Economic Burden of Multiple Sclerosis in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

Jalal Dahham, Rana Rizk, Ingrid Kremer, Silvia M A A Evers, Mickaël Hiligsmann
Author Information
  1. Jalal Dahham: Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. j.dahham@maastrichtuniversity.nl. ORCID
  2. Rana Rizk: Institut National de Santé Publique, d'Épidémiologie Clinique et de Toxicologie (INSPECT-Lb), Beirut, Lebanon. ORCID
  3. Ingrid Kremer: Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. ORCID
  4. Silvia M A A Evers: Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. ORCID
  5. Mickaël Hiligsmann: Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. ORCID

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the economic burden of multiple sclerosis (MS) in high-income countries (HICs) has been extensively studied, information on the costs of MS in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remains scarce. Moreover, no review synthesizing and assessing the costs of MS in LMICs has yet been undertaken.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to systematically identify and review the cost of illness (COI) of MS in LMICs to critically appraise the methodologies used, compare cost estimates across countries and by level of disease severity, and examine cost drivers.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search for original studies in English, French, and Dutch containing prevalence or incidence-based cost data of MS in LMICs. The search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Library, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Econlit, and CINAHL (EBSCO) on July 2020 without restrictions on publication date. Recommended and validated methods were used for data extraction and analysis to make the results of the COI studies comparable. Costs were adjusted to $US, year 2019 values, using the World Bank purchasing power parity and inflated using the consumer price index.
RESULTS: A total of 14 studies were identified, all of which were conducted in upper-middle-income economies. Eight studies used a bottom-up approach for costing, and six used a top-down approach. Four studies used a societal perspective. The total annual cost per patient ranged between $US463 and 58,616. Costs varied across studies and countries, mainly because of differences regarding the inclusion of costs of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), the range of cost items included, the methodological choices such as approaches used to estimate healthcare resource consumption, and the inclusion of informal care and productivity losses. Characteristics and methodologies of the included studies varied considerably, especially regarding the perspective adopted, cost data specification, and reporting of costs per severity levels. The total costs increased with greater disease severity. The cost ratios between different levels of MS severity within studies were relatively stable; costs were around 1-1.5 times higher for moderate versus mild MS and about two times higher for severe versus mild MS. MS drug costs were the main cost driver for less severe MS, whereas the proportion of direct non-medical costs and indirect costs increased with greater disease severity.
CONCLUSION: MS places a huge economic burden on healthcare systems and societies in LMICs. Methodological differences and substantial variations in terms of absolute costs were found between studies, which made comparison of studies challenging. However, the cost ratios across different levels of MS severity were similar, making comparisons between studies by disease severity feasible. Cost drivers were mainly DMTs and relapse treatments, and this was consistent across studies. Yet, the distribution of cost components varied with disease severity.

