Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of osteoporosis screening and treatment strategy for postmenopausal Japanese women

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Osteoporosis International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Summary

Although an osteoporosis screening program has been implemented as a health promotion project in Japan, its cost-effectiveness has yet to be elucidated fully. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis and found that osteoporosis screening and treatment would be cost-effective for Japanese women over 60 years.

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening and drug therapy in the Japanese healthcare system for postmenopausal women with no history of fracture.

Methods

A patient-level state transition model was developed to predict the outcomes of Japanese women with no previous fracture. Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated for women who receive osteoporosis screening and alendronate therapy for 5 years and those who do not receive the screening and treatments. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the screening option compared with the no screening option was estimated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the influence of parameter uncertainty on the base case results.

Results

The ICERs of osteoporosis screening and treatments for Japanese women aged 50–54, 55–59, 60–64, 65–69, 70–74, and 75–79 years were estimated to be $89,242, $64,010, $40,596, $27,697, $17,027, and $9771 per QALY gained, respectively. Deterministic sensitivity analyses showed that several parameters such as the disutility due to vertebral fracture had a significant influence on the base case results. Applying a willingness to pay of $50,000 per QALY gained, the probability that the screening option became cost-effectiveness estimated to 50.9, 56.3, 59.1, and 64.7 % for women aged 60–64, 65–69, 70–74, and 75–79 years, respectively. Scenario analyses showed that the ICER for women aged 55–59 years with at least one clinical risk factor was below $50,000 per QALY.

Conclusions

In conclusion, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) screening and alendronate therapy for osteoporosis would be cost-effective for postmenopausal Japanese women over 60 years. In terms of cost-effectiveness, the individual need for osteoporosis screening should be determined by age and clinical risk factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Orimo H, Yaegashi Y, Hosoi T, Fukushima Y, Onoda T, Hashimoto T, Sakata K (2016) Hip fracture incidence in Japan: estimates of new patients in 2012 and 25-year trends. Osteoporos Int. doi:10.1007/s00198-015-3464-8

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Orimo H, Yaegashi Y, Onoda T, Fukushima Y, Hosoi T, Sakata K (2009) Hip fracture incidence in Japan: estimates of new patients in 2007 and 20-year trends. Arch Osteoporos 4:71–77

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Harada A, Matsui Y, Takemura M, Ito Z, Wakao N, Ota T (2005) Cost-utility analysis of osteoporosis. Nippon Ronen Igakkai Zasshi. Jpn J Geriatr 42:596–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Nakatoh S (2014) [Epidemiology of bone and joint disease—the present and future. The present situation and problems associated with medical screening systems for osteoporosis]. Clinical Calcium 24:719–726

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mueller D, Weyler E, Gandjour A (2008) Cost effectiveness of the German screen-and-treat strategy for postmenopausal osteoporosis. PharmacoEconomics 26:513–536

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nayak S, Roberts MS, Greenspan SL (2012) Impact of generic alendronate cost on the cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening and treatment. PLoS One 7:e32879

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Nayak S, Roberts MS, Greenspan SL (2011) Cost-effectiveness of different screening strategies for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Ann Intern Med 155:751–761

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Nshimyumukiza L, Durand A, Gagnon M et al (2013) An economic evaluation: simulation of the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of universal prevention strategies against osteoporosis-related fractures. J Bone Miner Res 28:383–394

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Schwenkglenks M, Lippuner K (2007) Simulation-based cost-utility analysis of population screening-based alendronate use in Switzerland. Osteoporos Int 18:1481–1491

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mobley LR, Hoerger TJ, Wittenborn JS, Galuska DA, Rao JK (2006) Cost-effectiveness of osteoporosis screening and treatment with hormone replacement therapy, raloxifene, or alendronate. Med Decis Mak 26:194–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Moriwaki K, Komaba H, Noto S, Yanagisawa S, Takiguchi T, Inoue H, Toujo T, Fukagawa M, Takahashi HE (2013) Cost-effectiveness of alendronate for the treatment of osteopenic postmenopausal women in Japan. J Bone Miner Res 28:395–403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ross PD, Fujiwara S, Huang C, Davis JW, Epstein RS, Wasnich RD, Kodama K, Melton LJ III (1995) Vertebral fracture prevalence in women in Hiroshima compared to Caucasians or Japanese in the US. Int J Epidemiol 24:1171–1177

