Health Economic Evaluation of a Double-Blind, Randomised, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Low-Dose Oral Morphine (MABEL)

  1. M Atter
  2. PS Hall
  3. RA Evans
  4. J Norrie
  5. J Cohen
  6. B Williams
  7. N Chaudhuri
  8. S Bajwah
  9. IJ Higginson
  10. M Pearson
  11. DC Currow
  12. G Stewart
  13. MT Fallon
  14. MJ Johnson
Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objectives

To compare costs and health consequences and to assess the cost-effectiveness of using low-dose oral long-acting morphine in people with chronic breathlessness.

Design

Within-trial planned cost-consequences and cost-effectiveness analysis of data from a multi-site, parallel-group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of low-dose, long-acting morphine.

Setting

11 hospital outpatients across the UK.

Participants

Those eligible to participate were consenting adults with chronic breathlessness due to long-term cardiorespiratory conditions.

Intervention

5-10mg twice-daily oral long-acting morphine with a blinded laxative for 56 days.

Primary outcome measures

Mean and standard deviation (SD) of healthcare resource use (HRU) by trial arm; mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of costs between trial arms.

Secondary outcome measures

Mean differences in 28- and 56-day quality-adjusted life years (QALYs based on EQ-5D), SF-6D scores, and ICECAP-SCM scores; cost-utility of long-acting morphine for chronic breathlessness.

Results

143 participants (75 morphine, 67 placebo) were randomised; 140 formed the modified intention-to-treat population (90% power; males 66%; mean age 70.5 [SD 9.4]). There were more inpatient and fewer outpatient services used by the morphine group versus placebo. In the base case analysis at 56 days, long-acting morphine was associated with similar mean per-patient costs and QALYs: There was an increase of £24 (95% CI: -£395, £552) and 0.002 (95% CI: -0.004, 0.008) QALYs. Hospitalisations were the main driver of cost differences. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £12,000/QALY, with a probability of cost-effectiveness of 54% at a £20,000 Willingness-to-Pay (WTP) threshold. In the scenario analysis that excluded costs of adverse events considered unrelated to long-acting morphine by site investigators and researchers, the probability of cost-effectiveness increased to 73%.

Conclusion

Oral morphine for chronic breathlessness is likely to be a cost-effective intervention provided adverse events are minimised but the effect on outcome is small and cautious interpretation is warranted.

ARTICLE SUMMARY

Strengths and limitations of this study

  • Comprehensive collection of patient-reported health economic data in a randomised controlled trial, including three different health outcome measures relevant to people living with chronic breathlessness due to medical conditions

  • The parent trial intervention dosing schedule mirrored clinical practice to give a pragmatic indication of cost impacts

  • Limited interpretation of cost-effectiveness analysis due to a likely random imbalance in deaths and expensive adverse events, in a study design not primarily designed to detect differences in economic endpoints

  • Technical challenges in analysing and estimating costs for concomitant medications

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1101/2025.06.04.25328980v1 on medRxiv