References

  1. Eur Neurol. 2011;66(6):311-21 [PMID: 22086151]
  2. Acta Neurol Belg. 2013 Dec;113(4):415-20 [PMID: 23670405]
  3. Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc. 1982 Summer;60(3):429-62 [PMID: 6923138]
  4. J Med Econ. 2013;16(5):639-47 [PMID: 23425293]
  5. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2010 Dec;24(4):551-62 [PMID: 21619866]
  6. Am J Public Health Nations Health. 1967 Mar;57(3):424-40 [PMID: 6066903]
  7. Health Policy. 2006 Jun;77(1):51-63 [PMID: 16139925]
  8. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(9):869-90 [PMID: 16942122]
  9. Mult Scler. 2013 Oct;19(12):1640-6 [PMID: 23652216]
  10. Mult Scler. 2017 Jul;23(8):1123-1136 [PMID: 28273775]
  11. J Autoimmun. 2014 Feb-Mar;48-49:134-42 [PMID: 24524923]
  12. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019 Aug 20;14(1):204 [PMID: 31429789]
  13. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Mar;35(3):331-345 [PMID: 27848219]
  14. Mult Scler. 2005 Apr;11(2):232-9 [PMID: 15794399]
  15. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097 [PMID: 19621072]
  16. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2013 Aug;71(8):549-55 [PMID: 23982015]
  17. Value Health Reg Issues. 2018 Dec;17:14-20 [PMID: 29605798]
  18. J Med Econ. 2013 Jul;16(7):939-50 [PMID: 23692584]
  19. Value Health. 2011 Jul-Aug;14(5 Suppl 1):S48-50 [PMID: 21839899]
  20. Drugs. 2010 Sep 10;70(13):1677-91 [PMID: 20731475]
  21. Eur J Health Econ. 2004 Oct;5 Suppl 1:S54-62 [PMID: 15754075]
  22. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2021 Feb;21(1):137-144 [PMID: 31984811]
  23. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998 May;13(5 Pt 2):597-606 [PMID: 17165326]
  24. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Mar 24;16:102 [PMID: 27009599]
  25. J Med Econ. 2015 Jan;18(1):69-75 [PMID: 25116693]
  26. PLoS One. 2016 Jul 13;11(7):e0159129 [PMID: 27411042]
  27. PLoS One. 2018 Jun 21;13(6):e0199446 [PMID: 29928006]
  28. Neuroepidemiology. 2016;46(3):209-21 [PMID: 26901651]
  29. J Neurol Sci. 2007 May 15;256 Suppl 1:S5-13 [PMID: 17346747]
  30. Lancet. 2008 Oct 25;372(9648):1502-17 [PMID: 18970977]
  31. Mult Scler. 2017 Aug;23(2_suppl):155-165 [PMID: 28643590]
  32. Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(13):857-76 [PMID: 15329031]
  33. Int J Behav Med. 2007;14(1):3-11 [PMID: 17511528]
  34. Neurology. 1983 Nov;33(11):1444-52 [PMID: 6685237]
  35. Mult Scler. 2011 Sep;17(9):1055-9 [PMID: 21551216]
  36. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2014 May;72(5):337-43 [PMID: 24863508]
  37. Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Jun;20(Suppl 1):155-172 [PMID: 31104219]
  38. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012 Oct;28(4):349-57 [PMID: 22989410]
  39. Mult Scler. 2012 Jun;18(2 Suppl):7-15 [PMID: 22623122]
  40. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013 Jun;31(6):501-8 [PMID: 23620212]
  41. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Feb 05;16(1):4 [PMID: 29402314]
  42. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Aug;29(8):653-71 [PMID: 21604822]
  43. Value Health. 2010 Aug;13(5):519-27 [PMID: 20712601]
  44. PLoS One. 2019 Jan 23;14(1):e0208837 [PMID: 30673707]
  45. Value Health. 2008 Jan-Feb;11(1):13-21 [PMID: 18237356]
  46. Eur J Health Econ. 2012 Feb;13(1):81-91 [PMID: 21080024]
  47. J Med Econ. 2010;13(4):626-32 [PMID: 20950249]
  48. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2006 Apr;6(2):145-54 [PMID: 20528550]
  49. Pharmacoeconomics. 1999 Mar;15(3):229-40 [PMID: 10537431]
  50. N Engl J Med. 2000 Sep 28;343(13):938-52 [PMID: 11006371]
  51. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(5):363-79 [PMID: 20402540]
  52. CNS Drugs. 2004;18(9):561-74 [PMID: 15222773]
  53. BMC Neurol. 2020 May 23;20(1):205 [PMID: 32446303]
  54. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2020 Aug;43:102162 [PMID: 32442885]
  55. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 Jan;34(1):43-58 [PMID: 26385101]
  56. Przegl Epidemiol. 2013;67(1):75-9, 157-60 [PMID: 23745380]
  57. Int J Prev Med. 2014 Sep;5(9):1131-8 [PMID: 25317296]
  58. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006 Aug;77(8):918-26 [PMID: 16690691]
  59. Confl Health. 2015 Mar 29;9:10 [PMID: 25904979]
  60. Value Health. 2009 Jun;12(4):408 [PMID: 19900248]

MeSH Term

Cost of Illness
Developing Countries
Drug Costs
Health Care Costs
Humans
Multiple Sclerosis
State Medicine

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0MSstudiescostcostsseverityusedLMICsdiseasecountriesacrossconducteddatatotalvariedlevelseconomicburdenreviewCOImethodologiesdriverssearchOvidEconomicCostsusingapproachperspectivepermainlydifferencesregardinginclusionDMTsincludedhealthcareincreasedgreaterratiosdifferenttimeshigherversusmildsevereBACKGROUND:Althoughmultiplesclerosishigh-incomeHICsextensivelystudiedinformationlow-middle-incomeremainsscarceMoreoversynthesizingassessingyetundertakenOBJECTIVE:objectivesystematicallyidentifyillnesscriticallyappraisecompareestimateslevelexamineMETHODS:systematicliteratureoriginalEnglishFrenchDutchcontainingprevalenceincidence-basedMEDLINEPubMedEmbaseCochraneLibraryNationalHealthServiceEvaluationDatabaseNHSEEDEconlitCINAHLEBSCOJuly2020withoutrestrictionspublicationdateRecommendedvalidatedmethodsextractionanalysismakeresultscomparableadjusted$USyear2019valuesWorldBankpurchasingpowerparityinflatedconsumerpriceindexRESULTS:14identifiedupper-middle-incomeeconomiesEightbottom-upcostingsixtop-downFoursocietalannualpatientranged$US46358616disease-modifyingtherapiesrangeitemsmethodologicalchoicesapproachesestimateresourceconsumptioninformalcareproductivitylossesCharacteristicsconsiderablyespeciallyadoptedspecificationreportingwithinrelativelystablearound1-15moderatetwodrugmaindriverlesswhereasproportiondirectnon-medicalindirectCONCLUSION:placeshugesystemssocietiesMethodologicalsubstantialvariationstermsabsolutefoundmadecomparisonchallengingHoweversimilarmakingcomparisonsfeasibleCostrelapsetreatmentsconsistentYetdistributioncomponentsBurdenMultipleSclerosisLow-Middle-IncomeCountries:SystematicReview

Similar Articles

Cited By