A Model to Assess the Outcomes Associated With Dementia With Lewy Bodies

BACKGROUND

Research investigating outcomes associated with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) disease progression is scarce. Developing models of DLB disease progression will provide information on the burden of disease and facilitate the evaluation of treatments for DLB from a clinical and cost perspective.

METHODS

Longitudinal, cognitive evaluation data were utilized in order to identify distinct health states for DLB and to estimate transition probabilities across the DLB disease continuum. These probabilities were applied to a health state transition model to evaluate disease progression and associated outcomes for a closed cohort over a fixed time horizon. The effect of a reduction in the risk of disease progression on outcomes was assessed.

RESULTS

Estimated transition probabilities indicate that a patient >60 years of age with mild DLB has a 54%, 30%, 4%, and 12% chance of remaining mild, progressing to severe DLB, being institutionalized, and dying after 1 year, respectively. Reducing the annual risk of transitioning from mild to severe DLB by 40% decreased time institutionalized and increased time to death.

CONCLUSIONS

This study used real-world longitudinal data to create a clinically relevant DLB disease progression model. Reducing the rate of disease progression resulted in meaningful benefits with potentially significant public health implications.

How relevant are social costs in economic evaluations? The case of Alzheimer's disease

BACKGROUND

The main objective of this study was to analyse how the inclusion (exclusion) of social costs can alter the results and conclusions of economic evaluations in the field of Alzheimer's disease interventions.

METHODS

We designed a systematic review that included economic evaluations in Alzheimer's disease. The search strategy was launched in 2000 and ran until November 2018. The inclusion criteria were: being an original study published in a scientific journal, being an economic evaluation of any intervention related to Alzheimer's disease, including social costs (informal care costs and/or productivity losses), being written in English, using QALYs as an outcome for the incremental cost-utility analysis, and separating the results according to the perspective applied.

RESULTS

It was finally included 27 studies and 55 economic evaluations. Around 11% of economic evaluations changed their main conclusions. More precisely, three of them concluded that the new intervention became cost-effective when the societal perspective was considered, whereas when using just the health care payer perspective, the new intervention did not result in a cost-utility ratio below the threshold considered. Nevertheless, the inclusion of social cost can also influence the results, as 37% of the economic evaluations included became the dominant strategy after including social costs when they were already cost-effective in the health care perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

Social costs can substantially modify the results of the economic evaluations. Therefore, taking into account social costs in diseases such as Alzheimer's can be a key element in making decisions about public financing and pricing of health interventions.

Family and Caregiver Spillover Effects in Cost-Utility Analyses of Alzheimer's Disease Interventions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Alzheimer's disease or dementia can impose a significant burden on family and other informal caregivers. This study investigated how the inclusion of family/informal caregiver spillover effects in a cost-utility analysis may influence the reported value of Alzheimer's disease/dementia interventions.

METHODS

We used PubMed to identify Alzheimer's disease or dementia cost-utility analyses published from 1 January, 2000 to 31 March, 2018. We reviewed and abstracted information from each study using a two-reader consensus process. We investigated the frequency and methods in which family/caregiver spillover costs and health effects were incorporated into cost-utility analyses, and examined how their inclusion may influence the reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS

Of 63 Alzheimer's disease/dementia cost-utility analyses meeting inclusion criteria, 44 (70%) considered at least some family/caregiver spillover costs or health effects. Thirty-two studies incorporated spillover costs only, two incorporated spillover health effects only, and ten incorporated both. The most common approach for accounting for spillover was adding informal caregiving time costs to patient costs (n = 36) and adding informal caregiver quality-adjusted life-years to patient values (n = 7). In a subset of 33 incremental cost-effectiveness ratio pairs from 19 studies, incorporating spillover outcomes made incremental cost-effectiveness ratios more favorable (n = 15; 45%) or kept the intervention cost saving (n = 13; 39%) in most cases. In fewer cases, including spillover increased incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (n = 2; 6%), kept the intervention dominated [more costs/less quality-adjusted life-years] (n = 2; 6%), or changed incremental cost-effectiveness ratio from dominated to less cost/less quality-adjusted life-years (n = 1; 3%). In 11 cases (33%), adding spillover effects into analyses resulted in a lower incremental cost-effectiveness ratio that crossed a common cost-effectiveness threshold, which could have downstream implications for programs or policies that are adopted based on cost-effectiveness analysis results.

