Cost-effectiveness of strontium ranelate versus risedronate in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic women aged over 75Â years

ObjectiveTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of strontium ranelate in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic women aged over 75 years.Materials and methodsA validated Markov microsimulation model with a Belgian payer's perspective estimated the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of a 3-year strontium ranelate treatment compared with no treatment and with the bisphosphonate risedronate. Data on the effect of both treatments on fracture risk were taken from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Analyses were performed for postmenopausal women aged 75 and 80 years, either with a diagnosis of osteoporosis (i.e. bone mineral density T-score ≤ − 2.5 SD) or with prevalent vertebral fractures (PVF). Parameter uncertainty was evaluated using both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ResultsStrontium ranelate was dominant (i.e. more effective and less costly) versus risedronate for women with osteoporosis aged over 75 years and for women with PVF aged 80 years. The cost per QALY gained of strontium ranelate compared with risedronate at 75 years of age was €11,435 for women with PVF. When compared with no treatment, the costs per QALY gained of strontium ranelate were €15,588 and €7,708 at 75 and 80 years of age for women with osteoporosis; the equivalent values were €16,518 and €6,015 for women with PVF. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that strontium ranelate was generally more cost-effective than risedronate, in the range of 60% in all cases.ConclusionThe results of this study suggest that strontium ranelate is a cost-effective strategy, in a Belgian setting, for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic women aged over 75 years.