TABLE 5.

Comparison of the mean of the differences in costs and DALYs between the 3 different EU-level action policy options and the reference situation of not acting at the EU level for the base case and 3 scenarios (probabilistic sensitivity analysis)¹

	Base case		Scenario 1		Scenario 2		Scenario 3
	Δ Costs (× million), €	Δ DALYs (× million)	Δ Costs (× million), €	Δ DALYs (× million)	Δ Costs (× million), €	Δ DALYs (× million)	Δ Costs (× million), €	Δ DALYs (× million)
Legal limit vs. no EU action	−76,478	−5.32	−9,127	−1.13	−144,010	−9.65	−273,864	−16.67
Voluntary agreements vs. no EU action	−35,603	−2.93	−1684	−0.68	−79,067	−5.79	−153,857	−10.04
Mandatory labeling vs. no EU action	89,153	−1.39	104,736	−0.38	59,942	−3.25	20,144	−5.63
ICER
Legal limit	Dominant		Dominant		Dominant		Dominant
Voluntary agreements	Dominant		Dominant		Dominant		Dominant
Mandatory labeling	−64,363		−274,163		−18,433		−3580

¹Values are the means of 1000 outcomes in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis for the full time horizon of the model (85 y). Negative numbers express savings when compared with the reference situation. The absolute value of the ICER (calculated by dividing “Δ Costs” and “Δ DALYs”) represents the cost to the public for each DALY averted for a policy option against the reference of not acting at the EU level. A “dominant” ICER indicates that the policy option in question averts DALYs and saves money. DALY, disability-adjusted life-year; EU, European Union; ICER, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; Δ Costs, differences in costs; Δ DALYs, difference in DALYs.