DISCUSSION

Most Alzheimer's disease/dementia cost-utility analyses incorporated spillover costs, often as caregiver time costs, but considered spillover health impacts less often. In about 85% of the analyses, including Alzheimer's disease/dementia spillover cost or health effects decreased incremental cost-effectiveness ratios or kept the intervention cost saving. The broader value of an Alzheimer's disease/dementia intervention to society may in some cases be underestimated without considering these spillover effects on family and informal caregivers.

Where are we at with model-based economic evaluations of interventions for dementia? a systematic review and quality assessment

ABSTRACTObjective:To identify, review, and critically appraise model-based economic evaluations of all types of interventions for people with dementia and their carers.

DESIGN

A systematic literature search was undertaken to identify model-based evaluations of dementia interventions. A critical appraisal of included studies was carried out using guidance on good practice methods for decision-analytic models in health technology assessment, with a focus on model structure, data, and model consistency.

SETTING

Interventions for people with dementia and their carers, across prevention, diagnostic, treatment, and disease management.

RESULTS

We identified 67 studies, with 43 evaluating pharmacological products, 19 covering prevention or diagnostic strategies, and 5 studies reporting non-pharmacological interventions. The majority of studies use Markov models with a simple structure to represent dementia symptoms and disease progression. Half of all studies reported taking a societal perspective, with the other half adopting a third-party payer perspective. Most studies follow good practices in modeling, particularly related to the decision problem description, perspective, model structure, and data inputs. Many studies perform poorly in areas related to the reporting of pre-modeling analyses, justifying data inputs, evaluating data quality, considering alternative modeling options, validating models, and assessing uncertainty.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a growing literature on the model-based evaluations of interventions for dementia. The literature predominantly reports on pharmaceutical interventions for Alzheimer's disease, but there is a growing literature for dementia prevention and non-pharmacological interventions. Our findings demonstrate that decision-makers need to critically appraise and understand the model-based evaluations and their limitations to ensure they are used, interpreted, and applied appropriately.

The estimation of utility weights in cost-utility analysis for mental disorders: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review approaches and instruments used to derive utility weights in cost-utility analyses (CUAs) within the field of mental disorders and to identify factors that may have influenced the choice of the approach.

METHODS

We searched the databases DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects), NHS EED (National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database), HTA (Health Technology Assessment), and PubMed for CUAs. Studies were included if they were full economic evaluations and reported quality-adjusted life-years as the health outcome. Study characteristics and instruments used to estimate utility weights were described and a logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with the choice of either the direct (e.g. standard gamble) or the preference-based measure (PBM) approach (e.g. EQ-5D).

RESULTS

We identified 227 CUAs with a maximum in 2009, 2010, and 2012. Most CUAs were conducted in depression, dementia, or psychosis, and came from the US or the UK, with the EQ-5D being the most frequently used instrument. The application of the direct approach was significantly associated with depression, psychosis, and model-based studies. The PBM approach was more likely to be used in recent studies, dementia, Europe, and empirical studies. Utility weights used in model-based studies were derived from only a small number of studies.

LIMITATIONS

We only searched four databases and did not evaluate the quality of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct instruments and PBMs are used to elicit utility weights in CUAs with different frequencies regarding study type, mental disorder, and country.

Dementia care costs and outcomes: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed evidence on the cost-effectiveness of prevention, care and treatment strategies in relation to dementia.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of available literature on economic evaluations of dementia care, searching key databases and websites in medicine, social care and economics. Literature reviews were privileged, and other study designs were included only to fill gaps in the evidence base. Narrative analysis was used to synthesise the results.

