Microsimulation Model to Determine the Cost-Effectiveness of Treat-to-Target Strategies for Ulcerative Colitis

Common Instances of Low-value Care in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Value-based care focuses on improving the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of health care while controlling costs. Low-value care implies services or interventions that provide little or no benefit to patients, have the potential to cause harm, incur unnecessary cost to patients, or waste limited health care resources. In this review, we discuss common instances of low-value care along the spectrum of management in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). These include low value care in: (1) diagnosis and monitoring of IBD: utilization of serological markers to screen and diagnose IBD, over-reliance on symptoms for monitoring disease, failure to employ treat-to-target strategies in symptomatic patients with IBD, and annual surveillance colonoscopies in patients at low risk of developing dysplasia; (2) treatment of IBD: use of 5-aminosalicylates in Crohn's disease, continuation of 5-aminosalicylates after escalation to immunosuppressive therapy, chronic corticosteroid use without steroid-sparing strategies, step therapy for Crohn's disease, failure to optimize tumor necrosis factor antagonists in patients with active disease and subsequently de-intensification of therapies in those who have achieved stable remission; and (3) management of hospitalized patients with IBD: routine cross-sectional imaging for patients with IBD presenting to the emergency department, withholding pharmacological prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in patients hospitalized with IBD flare, and prolonged use of high-dose intravenous corticosteroids in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis. This review is meant to bring attention to value-based care in IBD and provide guidance to treating practitioners. Future studies on systematic evaluation of high- and low-value care in patients with IBD are warranted.

Non-invasive monitoring and treat-to-target approach are cost-effective in patients with mild-moderate ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

There are no data to assess the value associated with a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy based on tight control of mild-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC).

AIM

To assess the cost-effectiveness of a T2T approach based on the normalisation of clinical signs and faecal calprotectin (FC) METHODS: A decision analytical Markov model was developed to compare T2T algorithm combining clinical symptoms and FC levels to define treatment response and the possible switch to the next treatment line (T2T-FC), and the reference strategy based only on symptoms. The model included five treatment lines and was conducted from the Italian national health service (NHS) perspective using a 3-year time horizon. The model calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as € per relapse avoided. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The cost-effectiveness analysis produced an increased time spent by a patient in clinical remission and FC ≤ 100 level (+0.177 years; about 2 months) and a decreasing number of relapses (-0.1937; -20.9%) per patient using a T2T-FC approach compared to only symptoms. Furthermore, the T2T-FC was associated with higher cost (+€1795). The ICER estimated was €9263 per relapse avoided. These results were confirmed by sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

T2T-FC approach resulted in a higher benefit for mild-moderate UC patients in terms of time in remission and incidence of relapse but was associated with higher costs. Clinical trials and real-world clinical studies are needed to provide additional data on the cost-benefit of this approach.

AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on the Role of Biomarkers for the Management of Ulcerative Colitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Biomarkers are used frequently for noninvasive monitoring and treatment decision making in the management of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). This American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) guideline is intended to support practitioners in decisions about the use of biomarkers for the management of UC.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary panel of content experts and guideline methodologists used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to prioritize clinical questions, identify patient-centered outcomes, and conduct an evidence synthesis on the clinical performance of serum C-reactive protein (CRP), fecal calprotectin, and fecal lactoferrin as biomarkers of disease activity in patients with established UC in symptomatic remission or with active symptoms. The guideline panel used the Evidence-to-Decision framework to develop recommendations for the use of biomarkers for monitoring and management of UC and provided implementation considerations for clinical practice.

RESULTS

The guideline panel made 7 conditional recommendations. In patients with UC in symptomatic remission, the panel suggests the use of a biomarker- and symptom-based monitoring strategy over a symptom-based monitoring strategy. For patients in symptomatic remission, the panel suggests using fecal calprotectin <150 μg/g, normal fecal lactoferrin, and/or normal CRP to rule out active inflammation and avoid routine endoscopic assessment of disease. In patients with UC with moderate to severe symptoms, the panel suggests using fecal calprotectin >150 μg/g, elevated fecal lactoferrin, or elevated CRP to inform treatment decisions and avoid routine endoscopic assessment of disease. However, in patients in symptomatic remission but elevated biomarkers, and in patients with moderate to severe symptoms with normal biomarkers, the panel suggests endoscopic assessment of disease to inform treatment decisions. In patients with UC with mild symptoms, the panel suggests endoscopic assessment of disease activity to inform treatment decisions. The panel identified the use of a biomarker-based monitoring strategy over an endoscopy-based monitoring strategy as a knowledge gap. The panel also proposed key implementation considerations for optimal use of biomarkers, and identified areas for future research.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with UC, noninvasive biomarkers, including fecal calprotectin, fecal lactoferrin, and serum CRP can inform disease monitoring and management.