Cost-effectiveness of using an extensively hydrolyzed casein formula plus the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG compared to an extensively hydrolyzed formula alone or an amino acid formula as first-line dietary management for cow’s milk allergy in the US

Objectives The aim was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of using an extensively hydrolyzed casein formula (eHCF) plus the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (eHCF + LGG; Nutramigen LGG) compared to an eHCF alone (Nutramigen) and an amino acid formula (AAF; Neocate) as first-line dietary management for cow’s milk allergy (CMA) in the US. Methods Using a cohort study design, the analysis was based on the case records of 136 eHCF-fed, 59 eHCF + LGG-fed, and 217 matched AAF-fed infants extracted from the Truven Health MarketScan® Commercial Claims Database (a nationally representative database of the commercially insured population of the US). Clinical outcomes and health care resource use (with corresponding costs at 2012 prices), following first-line dietary management with each formula, were estimated over 12 months from the start of feeding. Differences in infants’ outcomes and resource use between groups were adjusted for any differences in baseline covariates. Results Infants were <6 months of age at presentation. Fifty-six percent of eHCF + LGG-fed infants were estimated to have been successfully managed by 9 months compared to 38% of eHCF-fed infants and 35% of AAF-fed infants (P<0.05 and P=0.003 respectively). Infants in the AAF group used significantly more health care resources and prescribed drugs than infants in the other two groups. The estimated cost of managing a CMA infant over the first 12 months following the start of feeding was $3,577, $3,781, and $6,255 for an eHCF + LGG-fed, eHCF-fed, and AAF-fed infant, respectively. Parents’ costs accounted for up to 10% of the total costs and the remainder was incurred by insurers. The analyses were robust to plausible changes in all variables. Conclusion Using real world evidence, initial dietary management with eHCF + LGG appears to afford a more cost-effective use of health care resources than initial dietary management with eHCF or AAF since it releases health care resources for alternative use within the system and reduces costs without impacting on the time needed to manage the allergy.

[1]  R. Troncone,et al.  Formula selection for management of children with cow's milk allergy influences the rate of acquisition of tolerance: a prospective multicenter study. , 2013, The Journal of pediatrics.

[2]  B. Niggemann,et al.  Diagnostic approach and management of cow's-milk protein allergy in infants and children: ESPGHAN GI Committee practical guidelines. , 2012, Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition.

[3]  S. H. Arshad,et al.  Guideline fever: an overview of DRACMA, US NIAID and UK NICE guidelines , 2012, Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology.

[4]  G. Lack,et al.  Cost‐effectiveness of using an extensively hydrolysed formula compared to an amino acid formula as first‐line treatment for cow milk allergy in the UK , 2012, Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology.

[5]  A. Coruzzo,et al.  Effect of Lactobacillus GG on tolerance acquisition in infants with cow's milk allergy: a randomized trial. , 2012, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[6]  S. Halken,et al.  Clinical course of cow's milk protein allergy/intolerance and atopic diseases in childhood , 2002, Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology.

[7]  D. Moneret-vautrin,et al.  [Use of an amino-acid-based formula in the treatment of cow's milk protein allergy and multiple food allergy syndrome]. , 2002, Allergie et immunologie.

[8]  D. Moneret-vautrin,et al.  [Protein hydrolysates: hypoallergenic milks and extensively hydrolyzed formulas. Immuno-allergic basis for their use in prevention and treatment of milk allergy]. , 2001, Archives de pédiatrie.

[9]  D. Moneret-Vautrin,et al.  Hydrolysats de protéines : laits hypoallergéniques et formules extensivement hydrolysées. Bases immuno-allergologiques de leur utilisation dans la prévention et le traitement de l’allergie au lait , 2001 .

[10]  J. Bines,et al.  The natural history of intolerance to soy and extensively hydrolyzed formula in infants with multiple food protein intolerance. , 1999, The Journal of pediatrics.

[11]  C. Dupont,et al.  Allergy to extensively hydrolyzed cow milk proteins in infants: identification and treatment with an amino acid-based formula. , 1997, The Journal of pediatrics.

[12]  M. Shelton,et al.  Manifestations of milk allergy in infancy: clinical and immunologic findings. , 1986, The Journal of pediatrics.

[13]  Carol Byrd-Bredbenner,et al.  Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Food Allergy in the United States: Summary of the NIAID-Sponsored Expert Panel Report. , 2010, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[14]  R. Korpela,et al.  A follow-up study of nutrient intake, nutritional status, and growth in infants with cow milk allergy fed either a soy formula or an extensively hydrolyzed whey formula. , 2005, The American journal of clinical nutrition.