RESULTS

We identified 56 literature reviews and 29 single studies offering economic evidence on dementia care. There is more cost-effectiveness evidence on pharmacological therapies than other interventions. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors for mild-to-moderate disease and memantine for moderate-to-severe disease were found to be cost-effective. Regarding non-pharmacological treatments, cognitive stimulation therapy, tailored activity programme and occupational therapy were found to be more cost-effective than usual care. There was some evidence to suggest that respite care in day settings and psychosocial interventions for carers could be cost-effective. Coordinated care management and personal budgets held by carers have also demonstrated cost-effectiveness in some studies.

CONCLUSION

Five barriers to achieving better value for money in dementia care were identified: the scarcity and low methodological quality of available studies, the difficulty of generalising from available evidence, the narrowness of cost measures, a reluctance to implement evidence and the poor coordination of health and social care provision and financing.

Health state values for use in the economic evaluation of treatments for Alzheimer's disease

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a chronic, progressive, neurodegenerative disease that places a heavy burden on people with the condition, their families and carers, health care systems and society in general. Health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in patients deteriorates as the cognitive, behavioural and functional symptoms of AD develop. The human and financial cost of AD is forecast to grow rapidly as populations age, and those responsible for planning and financing health care face the challenge of allocating increasingly scarce resources against current and future interventions targeted towards AD. These include calls for early detection and diagnosis, preventative strategies, new medications, residential care, supportive care, and meeting the needs of carers as well as patients. Health care funders in many health systems now require a demonstration of the value of new interventions through a comparison of benefits in terms of improvements in HR-QOL and costs relative to those of competing or existing practices. Changes in HR-QOL provide the basis for the calculation of the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), a key outcome used in economic evaluations to compare treatments within and between different disease conditions. The objective of this systematic review was to provide a summary of the published health state values (utilities) for AD patients and their carers that are currently available to estimate QALYs for use in health economic evaluations of interventions in AD. The health care literature was searched for articles published in English between 2000 and 2011, using keywords and variants including 'quality-adjusted life years', 'health state indicators', 'health utilities' and the specific names of generic measures of HR-QOL and health state valuation techniques. Databases searched included MEDLINE, EMBASE, NHS EED, PsycINFO and ISI Web of Science. This review identified 12 studies that reported utility values associated with health states in AD. Values for AD health states categorized according to cognitive impairment (where 1 = perfect health and 0 = dead) ranged from mild AD (0.52-0.73) to moderate AD (0.30-0.53) to severe AD (0.12-0.49). Utility values were almost all based on two generic measures of HR-QOL: the EQ-5D and Health Utility Index mark 2/3 (HUI2/3). There were no health state values estimated from condition- or disease-specific measures of HR-QOL. The review also identified 18 published cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of treatments for AD. The CUAs incorporated results from only three of the identified health state valuation studies. Twelve CUAs relied on the same study for health state values. We conclude that the literature on health state values in AD is limited and overly reliant on a single symptom (cognition) to describe disease progression. Other approaches to characterizing disease progression in AD based on multiple outcomes or dependency may be better predictors of costs and utilities in economic evaluations. Patient and proxy ratings were poorly correlated, particularly in patients with more advanced AD. However, proxy ratings displayed the validity and reliability across the entire range of AD severity needed to detect long-term changes relevant to economic evaluation. Further longitudinal research of patient and carer HR-QOL based on multidimensional measures of outcome and utilities is needed.

Economic evaluation of treatment options in patients with Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses

INTRODUCTION

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is common among the elderly; it is responsible for 60-80% of all dementia cases. AD is characterized by cognitive decline, behavioural and psychological symptoms, and reductions in functioning and independence. Because of its progressive neurodegenerative nature and unknown aetiology, the burden of AD becomes increasingly significant in an aging population. Estimates indicate that 35.6 million people worldwide suffered from AD in 2010. By 2030 and 2050, this figure is predicted to increase to 65.7 million and 115.4 million, respectively. Costs will also rise along with the increase in the number of people diagnosed with AD. In 2010, the worldwide costs associated with dementia were estimated to be $US604 billion.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of current publications dealing with the pharmacoeconomic factors associated with AD medications and to describe the decision-analytic models used to evaluate long-term outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify articles published between 1 January 2007 and 15 July 2010. The search was also based on a previous systematic review, which included literature up to 2007. Articles were included if they were complete and original economic evaluations of AD and if they were comparative in nature. A quality assessment of the included publications was conducted and relevant information was extracted into tables.

