M., Akram, P., Chalmers, J. R., Haines, R. H., Meakin, G. D., Duley, Leila, Ravenscroft, J. C., Rogers, A., Santer, M., Tan, W., White, J., Whitton, M. E., Williams, H. C., Cheung, S. T., Hamad, H., Wright, A., Ingram, J. R., Levell, Nick, Goulding, J. M. R., Makrygeorgou, A., Bewley, A., Ogboli, M., Stainforth, J., Ferguson, A., Laguda, B., Wahie, S., Ellis, R., Azad, J., Rajasekaran, A., Eleftheriadou, V. and Montgomery, A. A. (2021) An economic evaluation of the randomized controlled trial of topical corticosteroid and home-based narrowband ultraviolet B for active and limited vitiligo (the HI-Light Vitiligo Trial). British Journal of Dermatology, 184 (5). pp. 840-848. ISSN 0007-0963

Preview

PDF (Published_Version) - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: Economic evidence for vitiligo treatments is absent. Objectives: To determine the cost-effectiveness of (i) handheld narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) and (ii) a combination of topical corticosteroid (TCS) and NB-UVB compared with TCS alone for localized vitiligo. Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pragmatic, three-arm, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial with 9 months’ treatment. In total 517 adults and children (aged ≥ 5 years) with active vitiligo affecting < 10% of skin were recruited from secondary care and the community and were randomized 1: 1: 1 to receive TCS, NB-UVB or both. Cost per successful treatment (measured on the Vitiligo Noticeability Scale) was estimated. Secondary cost–utility analyses measured quality-adjusted life-years using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Levels for those aged ≥ 11 years and the Child Health Utility 9D for those aged 5 to < 18 years. The trial was registered with number ISRCTN17160087 on 8 January 2015. Results: The mean ± SD cost per participant was £775 ± 83·7 for NB-UVB, £813 ± 111.4 for combination treatment and £600 ± 96·2 for TCS. In analyses adjusted for age and target patch location, the incremental difference in cost for combination treatment compared with TCS was £211 (95% confidence interval 188–235), corresponding to a risk difference of 10·9% (number needed to treat = 9). The incremental cost was £1932 per successful treatment. The incremental difference in cost for NB-UVB compared with TCS was £173 (95% confidence interval 151–196), with a risk difference of 5·2% (number needed to treat = 19). The incremental cost was £3336 per successful treatment. Conclusions: Combination treatment, compared with TCS alone, has a lower incremental cost per additional successful treatment than NB-UVB only. Combination treatment would be considered cost-effective if decision makers are willing to pay £1932 per additional treatment success.

Item Type:	Article
Faculty \ School:	Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School
UEA Research Groups:	Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Public Health and Health Services Research (former - to 2023) Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Norwich Clinical Trials Unit Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Health Economics
Related URLs:	http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?...
Depositing User:	LivePure Connector
Date Deposited:	18 Sep 2020 00:31
Last Modified:	06 Feb 2025 09:22
URI:	https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/76928
DOI:	10.1111/bjd.19554

Downloads

Actions (login required)

View Item