Cost-effectiveness analysis of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for the treatment of chronic cluster headache

Table 5 Cost-effectiveness analysis for alternative scenarios

Scenario
Treatment group	Mean cost, €	Mean QALY	ICER^a
Constant rate of response loss
nVNS + SoC	7377.41	0.558	nVNS dominant over SoC^b
SoC alone	7518.56	0.526	nVNS dominant over SoC^b
Diminishing rate of response loss
nVNS + SoC	7141.30	0.599	nVNS dominant over SoC^b
SoC alone	7508.98	0.525	nVNS dominant over SoC^b
No response for SoC
nVNS + SoC	7085.34	0.610	nVNS dominant over SoC^b
SoC alone	7507.94	0.524	nVNS dominant over SoC^b

Abbreviations: ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, nVNS non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation, QALY quality-adjusted life-year, SoC standard of care
Probabilistic estimates are based on mean results across all Monte Carlo simulations [21]
^aThe expense of gaining an additional QALY with adjunctive nVNS therapy (vs SoC alone)
^bIndicates that adjunctive nVNS therapy was more effective and cost saving than SoC alone

ISSN: 1129-2377