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fujiwara S, Kasagi F, Masunari N, Naito K, Suzuki G, Fukunaga M (2003) Fracture prediction from bone mineral density in Japanese men and women. J Bone Miner Res 18:1547–1553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ross PD, Norimatsu H, Davis JW, Yano K, Wasnich RD, Fujiwara S, Hosoda Y, Melton LJ III (1991) A comparison of hip fracture incidence among native Japanese, Japanese Americans, and American Caucasians. Am J Epidemiol 133:801–809

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hagino H, Katagiri H, Okano T, Yamamoto K, Teshima R (2005) Increasing incidence of hip fracture in Tottori Prefecture, Japan: trend from 1986 to 2001. Osteoporos Int 16:1963–1968

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Orimo H, Hayashi Y, Fukunaga M et al (2001) Diagnostic criteria for primary osteoporosis: year 2000 revision. J Bone Miner Metab 19:331–337

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Committee of Japanese Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis (2015) The Japanese guidelines for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis (2015 edition). Life Science Publishing, Tokyo, Japan Japanese

    Google Scholar 

  18. Looker AC, Wahner HW, Dunn WL, Calvo MS, Harris TB, Heyse SP, Johnston CC Jr, Lindsay R (1998) Updated data on proximal femur bone mineral levels of US adults. Osteoporos Int 8:468–489

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gray AM, Clarke PM, Wolstenholme JL, Wordsworth S (2010) Applied methods of cost-effectiveness analysis in healthcare. Oxford University Press, New York, USA

    Google Scholar 

  20. De Laet CE, van Hout BA, Burger H, Hofman A, Pols HA (1997) Bone density and risk of hip fracture in men and women: cross sectional analysis. BMJ 315:221–225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Hagino H, Furukawa K, Fujiwara S, Okano T, Katagiri H, Yamamoto K, Teshima R (2009) Recent trends in the incidence and lifetime risk of hip fracture in Tottori, Japan. Osteoporos Int 20:543–548

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hagino H, Yamamoto K, Ohshiro H, Nakamura T, Kishimoto H, Nose T (1999) Changing incidence of hip, distal radius, and proximal humerus fractures in Tottori Prefecture, Japan. Bone 24:265–270

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Marshall D, Johnell O, Wedel H (1996) Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures. BMJ 312:1254–1259

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Kanis JA, Johnell O, De Laet C et al (2004) A meta-analysis of previous fracture and subsequent fracture risk. Bone 35:375–382

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kanis JA, Johansson H, Johnell O, Oden A, De Laet C, Eisman JA, Pols H, Tenenhouse A (2005) Alcohol intake as a risk factor for fracture. Osteoporos Int 16:737–742

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kanis JA, Johansson H, Oden A et al (2004) A family history of fracture and fracture risk: a meta-analysis. Bone 35:1029–1037

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A et al (2005) Smoking and fracture risk: a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 16:155–162

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, Jonsson B, Dawson A, Dere W (2000) Risk of hip fracture derived from relative risks: an analysis applied to the population of Sweden. Osteoporos Int 11:120–127

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Japan Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare (2012) National Health and Nutrition Survey [Internet]. Tokyo, Japan: Japan Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare; [cited 2016 Mar 20]. Available from: http://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/houdou/0000032074.html. Japanese

  30. Black DM, Cummings SR, Karpf DB et al (1996) Randomised trial of effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with existing vertebral fractures. Fracture Intervention Trial Research Group. Lancet 348:1535–1541

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Japan Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare (2010) Life table for Japanese [Internet]. Tokyo, Japan: Japan Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare; [cited 2016 Mar 20]. Available from: http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/GL08020103.do?_toGL08020103_&listID=000001111987&requestSender=dsearch. Japanese

  32. Kanis JA, Oden A, Johnell O, De Laet C, Jonsson B, Oglesby AK (2003) The components of excess mortality after hip fracture. Bone 32:468–473

  33. Hayashi Y (2007) [Economical viewpoint for treatment of osteoporosis]. Nihon Rinsho 65(Suppl 9):609–614

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Jansen JP, Bergman GJ, Huels J, Olson M (2011) The efficacy of bisphosphonates in the prevention of vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral-nonhip fractures in osteoporosis: a network meta-analysis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 40:275–284 e271-272

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tosteson AN, Jonsson B, Grima DT, O’Brien BJ, Black DM, Adachi JD (2001) Challenges for model-based economic evaluations of postmenopausal osteoporosis interventions. Osteoporos Int 12:849–857

