Our latest research, all in one place. Browse our collection of journal articles, reports and conference proceedings to see how we’re contributing to HEOR research. Remember to:
The economic evaluation of medical devices is increasingly used to inform decision making on adopting new or novel technologies; however, challenges are inevitable due to the unique characteristics of devices. Costconsequence analyses are recommended and employed by the English National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme (MTEP) to help address these challenges. The aim of this work was to review the critiques raised for previous MTEP submissions and explore if there were common problems across submissions. We reviewed a sample of 12 economic submissions to MTEP representing 50 % of 24 sets of guidance issued to July 2015. For each submission, we reviewed the External Assessment Centre's (EAC) report and the guidance document produced by NICE. We identified the main problems raised by the EAC's assessments and the committee's considerations for each submission, and explored strategies for improvement. We found that the identification and measurement of costs and consequences are the main shortcomings within economic submissions to MTEP. Together, these shortcomings accounted for 42 % of criticisms by the EACs among the reviewed submissions. In certain circumstances problems with these shortcomings may be unavoidable, for example, if there is a limited evidence base for the device being appraised. Nevertheless, strategies can often be adopted to improve submissions, including the use of more appropriate time horizons, whilst cost and resource use information should be taken, where possible, from nationally representative sources.
AIM: To estimate potential cost avoidance through modest and achievable improvements in glycaemic control in adults with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes mellitus in the UK healthcare system.
METHODS: The IMS Core Diabetes Model was used to examine the impact of improved glycaemic control (indicated by reduction in HbA1c level), in a representative cohort of adults with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. The cumulative incidence of microvascular and macrovascular complications was modelled across 5-year periods to a 25-year time horizon. Complication costs were applied to the data to estimate potential accrued cost avoidance.
RESULTS: Significant cost avoidance of ~£340 m is apparent in the first 5 years, increasing to ~£5.5bn after 25 years of sustained improvement in control. The overwhelming majority of cost avoidance arises from reductions in microvascular complications. In people with Type 1 diabetes the greatest cost avoidance comes from a reduction in renal disease (74% of cost avoidance), while in people with Type 2 diabetes it is generated by a reduction in foot ulcers, amputations and neuropathy: 57% cost avoidance). Greater cost reduction is accrued more rapidly in people with higher starting HbA1c levels.
CONCLUSION: Modest improvements in glycaemic control generate significant reductions in the incidence and, therefore, cost of microvascular complications in people with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. This study provides clear support for the premise that prioritized and sustained investment in early and better intervention can provide concrete financial benefits in both the short and longer term.
BACKGROUND: Previously developed models in ophthalmology have generally used a Markovian structure. There are a number of limitations with this approach, most notably the ability to base patient outcomes on best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in both eyes, which may be overcome using a different modelling structure. Simulation modelling allows for this to be modelled more precisely, and therefore may provide more accurate and relevant estimates of the cost effectiveness of ophthalmology interventions.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the appropriateness of simulation modelling in ophthalmology, using the disease area of wet age-related macular degeneration (wAMD) as an example.
METHODS: A de novo economic model was built using a patient-level simulation, which compared ranibizumab with aflibercept in wAMD. Disease progression was measured using BCVA. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was estimated using a regression analysis linking BCVA in each eye to utility. The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service in the UK. Five different regression models were explored and were based on BCVA in either one eye or both eyes.
RESULTS: The model outputs provide some evidence to support the hypothesis that the analyses using the two-eye models for estimating HRQoL generate a more accurate estimation of incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with the positive treatment effect for ranibizumab versus aflibercept. Second-order analysis broadly supported these findings, and showed that the variation in incremental costs was slightly lower than in incremental QALYs. The second-order analysis estimated similar incremental costs and a greater overall variation in incremental QALYs than the first-order analysis, suggesting important non-linearities within the model.
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that patient-level simulation models may be well suited to representing the real-world patient pathway in wAMD, particularly when aspects of disease progression cannot be adequately captured using a Markov structure. The benefits of a simulation approach can be demonstrated in the modelling of HRQoL as a function of BCVA in both eyes.
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that probiotics may improve gastrointestinal discomfort. Not all probiotics exhibit the same effects and consequently meta-analyses on probiotics should be confined to well-defined strains or strain combinations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a probiotic fermented milk (PFM) that includes Bifidobacterium lactis (B. lactis) CNCM I-2494 and lactic acid bacteria on gastrointestinal discomfort in the general adult population.
METHODS: Double-blind randomized controlled trials in the general adult population comparing PFM with a control dairy product for at least 4 weeks were searched from multiple literature databases (up to February 2015). Meta-analyses using random-effects models, with individual participant data were undertaken to calculate an odds ratio (OR) or standard mean difference (SMD), with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: The search strategy identified 12,439 documents. Overall, three trials with a total of 598 adults (female = 96.5%) met the inclusion criteria. Consumption of the PFM product was associated with a significant improvement in overall gastrointestinal discomfort compared with the control product (OR = 1.48; 95% CI 1.07-2.05), with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 10.24 (95% CI 5.64-55.93). PFM was also superior to the control in reducing digestive symptoms, as measured using a composite score (SMD = -0.21; 95% CI -0.37 to -0.05). Sensitivity analyses produced similar results, and the heterogeneity between studies was minimal.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that the consumption of PFM with B. lactis CNCM I-2494 and lactic acid bacteria is associated with a modest but consistent and significant improvement of outcomes related to gastrointestinal discomfort in healthy adults.