RESULTS

Seven out of 2067 identified articles were included in this systematic review. Four articles evaluated treatment with donepezil, one with galantamine and two with memantine. The studies were conducted in America, Europe and Asia. Five different groups of medications were compared. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the group of patients treated with donepezil versus no drug treatment ranged from a dominant value to 281, 416.13 euros per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Patients treated with donepezil versus placebo showed ICERs with a range from a dominant value (not specified) up to 20, 866.77 euros per QALY. Treatment with memantine in addition to donepezil versus treatment with donepezil alone showed an ICER range from a dominant value to 6818.33 euros per QALY. In comparison with the memantine treatment as an add-on therapy, the ICER of memantine monotherapy versus standard care (without cholinesterase inhibitors [CEIs]) ranged from a dominant value to 63, 087.20 euros per QALY. Finally, the economic evaluation of galantamine in comparison with usual care without any AD drugs showed ICERs ranging from 1894.70 euros to 6953 euros per QALY.

CONCLUSION

The seven identified publications included in this review indicate that treatment with CEIs or memantine seems to be reasonable in terms of clinical effects and costs for patients with AD. Depending on different hypotheses, assumptions and variables (e.g. time horizon, discount rates, initial number of patients in different states, etc.) in the sensitivity analyses, treatment with these drugs seems to be primarily a cost-effective strategy or even a cost-saving strategy. Nevertheless, the results generally are associated with a degree of uncertainty. The comparability of the results from the different economic evaluations is limited because of the different assumptions made.

CDR state transition probabilities in Alzheimer's disease with and without cholinesterase inhibitor intervention in an observational cohort

Cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine are medications used in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). These agents have been shown to reduce the rate of AD progression in randomized trials. The objective of this study is to evaluate the association between treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors or memantine and the probability of transitioning to a more severe Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) state. Analysis was limited to possible or probable AD patients from NACC-UDS with three or more observations, baseline CDR score of 0.5 or 1, and without reported use AD drugs at enrollment. Use of an AD drug at any observation after baseline was classified as treatment. Odds of CDR stage were calculated by multinomial logistic regression controlling for baseline age, baseline MMSE score, education, marital status, race, gender, place of residence, and time since last measure. The resulting coefficients from logistic regression were used to calculate transitional probabilities. A total of 1,114 patients were included. No differences were observed in the probability of transitioning to more severe CDR states based on treatment, but treated patients had lower odds of death, OR 0.49 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.79) compared to untreated. Ultimately, this study failed to detect a difference in the probability of progressing to a more severe AD state as a result of treatment in an observational cohort of AD patients, but is limited by non-randomized treatment selection and small dataset. The NACC-UDS dataset is ongoing and this analysis may be improved if repeated when more data is available.

Model-based economic evaluation in Alzheimer's disease: a review of the methods available to model Alzheimer's disease progression

OBJECTIVE

To consider the methods available to model Alzheimer's disease (AD) progression over time to inform on the structure and development of model-based evaluations, and the future direction of modelling methods in AD.

METHODS

A systematic search of the health care literature was undertaken to identify methods to model disease progression in AD. Modelling methods are presented in a descriptive review.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 42 studies presenting methods or applications of methods to model AD progression over time. The review identified 10 general modelling frameworks available to empirically model the progression of AD as part of a model-based evaluation. Seven of these general models are statistical models predicting progression of AD using a measure of cognitive function. The main concerns with models are on model structure, around the limited characterization of disease progression, and on the use of a limited number of health states to capture events related to disease progression over time. None of the available models have been able to present a comprehensive model of the natural history of AD.

CONCLUSIONS

Although helpful, there are serious limitations in the methods available to model progression of AD over time. Advances are needed to better model the progression of AD and the effects of the disease on peoples' lives. Recent evidence supports the need for a multivariable approach to the modelling of AD progression, and indicates that a latent variable analytic approach to characterising AD progression is a promising avenue for advances in the statistical development of modelling methods.