A cost-utility analysis of low-dose hormone replacement therapy in postmenopausal women with an intact uterus

The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost utility of one year's treatment with a low-dose conjugated estrogen/medroxyprogesterone acetate (CE/MPA low dose) preparation (Premique Low Dose [Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Maidenhead, UK]), compared with a higher-dose preparation (Premique; CE/MPA [Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Maidenhead, UK]), in postmenopausal women with an intact uterus. The evaluation captured the resource implications associated with the difference in treatment discontinuation and adverse event driven consultations in patients receiving either the low- or higher-dose preparation. This economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of the NHS.

A health economic model was developed to calculate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from treatment with a lower-dose CE/MPA combination, compared with a higher-dose CE/MPA preparation. Cohorts of 100 patients were assumed to receive either CE/MPA low dose or CE/MPA for one year. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to explore whether the base case model was robust to the assumptions employed. Neither costs nor consequences were discounted because of the one year timeframe.

In the base case, CE/MPA low dose dominates, i.e. it showed a greater health gain at a reduced cost, in both mild and severe symptom populations. These results were repeated in the sensitivity analysis, with the cost-effectiveness planes for both mild and severe symptom populations showing a greater utility at a reduced cost.

CE/MPA low dose has been demonstrated to be a cost-effective treatment of estrogen-deficiency symptoms in postmenopausal women with an intact uterus. It has great potential for increasing the number of patients benefiting from relief of menopausal symptoms while also reducing the resource utilisation associated with managing the adverse effects associated with higher-dose HRT.