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kanis JA, Cooper C, Hiligsmann M, Rabenda V, Reginster JY, Rizzoli R (2011) Partial adherence: a new perspective on health economic assessment in osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 22:2565–2573

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. National Health Insurance price list (2014) Tokyo Japan. Jihou Press, Japanese

  38. Medical fee schedule (2014) Tokyo Japan. Igaku-tsushin-sya, Japanese

  39. Hagino H (2002) [Cost-effectiveness of the treatment for osteoporosis]. Nihon Rinsho 60(Suppl 3):645–654

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kondo A, Zierler BK, Isokawa Y, Hagino H, Ito Y (2009) Comparison of outcomes and costs after hip fracture surgery in three hospitals that have different care systems in Japan. Health Policy 91:204–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Negami S (2011) Comparison of cost for distal radius fractures before and after DPC revision by using EVE. J Sapporo Soc Insur Gen Hosp 20:43

    Google Scholar 

  42. Reward for nursing care (2014) Tokyo, Japan. Igaku-tsushin-sya, Japanese

  43. Nawata S, Yamada Y, Ikeda S, Ikegami N (2000) EuroQol study of the elderly general population: relationship with IADL and other attributes. J Health Care Soc 10

  44. Hagino H, Nakamura T, Fujiwara S, Oeki M, Okano T, Teshima R (2009) Sequential change in quality of life for patients with incident clinical fractures: a prospective study. Osteoporos Int 20:695–702

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Imai H, Fujii Y, Fukuda Y, Nakao H, Yahata Y (2008) Health-related quality of life and beneficiaries of long-term care insurance in Japan. Health Policy 85:349–355

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Gafni A, Birch S (2006) Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the silence of the lambda. Soc Sci Med 62:2091–2100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. FRAX WHO Fracture Risk Assessment Tool Japan. The probabilities of a major osteoporotic fracture in women [Internet]. Sheffield, UK: World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases, University of Sheffield; [cited 2016 Mar 20]. Available from: http://www.shef.ac.uk/FRAX/charts/Chart_JAP_ost_wom_bmd.pdf

  48. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB (1996) Recommendations of the panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 276:1253–1258

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Tsuboi M, Hasegawa Y, Suzuki S, Wingstrand H, Thorngren KG (2007) Mortality and mobility after hip fracture in Japan: a ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br Vol 89-B(4):461–466

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI) Grant Number 26870670 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)/Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS).

Authors’ contributions

Study design: MY and KM. Data collection: MY, KM, and SN. Data analysis: MY and KM. Data interpretation: MY, KM, SN, and TT. Drafting the manuscript: MY and KM. Revising the manuscript content: MY, KM, SN, and TT. Approving the final version of manuscript: MY, KM, SN, and TT. MY and KM takes responsibility for the integrity of the data analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Field of Health Informatics and Business Administration, Graduate School of Health and Welfare, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami, Kita-ku, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan

    M. Yoshimura & T. Takiguchi

  2. Crecon Medical Assessment Inc, The Pharmaceutical Society of Japan, Nagai Memorial, 2-12-15, Shibuya, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo, 150-0002, Japan

    M. Yoshimura

  3. Department of Medical Statistics, Kobe Pharmaceutical University, 4-19-1 Motoyamakita, Higashinada, Kobe, 658-8558, Japan

    K. Moriwaki

  4. Center for Health Economics and QOL Research, 1398 Shimami, Kita-ku, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan

    K. Moriwaki & S. Noto

  5. Department of Occupational Therapy, Niigata University of Health and Welfare, 1398 Shimami, Kita-ku, Niigata, 950-3198, Japan

    S. Noto

Authors
  1. M. Yoshimura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Moriwaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Noto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. T. Takiguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Moriwaki.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

KM has received speaker honoraria, consulting fees, and reimbursement for attending meetings from AbbVie GK, Asahi Kasei Pharma Corp., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Deloitte Tohmatsu Consulting LLC, Eli Lilly Japan K.K., MSD K.K., and Medtronic Japan Co., Ltd. SN has received research funding from the CRECON Medical Assessment Inc. MY and TT declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Mizuki Yoshimura and Kensuke Moriwaki contributed equally to this work.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOC 161 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yoshimura, M., Moriwaki, K., Noto, S. et al. A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of osteoporosis screening and treatment strategy for postmenopausal Japanese women. Osteoporos Int 28, 643–652 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3782-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3782-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation