1
|
Mant J, Modi RN, Dymond A, Armstrong N, Burt J, Calvert P, Cowie M, Ding WY, Edwards D, Freedman B, Griffin SJ, Hoare S, Hobbs FDR, Johnson R, Kaptoge S, Lip GYH, Lobban T, Lown M, Lund J, McManus RJ, Mills MT, Morris S, Powell A, Proietti R, Sutton S, Sweeting M, Thom H, Williams K. Randomised controlled trial of population screening for atrial fibrillation in people aged 70 years and over to reduce stroke: protocol for the SAFER trial. BMJ Open 2024; 14:e082047. [PMID: 38670614 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There is a lack of evidence that the benefits of screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) outweigh the harms. Following the completion of the Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke (SAFER) pilot trial, the aim of the main SAFER trial is to establish whether population screening for AF reduces incidence of stroke risk. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Approximately 82 000 people aged 70 years and over and not on oral anticoagulation are being recruited from general practices in England. Patients on the palliative care register or residents in a nursing home are excluded. Eligible people are identified using electronic patient records from general practices and sent an invitation and consent form to participate by post. Consenting participants are randomised at a ratio of 2:1 (control:intervention) with clustering by household. Those randomised to the intervention arm are sent an information leaflet inviting them to participate in screening, which involves use of a handheld single-lead ECG four times a day for 3 weeks. ECG traces identified by an algorithm as possible AF are reviewed by cardiologists. Participants with AF are seen by a general practitioner for consideration of anticoagulation. The primary outcome is stroke. Major secondary outcomes are: death, major bleeding and cardiovascular events. Follow-up will be via electronic health records for an average of 4 years. The primary analysis will be by intention-to-treat using time-to-event modelling. Results from this trial will be combined with follow-up data from the cluster-randomised pilot trial by fixed-effects meta-analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The London-Central National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1597) provided ethical approval. Dissemination will include public-friendly summaries, reports and engagement with the UK National Screening Committee. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN72104369.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Mant
- Primary Care Unit, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Cambridge, UK
| | - Rakesh N Modi
- Primary Care Unit, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Cambridge, UK
| | - Andrew Dymond
- Primary Care Unit, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Cambridge, UK
| | - Natalie Armstrong
- Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | | | - Peter Calvert
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Martin Cowie
- School of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine & Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Wern Yew Ding
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Duncan Edwards
- Primary Care Unit, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Cambridge, UK
| | - Ben Freedman
- Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Simon J Griffin
- Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge Primary Care Unit, Cambridge, UK
- MRC Epidemiology Unit, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sarah Hoare
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge Primary Care Unit, Cambridge, UK
| | - F D Richard Hobbs
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | | | - Gregory Y H Lip
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
- Danish Centre for Health Services Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Trudie Lobban
- Arrhythmia Alliance and AF Association, Stratford upon Avon, UK
| | - Mark Lown
- School of Primary Care, Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Jenny Lund
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Cambridge, UK
| | - Richard J McManus
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Mark T Mills
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Stephen Morris
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge Primary Care Unit, Cambridge, UK
| | - Alison Powell
- THIS Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Riccardo Proietti
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Stephen Sutton
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge Primary Care Unit, Cambridge, UK
| | | | | | - Kate Williams
- Primary Care Unit, University of Cambridge, Strangeways Research Laboratory, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mørup MF, Taieb V, Willems D, Rose M, Lyris N, Lamotte M, Gerlier L, Thom H. The cost-effectiveness of a bimekizumab versus IL-17A inhibitors treatment-pathway in patients with active axial spondyloarthritis in Scotland. J Med Econ 2024:1-25. [PMID: 38650583 DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2024.2342209] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2024] [Accepted: 04/09/2024] [Indexed: 04/25/2024]
Abstract
AIMS To estimate the cost-effectiveness of a treatment-pathway initiated with bimekizumab, a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin (IL)-17F in addition to IL-17A, in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) compared with IL-17A inhibitors, ixekizumab, and secukinumab, from the National Health Service (NHS) of Scotland perspective. METHODS The axSpA treatment-pathway was modeled using a one-year decision tree followed by a lifetime Markov model. The pathway included first- and second-line biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD), followed by best supportive care (bDMARD or nonbiologic). Bimekizumab followed by any bDMARD ('BKZ') was compared with IL-17Ai's: secukinumab 150 mg followed by a blend ('SEC') of dose up-titration to secukinumab 300 mg and any bDMARD, or ixekizumab followed by any bDMARD ('IXE'). Transition to the next therapy was triggered by Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index-50% (BASDAI50) non-response or any-cause discontinuation. A published network meta-analysis provided efficacy data. EuroQoL-5-dimensions utilities were derived by mapping from Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score. Costs included disease management (linked to functional limitations), biologics acquisition (list prices, British National Formulary 2022), administration and monitoring (NHS 2021/22). Discounting was 3.5%/year. Probabilistic results from patients with non-radiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) were averaged to reflect the full axSpA disease spectrum. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of BKZ was £24,801/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) vs. SEC (95% credible interval £24,163-£25,895). BKZ had similar costs (Δ -£385 [-£15,239-£14,468]) and QALYs (Δ 0.039 [-0.748-0.825]) to IXE, with £1,523 (£862-£2,222) net monetary benefit. Conclusions remained unchanged in most scenarios. Results' drivers included BASDAI50 response rate and disease management cost. CONCLUSION The bimekizumab treatment-pathway represents a cost-effective option across the axSpA disease spectrum in Scotland. Bimekizumab is cost-effective compared to a secukinumab-pathway that includes dose up-titration, and has similar costs and QALYs to an ixekizumab-pathway.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Howard Thom
- University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
- Clifton Insight, Bristol, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Keeney E, Elwenspoek MMC, Jackson J, Roadevin C, Jones HE, O'Donnell R, Sheppard AL, Dawson S, Lane D, Stubbs J, Everitt H, Watson JC, Hay AD, Gillett P, Robins G, Mallett S, Whiting PF, Thom H. Identifying the Optimum Strategy for Identifying Adults and Children With Celiac Disease: A Cost-Effectiveness and Value of Information Analysis. Value Health 2024; 27:301-312. [PMID: 38154593 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2023.12.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Revised: 11/08/2023] [Accepted: 12/11/2023] [Indexed: 12/30/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Celiac disease (CD) is thought to affect around 1% of people in the United Kingdom, but only approximately 30% are diagnosed. The aim of this work was to assess the cost-effectiveness of strategies for identifying adults and children with CD in terms of who to test and which tests to use. METHODS A decision tree and Markov model were used to describe testing strategies and model long-term consequences of CD. The analysis compared a selection of pre-test probabilities of CD above which patients should be screened, as well as the use of different serological tests, with or without genetic testing. Value of information analysis was used to prioritize parameters for future research. RESULTS Using serological testing alone in adults, immunoglobulin A (IgA) tissue transglutaminase (tTG) at a 1% pre-test probability (equivalent to population screening) was most cost-effective. If combining serological testing with genetic testing, human leukocyte antigen combined with IgA tTG at a 5% pre-test probability was most cost-effective. In children, the most cost-effective strategy was a 10% pre-test probability with human leukocyte antigen plus IgA tTG. Value of information analysis highlighted the probability of late diagnosis of CD and the accuracy of serological tests as important parameters. The analysis also suggested prioritizing research in adult women over adult men or children. CONCLUSIONS For adults, these cost-effectiveness results suggest UK National Screening Committee Criteria for population-based screening for CD should be explored. Substantial uncertainty in the results indicate a high value in conducting further research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edna Keeney
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK.
| | - Martha M C Elwenspoek
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK; The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Joni Jackson
- The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Cristina Roadevin
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Hayley E Jones
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Rachel O'Donnell
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK; The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Athena L Sheppard
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK; The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, England, UK; Swansea University Medical School, Swansea University, Swansea, England, UK
| | - Sarah Dawson
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | | | | | - Hazel Everitt
- Primary Care Research Centre, Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, England, UK
| | - Jessica C Watson
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Alastair D Hay
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Peter Gillett
- Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Department, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh EH9 1LF Scotland, England, UK
| | - Gerry Robins
- Department of Gastroenterology, York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, England, UK
| | - Sue Mallett
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, England, UK
| | - Penny F Whiting
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tomlinson E, Jones HE, James R, Cooper C, Stokes C, Begum S, Watson J, Hay AD, Ward M, Thom H, Whiting P. Clinical effectiveness of point of care tests for diagnosing urinary tract infection: a systematic review. Clin Microbiol Infect 2024; 30:197-205. [PMID: 37839580 DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2023.10.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2023] [Revised: 08/23/2023] [Accepted: 10/06/2023] [Indexed: 10/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Point of care tests (POCTs) have the potential to improve the urinary tract infection (UTI) diagnostic pathway, as they can provide a diagnosis quickly in near-patient settings, and some also identify causative pathogens/antimicrobial sensitivity. OBJECTIVES To assess the clinical impact, accuracy, and technical characteristics of POCT for diagnosing UTI. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS Narrative summary and bivariate random effects meta-analyses to estimate summary sensitivity and specificity. DATA SOURCES Five electronic databases, two clinical trial registries, study reports and review reference lists, and websites. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Randomized controlled trials/non-randomized studies and diagnostic test accuracy studies published since 2000. PARTICIPANTS People with suspected UTI. TESTS Rapid tests (results <40 minutes): Astrego PA-100 system, Lodestar DX, Uriscreen, UTRiPLEX. Culture tests (results <24 hours): Flexicult Human, ID Flexicult, Diaslide, Dipstreak, Chromostreak, Uricult, Uricult Trio, Uricult Plus. REFERENCE STANDARD Any. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS Risk of Bias-2, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-C. RESULTS Two randomized controlled trials evaluated Flexicult Human (one against standard care; one against ID Flexicult). No difference was reported in antibiotic use concordant with culture results (OR 0.84 95% CI 0.58-1.20) or appropriate antibiotic prescribing (OR 1.44 95% CI 1.03-1.99). Initial antibiotic prescribing was lower with Flexicult than standard care (OR 0.56 95% CI 0.35-0.88). No difference for other measures of antibiotic use, symptom duration, patient enablement, or resource use. Fifteen studies reported accuracy data. Limited data were available, with most POCT evaluated in single studies or not evaluated at all. Uriscreen (four studies), Uricult Trio (three studies), Flexicult Human (four studies), and ID Flexicult (two studies) had modest sensitivity and specificity. POCTs were easier to use and interpret than standard culture. CONCLUSIONS There is currently insufficient evidence to support the use of POCTs in UTI diagnosis. Due to the rapid development of POCT, this review should be updated regularly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eve Tomlinson
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
| | - Hayley E Jones
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Rachel James
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Chris Cooper
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | | | - Jessica Watson
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Alastair D Hay
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Mary Ward
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Penny Whiting
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Thom H. Correction: Deterministic and Probabilistic Analysis of a Simple Markov Model: How Different Could They Be? Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2023; 21:967. [PMID: 37755668 PMCID: PMC10627953 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-023-00828-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/28/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
- Clifton Insight, Bristol, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Fawsitt CG, Thom H, Regnier SA, Lee XY, Kymes S, Vase L. Comparison of indirect treatment methods in migraine prevention to address differences in mode of administration. J Comp Eff Res 2023; 12:e230021. [PMID: 37222593 PMCID: PMC10508308 DOI: 10.57264/cer-2023-0021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2023] [Accepted: 05/02/2023] [Indexed: 05/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Aim: Indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) are anchored on a placebo comparator, and the placebo response may vary according to drug administration route. Migraine preventive treatment studies were used to evaluate ITCs and determine whether mode of administration influences placebo response and the overall study findings. Materials & methods: Change from baseline in monthly migraine days produced by monoclonal antibody treatments (subcutaneous, intravenous) was compared using fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), network meta-regression (NMR), and unanchored simulated treatment comparison (STC). Results: NMA and NMR provide mixed, rarely differentiated results between treatments, whereas unanchored STC strongly favors eptinezumab over other preventive treatments. Conclusion: Further investigations are needed to determine which ITC best reflects the impact of mode of administration on placebo.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Howard Thom
- Clifton Insight, Bristol, United Kingdom
- University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | - Lene Vase
- Department of Psychology & Behavioural Sciences, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Partridge J, Aceituno D, Paracha N, Thom H. A sequential therapy with sorafenib followed by regorafenib against single-line atezolizumab and bevacizumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): Indirect treatment comparisons (ITC) using the RESORCE study. J Clin Oncol 2023. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.4_suppl.537] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
537 Background: Our objective was to explore ITC of sequential therapy with sorafenib followed by regorafenib (sorego) against atezolizumab+bevacizumab (atezobev) in HCC. Naïvely comparing median Overall Survival (OS) from sorafenib initiation on sorego in the RESORCE trial with atezobev from IMbrave150 is biased by population imbalance and selection of patients who survived on sorafenib in RESORCE. We used unanchored Matching Adjusted Indirect Comparison (MAIC) and novel survivorship bias adjusted anchored ITC (SBITC) to overcome these limitations. Methods: Overall Survival (OS) from sorafenib initiation in RESORCE on sorego were compared with reconstructed Individual Patient Data (IPD) OS based on Kaplan-Meier curves from IMbrave150 on atezobev. In MAIC, the sorego arm of RESORCE was weighted on reported baseline characteristics to match the IMbrave150 atezobev arm. In SBITC, sorafenib IPD from IMbrave150 were sampled with replacement and added to the RESORCE BSC arm to correct for “survivorship bias”. Sample size was sufficient for follow-up prior to RESORCE randomisation to be within 5% of sorafenib follow-up in IMbrave150. Anchored Bucher ITC was used to compare to unadjusted IMbrave150 with bootstrapping to obtain standard errors. Hazard Ratios (HRs) were used to compare OS. Results: MAIC gave an OS HR of 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.60, 0.93; p-value=0.007). Effective sample size (ESS) was reduced from 379 to 271.75. SBITC gave a HR of 0.63 (0.52, 0.76; p-value <0.001) requiring an average of 83 sorafenib patients to be added from IMbrave150. Conclusions: We proposed MAIC and SBITC to overcome biases in naïve comparisons of OS on sorego with atezobev in HCC. However, MAIC is limited to baseline characteristics in IMbrave150 and does not adjust for “survivorship bias”. SBITC depends on sample size from IMbrave150, and makes no adjustment for imbalance in baseline characteristics. Despite these limitations, our methods were consistent with naïve comparisons and suggested longer OS with sorego compared to atezobev in patients with HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - David Aceituno
- 2.Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Aggarwal H, Ndirangu K, Winfree KB, Muehlenbein CE, Zhu E, Tongbram V, Thom H. A network meta-analysis of immunotherapy-based treatments for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer. J Comp Eff Res 2023; 12:e220016. [PMID: 36621905 PMCID: PMC10288959 DOI: 10.2217/cer-2022-0016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2022] [Accepted: 09/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing immunotherapies for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NsqNSCLC), a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the relative efficacy of these treatments. Materials & methods: A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials evaluating first-line-to-progression and second-line treatments for advanced NsqNSCLC informed Bayesian NMAs for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) end points. Results: Among first-line-to-progression treatments, pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed the greatest OS benefit versus other regimens and a PFS benefit versus all but three regimens. Among second-line treatments, an OS benefit was seen for atezolizumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab versus docetaxel. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed the maximum OS benefit in the first-line setting. In the second-line setting, anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapies were better than docetaxel.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Himani Aggarwal
- Eli Lilly & Company, 893 S Delaware Street Indianapolis, IN 46225, USA
| | | | | | | | - Emily Zhu
- Eli Lilly & Company, 893 S Delaware Street Indianapolis, IN 46225, USA
| | | | - Howard Thom
- Health Economics Bristol (HEB), Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road Clifton Bristol, BS8 1NU, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Keeney E, Sanghera S, Martin RM, Gulati R, Wiklund F, Walsh EI, Donovan JL, Hamdy F, Neal DE, Lane JA, Turner EL, Thom H, Clements MS. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Prostate Cancer Screening in the UK: A Decision Model Analysis Based on the CAP Trial. Pharmacoeconomics 2022; 40:1207-1220. [PMID: 36201131 PMCID: PMC9674711 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01191-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/05/2022] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Most guidelines in the UK, Europe and North America do not recommend organised population-wide screening for prostate cancer. Prostate-specific antigen-based screening can reduce prostate cancer-specific mortality, but there are concerns about overdiagnosis, overtreatment and economic value. The aim was therefore to assess the cost effectiveness of eight potential screening strategies in the UK. METHODS We used a cost-utility analysis with an individual-based simulation model. The model was calibrated to data from the 10-year follow-up of the Cluster Randomised Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP). Treatment effects were modelled using data from the Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) trial. The participants were a hypothetical population of 10 million men in the UK followed from age 30 years to death. The strategies were: no screening; five age-based screening strategies; adaptive screening, where men with an initial prostate-specific antigen level of < 1.5 ng/mL are screened every 6 years and those above this level are screened every 4 years; and two polygenic risk-stratified screening strategies. We assumed the use of pre-biopsy multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging for men with prostate-specific antigen ≥ 3 ng/mL and combined transrectal ultrasound-guided and targeted biopsies. The main outcome measures were projected lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years from a National Health Service perspective. RESULTS All screening strategies increased costs compared with no screening, with the majority also increasing quality-adjusted life-years. At willingness-to-pay thresholds of £20,000 or £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, a once-off screening at age 50 years was optimal, although this was sensitive to the utility estimates used. Although the polygenic risk-stratified screening strategies were not on the cost-effectiveness frontier, there was evidence to suggest that they were less cost ineffective than the alternative age-based strategies. CONCLUSIONS Of the prostate-specific antigen-based strategies compared, only a once-off screening at age 50 years was potentially cost effective at current UK willingness-to-pay thresholds. An additional follow-up of CAP to 15 years may reduce uncertainty about the cost effectiveness of the screening strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edna Keeney
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
| | - Sabina Sanghera
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
| | - Richard M Martin
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
- NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Roman Gulati
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Fredrik Wiklund
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Eleanor I Walsh
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
| | - Jenny L Donovan
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
| | - Freddie Hamdy
- Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - David E Neal
- Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - J Athene Lane
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
| | - Emma L Turner
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Health Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
| | - Mark S Clements
- Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Thom H, Leahy J, Jansen JP. Network Meta-analysis on Disconnected Evidence Networks When Only Aggregate Data Are Available: Modified Methods to Include Disconnected Trials and Single-Arm Studies while Minimizing Bias. Med Decis Making 2022; 42:906-922. [PMID: 35531938 PMCID: PMC9459361 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x221097081] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Network meta-analysis (NMA) requires a connected network of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cannot include single-arm studies. Regulators or academics often have only aggregate data. Two aggregate data methods for analyzing disconnected networks are random effects on baseline and aggregate-level matching (ALM). ALM has been used only for single-arm studies, and both methods may bias effect estimates. METHODS We modified random effects on baseline to separate RCTs connected to and disconnected from the reference and any single-arm studies, minimizing the introduction of bias. We term our modified method reference prediction. We similarly modified ALM and extended it to include RCTs disconnected from the reference. We tested these methods using constructed data and a simulation study. RESULTS In simulations, bias for connected treatments for ALM ranged from -0.0158 to 0.051 and for reference prediction from -0.0107 to 0.083. These were low compared with the true mean effect of 0.5. Coverage ranged from 0.92 to 1.00. In disconnected treatments, bias of ALM ranged from -0.16 to 0.392 and of reference prediction from -0.102 to 0.40, whereas coverage of ALM ranged from 0.30 to 0.82 and of reference prediction from 0.64 to 0.94. Under fixed study effects for disconnected evidence, bias was similar, but coverage was 0.81 to 1.00 for reference prediction and 0.18 to 0.76 for ALM. Trends of similar bias but greater coverage for reference prediction with random study effects were repeated in constructed data. CONCLUSIONS Both methods with random study effects seem to minimize bias in treatment connected to the reference. They can estimate treatment effects for disconnected treatments but may be biased. Reference prediction has greater coverage and may be recommended overall. HIGHLIGHTS Two methods were modified for network meta-analysis on disconnected networks and for including single-arm observational or interventional studies in network meta-analysis using only aggregate data and for minimizing the bias of effect estimates for treatments only in trials connected to the reference.Reference prediction was developed as a modification of random effects on baseline that keeps analyses of trials connected to the reference separately from those disconnected from the reference and from single-arm studies. The method was further modified to account for correlation in trials with more than 2 arms and, under random study effects, to estimate variance in heterogeneity separately in connected and disconnected evidence.Aggregate-level matching was extended to include trials disconnected from the reference, rather than only single-arm studies. The method was further modified to separately estimate treatment effects and heterogeneity variance in the connected and disconnected evidence and to account for the correlation between arms in trials with more than 2 arms.Performance was assessed using a constructed data example and simulation study.The methods were found to have similar, and sometimes low, bias when estimating the relative effects for disconnected treatments, but reference prediction with random study effects had the greatest coverage.The use of reference prediction with random study effects for disconnected networks is recommended if no individual patient data or alternative real-world evidence is available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Howard Thom, Bristol Medical School,
University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Rm 2.07, 39 Whatley Rd, Bristol, BS8 2PS,
UK; ()
| | - Joy Leahy
- National Centre for Pharmacoeconomic, Dublin,
Ireland
| | - Jeroen P. Jansen
- School of Pharmacy, University of California,
San Francisco, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Elwenspoek MM, Thom H, Sheppard AL, Keeney E, O'Donnell R, Jackson J, Roadevin C, Dawson S, Lane D, Stubbs J, Everitt H, Watson JC, Hay AD, Gillett P, Robins G, Jones HE, Mallett S, Whiting PF. Defining the optimum strategy for identifying adults and children with coeliac disease: systematic review and economic modelling. Health Technol Assess 2022; 26:1-310. [PMID: 36321689 PMCID: PMC9638887 DOI: 10.3310/zuce8371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Coeliac disease is an autoimmune disorder triggered by ingesting gluten. It affects approximately 1% of the UK population, but only one in three people is thought to have a diagnosis. Untreated coeliac disease may lead to malnutrition, anaemia, osteoporosis and lymphoma. OBJECTIVES The objectives were to define at-risk groups and determine the cost-effectiveness of active case-finding strategies in primary care. DESIGN (1) Systematic review of the accuracy of potential diagnostic indicators for coeliac disease. (2) Routine data analysis to develop prediction models for identification of people who may benefit from testing for coeliac disease. (3) Systematic review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests for coeliac disease. (4) Systematic review of the accuracy of genetic tests for coeliac disease (literature search conducted in April 2021). (5) Online survey to identify diagnostic thresholds for testing, starting treatment and referral for biopsy. (6) Economic modelling to identify the cost-effectiveness of different active case-finding strategies, informed by the findings from previous objectives. DATA SOURCES For the first systematic review, the following databases were searched from 1997 to April 2021: MEDLINE® (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA), Embase® (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Cochrane Library, Web of Science™ (Clarivate™, Philadelphia, PA, USA), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ( WHO ICTRP ) and the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials database. For the second systematic review, the following databases were searched from January 1990 to August 2020: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Kleijnen Systematic Reviews ( KSR ) Evidence, WHO ICTRP and the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials database. For prediction model development, Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD, Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum and a subcohort of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children were used; for estimates for the economic models, Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum was used. REVIEW METHODS For review 1, cohort and case-control studies reporting on a diagnostic indicator in a population with and a population without coeliac disease were eligible. For review 2, diagnostic cohort studies including patients presenting with coeliac disease symptoms who were tested with serological tests for coeliac disease and underwent a duodenal biopsy as reference standard were eligible. In both reviews, risk of bias was assessed using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 tool. Bivariate random-effects meta-analyses were fitted, in which binomial likelihoods for the numbers of true positives and true negatives were assumed. RESULTS People with dermatitis herpetiformis, a family history of coeliac disease, migraine, anaemia, type 1 diabetes, osteoporosis or chronic liver disease are 1.5-2 times more likely than the general population to have coeliac disease; individual gastrointestinal symptoms were not useful for identifying coeliac disease. For children, women and men, prediction models included 24, 24 and 21 indicators of coeliac disease, respectively. The models showed good discrimination between patients with and patients without coeliac disease, but performed less well when externally validated. Serological tests were found to have good diagnostic accuracy for coeliac disease. Immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase had the highest sensitivity and endomysial antibody the highest specificity. There was little improvement when tests were used in combination. Survey respondents (n = 472) wanted to be 66% certain of the diagnosis from a blood test before starting a gluten-free diet if symptomatic, and 90% certain if asymptomatic. Cost-effectiveness analyses found that, among adults, and using serological testing alone, immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase was most cost-effective at a 1% pre-test probability (equivalent to population screening). Strategies using immunoglobulin A endomysial antibody plus human leucocyte antigen or human leucocyte antigen plus immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase with any pre-test probability had similar cost-effectiveness results, which were also similar to the cost-effectiveness results of immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase at a 1% pre-test probability. The most practical alternative for implementation within the NHS is likely to be a combination of human leucocyte antigen and immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase testing among those with a pre-test probability above 1.5%. Among children, the most cost-effective strategy was a 10% pre-test probability with human leucocyte antigen plus immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase, but there was uncertainty around the most cost-effective pre-test probability. There was substantial uncertainty in economic model results, which means that there would be great value in conducting further research. LIMITATIONS The interpretation of meta-analyses was limited by the substantial heterogeneity between the included studies, and most included studies were judged to be at high risk of bias. The main limitations of the prediction models were that we were restricted to diagnostic indicators that were recorded by general practitioners and that, because coeliac disease is underdiagnosed, it is also under-reported in health-care data. The cost-effectiveness model is a simplification of coeliac disease and modelled an average cohort rather than individuals. Evidence was weak on the probability of routine coeliac disease diagnosis, the accuracy of serological and genetic tests and the utility of a gluten-free diet. CONCLUSIONS Population screening with immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase (1% pre-test probability) and of immunoglobulin A endomysial antibody followed by human leucocyte antigen testing or human leucocyte antigen testing followed by immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase with any pre-test probability appear to have similar cost-effectiveness results. As decisions to implement population screening cannot be made based on our economic analysis alone, and given the practical challenges of identifying patients with higher pre-test probabilities, we recommend that human leucocyte antigen combined with immunoglobulin A tissue transglutaminase testing should be considered for adults with at least a 1.5% pre-test probability of coeliac disease, equivalent to having at least one predictor. A more targeted strategy of 10% pre-test probability is recommended for children (e.g. children with anaemia). FUTURE WORK Future work should consider whether or not population-based screening for coeliac disease could meet the UK National Screening Committee criteria and whether or not it necessitates a long-term randomised controlled trial of screening strategies. Large prospective cohort studies in which all participants receive accurate tests for coeliac disease are needed. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019115506 and CRD42020170766. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research ( NIHR ) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 44. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martha Mc Elwenspoek
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Athena L Sheppard
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Edna Keeney
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Rachel O'Donnell
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Joni Jackson
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Cristina Roadevin
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sarah Dawson
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | | | - Hazel Everitt
- Primary Care Research Centre, Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Jessica C Watson
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Alastair D Hay
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Peter Gillett
- Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Department, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Gerry Robins
- Department of Gastroenterology, York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, UK
| | - Hayley E Jones
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sue Mallett
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Penny F Whiting
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Williams K, Modi RN, Dymond A, Hoare S, Powell A, Burt J, Edwards D, Lund J, Johnson R, Lobban T, Lown M, Sweeting MJ, Thom H, Kaptoge S, Fusco F, Morris S, Lip G, Armstrong N, Cowie MR, Fitzmaurice DA, Freedman B, Griffin SJ, Sutton S, Hobbs FR, McManus RJ, Mant J, Safer Authorship Group T. Cluster randomised controlled trial of screening for atrial fibrillation in people aged 70 years and over to reduce stroke: protocol for the pilot study for the SAFER trial. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e065066. [PMID: 36691194 PMCID: PMC9472173 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2022] [Accepted: 08/16/2022] [Indexed: 02/02/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia associated with 30% of strokes, as well as other cardiovascular disease, dementia and death. AF meets many criteria for screening, but there is limited evidence that AF screening reduces stroke. Consequently, no countries recommend national screening programmes for AF. The Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke (SAFER) trial aims to determine whether screening for AF is effective at reducing risk of stroke. The aim of the pilot study is to assess feasibility of the main trial and inform implementation of screening and trial procedures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS SAFER is planned to be a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) of