In England, general practitioners are incentivized through a national pay-for-performance scheme to adopt evidence-based quality improvement initiatives using a portfolio of Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) indicators. We describe the development of the methods used to assess the cost-effectiveness of these pay-for-performance indicators and how they have contributed to the development of new indicators. Prior to analysis of new potential indicators, an economic subgroup of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Indicator Advisory Committee is formed to assess evidence on the cost-effectiveness of potential indicators in terms of the health benefits gained, compared to the cost of the intervention and the cost of the incentive. The expert subgroup is convened to reach consensus on the amounts that could potentially be paid to general practices for achieving new indicators. Indicators are also piloted in selected general practices and evidence gathered about their practical implementation. The methods used to assess economic viability of new pilot indicators represent a pragmatic and effective way of providing information to inform recommendations. Current policy to reduce QOF funding could shift the focus from national (QOF) to local schemes, with economic appraisal remaining central.
BACKGROUND: Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Tofacitinib is approved in the United States for use in adults with moderately to severely active RA and an inadequate response or intolerance to methotrexate.
OBJECTIVES: To (a) evaluate, using an economic model, the treatment costs of an RA strategy including tofacitinib, compared with adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab and tocilizumab biologic RA treatment strategies, which are commonly prescribed in the United States, and (b) assess the economic impact of monotherapy and combination therapy in patients who had an inadequate response to methotrexate therapy (MTX-IR analysis) and to combination therapy in patients who had an inadequate response to a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNF-IR analysis).
METHODS: A transparent, Excel-based economic model with a decision-tree approach was developed to evaluate costs over a 1- and 2-year time horizon. The model compared tofacitinib 5 mg twice a day (BID) either as monotherapy or in combination with MTX with similarly labeled biologic therapies. Response to treatment was modeled as American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70 response. ACR20 represented clinical response and determined whether patients continued therapy. ACR response rates at 6-month intervals were sourced from prescribing information and safety event rates from a published meta-analysis. Following an adverse event or a lack of response to treatment, it was assumed that 75% of patients switched to the next line of treatment (first to abatacept and then to rituximab). The perspective was that of a U.S. payer. Costs were reported in 2015 U.S. dollars and included drug wholesale acquisition costs, monitoring, drug administration, and treatment for minor and serious adverse events. The patient population eligible for treatment was based on the total number of members (i.e., RA and non-RA) in a payer organization; members with RA treated with biologic therapies were estimated using epidemiological data. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of varying key parameters, including treatment-switching probability, product rebate, major rates of adverse drug reaction, and ACR20 rates, on the model outcomes.
RESULTS: Tofacitinib combination therapy after MTX failure was associated with the lowest cost per member per month (PMPM) over a 2-year time frame at $5.53, compared with $6.49 for adalimumab, $6.43 for etanercept, $5.95 for certolizumab, and $5.89 for tocilizumab. Similar savings were observed when all biologics were administered as monotherapy. Tofacitinib combination therapy was also associated with the lower PMPM cost compared with adalimumab combination therapy in the TNF-IR analysis. Tofacitinib was also among the lowest cost per ACR20 responder in each analysis. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that tofacitinib would potentially be cost saving even in the least optimistic scenarios.
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that tofacitinib 5 mg BID following MTX failure is a lower cost per patient treatment option when used either as monotherapy or combination therapy, compared with adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab and tocilizumab biologic regimens. Tofacitinib + MTX in TNF-IR patients was also predicted to be a lower-cost treatment option compared with adalimumab+MTX and was associated with the lowest cost per ACR 20/50/70 responder.
BACKGROUND: The numbers of incarcerated people suffering from drug dependence has steadily risen since the 1980s and only a small proportion of these receive appropriate treatment. A systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and economic evidence of non-pharmacological interventions for drug using offenders was conducted.
METHODS: Cochrane Collaboration criteria were used to identify trials across 14 databases between 2004 and 2014. A series of meta-analyses and an economic appraisal were conducted.
RESULTS: 43 trials were identified showing to have limited effect in reducing re-arrests RR 0.97 (95% CI 0.89-1.07) and drug use RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.80-1.00) but were found to significantly reduce re-incarceration RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.85). Therapeutic community programs were found to significantly reduce the number of re-arrests RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.56-0.87). 10 papers contained economic information. One paper presented a cost-benefit analysis and two reported on the cost and cost effectiveness of the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that therapeutic community interventions have some benefit in reducing subsequent re-arrest. We recommend that economic evaluations should form part of standard trial protocol
