Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2020 Mar 2;3(3):e201594.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1594.

Cost-effectiveness of Mifepristone Pretreatment for the Medical Management of Nonviable Early Pregnancy: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Divyah Nagendra  1 , Nathanael Koelper  1 , Sandra E Loza-Avalos  1 , Sarita Sonalkar  1 , Melissa Chen  2 , Jessica Atrio  3 , Courtney A Schreiber  1 , Heidi S Harvie  1
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Cost-effectiveness of Mifepristone Pretreatment for the Medical Management of Nonviable Early Pregnancy: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Divyah Nagendra et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Early pregnancy loss (EPL) is the most common complication of pregnancy. A multicenter randomized clinical trial compared 2 strategies for medical management and found that mifepristone pretreatment is 25% more effective than the standard of care, misoprostol alone. The cost of mifepristone may be a barrier to implementation of the regimen.

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of medical management of EPL with mifepristone pretreatment plus misoprostol vs misoprostol alone in the United States.

Design, setting, and participants: This preplanned. prospective economic evaluation was performed concurrently with a randomized clinical trial in 3 US sites from May 1, 2014, through April 30, 2017. Participants included 300 women with anembryonic gestation or embryonic or fetal demise. Cost-effectiveness was computed from the health care sector and societal perspectives, with a 30-day time horizon. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2018, to July 3, 2019.

Interventions: Mifepristone pretreatment plus misoprostol administration vs misoprostol alone.

Main outcomes and measures: Costs in 2018 US dollars, effectiveness in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and treatment efficacy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of mifepristone and misoprostol vs misoprostol alone were calculated, and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated.

Results: Among the 300 women included in the randomized clinical trial (mean [SD] age, 30.4 [6.2] years), mean costs were similar for groups receiving mifepristone pretreatment and misoprostol alone from the health care sector perspective ($696.75 [95% CI, $591.88-$801.62] vs $690.88 [95% CI, $562.38-$819.38]; P = .94) and the societal perspective ($3846.30 [95% CI, $2783.01-$4909.58] vs $4845.62 [95% CI, $3186.84-$6504.41]; P = .32). The mifepristone pretreatment group had higher QALYs (0.0820 [95% CI, 0.0815-0.0825] vs 0.0806 [95% CI, 0.0800-0.0812]; P = .001) and a higher completion rate after first treatment (83.8% vs 67.1%; P < .001) than the group receiving misoprostol alone. From the health care sector perspective, mifepristone pretreatment was cost-effective relative to misoprostol alone with an ICER of $4225.43 (95% CI, -$195 053.30 to $367 625.10) per QALY gained. From the societal perspective, mifepristone pretreatment dominated misoprostol alone (95% CI, -$5 111 629 to $1 801 384). The probabilities that mifepristone pretreatment was cost-effective compared with misoprostol alone at a willingness-to-pay of $150 000 per QALY gained from the health care sector and societal perspectives were approximately 90% and 80%, respectively.

Conclusions and relevance: This study found that medical management of EPL with mifepristone pretreatment was cost-effective when compared with misoprostol alone.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02012491.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Chen reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) during the conduct of the study. Dr Schreiber reported receiving grants from NIH during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Danco Laboratories LLC outside the submitted work; and having US provisional patent application 62/777,369 pending. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Consort Diagram of Study Participants Included in Cost-effectiveness Analysis
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER) Scatterplot for Mifepristone Pretreatment Plus Misoprostol vs Misoprostol Only
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Cost-effectiveness Acceptability Curve for Mifepristone Pretreatment Plus Misoprostol vs Misoprostol Alone
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Casterline JB. Collecting data on pregnancy loss: a review of evidence from the World Fertility Survey. Stud Fam Plann 1989;20(2):81–95. doi:10.2307/1966462 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ventura SJ, Curtin SC, Abma JC, Henshaw SK. Estimated pregnancy rates and rates of pregnancy outcomes for the United States, 1990–2008. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2012;60(7):1–21. - PubMed
    1. Schreiber CA, Chavez V, Whittaker PG, Ratcliffe SJ, Easley E, Barg FK. Treatment decisions at the time of miscarriage diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(6):1347–1356. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001753 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zhang J, Gilles JM, Barnhart K, Creinin MD, Westhoff C, Frederick MM; National Institute of Child Health Human Development (NICHD) Management of Early Pregnancy Failure Trial. A comparison of medical management with misoprostol and surgical management for early pregnancy failure. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(8):761–769. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa044064 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rausch M, Lorch S, Chung K, Frederick M, Zhang J, Barnhart K. A cost-effectiveness analysis of surgical versus medical management of early pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(2):355–360. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.11.044 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data