over 100 000 participants aged 70 years and over, not on long-term anticoagulation therapy at baseline, with an average follow-up of 5 years. Participants are asked to record four traces every day for 3 weeks on a hand-held single-lead ECG device. Cardiologists remotely confirm episodes of AF identified by the device algorithm, and general practitioners follow-up with anticoagulation as appropriate. The pilot study is a cluster RCT in 36 UK general practices, randomised 2:1 control to intervention, recruiting approximately 12 600 participants. Pilot study outcomes include AF detection rate, anticoagulation uptake and other parameters to incorporate into sample size calculations for the main trial. Questionnaires sent to a sample of participants will assess impact of screening on psychological health. Process evaluation and qualitative studies will underpin implementation of screening during the main trial. An economic evaluation using the pilot data will confirm whether it is plausible that screening might be cost-effective. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The London-Central Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/1597) and Confidentiality Advisory Group (19/CAG/0226) provided ethical approval. Dissemination will be via publications, patient-friendly summaries, reports and engagement with the UK National Screening Committee. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN72104369.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Williams
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Rakesh Narendra Modi
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Andrew Dymond
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Sarah Hoare
- THIS (The Healthcare Improvement Studies) Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Alison Powell
- THIS (The Healthcare Improvement Studies) Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jenni Burt
- THIS (The Healthcare Improvement Studies) Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Duncan Edwards
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jenny Lund
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Rachel Johnson
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Mark Lown
- Primary Care Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton School, Southampton, UK
| | - Michael J Sweeting
- Department of Health Sciences, George Davies Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - H Thom
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Stephen Kaptoge
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Francesco Fusco
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Stephen Morris
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Gregory Lip
- Liverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moores University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Natalie Armstrong
- Department of Health Sciences, George Davies Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Martin R Cowie
- Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK
- Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, Kings College London, London, UK
- Faculty of Medicine, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - David A Fitzmaurice
- Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Ben Freedman
- Heart research Institute, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Simon J Griffin
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- MRC Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Stephen Sutton
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Fd Richard Hobbs
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Richard J McManus
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jonathan Mant
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - The Safer Authorship Group
- Strangeways Research Laboratory, Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Thom H. Correction to: Deterministic and Probabilistic Analysis of a Simple Markov Model: How Different Could They Be? Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2022; 20:451. [PMID: 35301678 PMCID: PMC9021132 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-022-00724-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
- Clifton Insight, Bristol, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
- Clifton Insight, Bristol, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Khera TK, Hunt LP, Davis S, Gooberman-Hill R, Thom H, Xu Y, Paskins Z, Peters TJ, Tobias JH, Clark EM. A clinical tool to identify older women with back pain at high risk of osteoporotic vertebral fractures (Vfrac): a population-based cohort study with exploratory economic evaluation. Age Ageing 2022; 51:6547547. [PMID: 35284926 DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afac031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs) identify people at high risk of future fractures, but despite this, less than a third come to clinical attention. The objective of this study was to develop a clinical tool to aid health care professionals decide which older women with back pain should have a spinal radiograph. METHODS a population-based cohort of 1,635 women aged 65+ years with self-reported back pain in the previous 4 months were recruited from primary care. Exposure data were collected through self-completion questionnaires and physical examination, including descriptions of back pain and traditional risk factors for osteoporosis. Outcome was the presence/absence of OVFs on spinal radiographs. Logistic regression models identified independent predictors of OVFs, with the area under the (receiver operating) curve calculated for the final model, and a cut-point was identified. RESULTS mean age was 73.9 years and 209 (12.8%) had OVFs. The final Vfrac model comprised 15 predictors of OVF, with an AUC of 0.802 (95% CI: 0.764-0.840). Sensitivity was 72.4% and specificity was 72.9%. Vfrac identified 93% of those with more than one OVF and two-thirds of those with one OVF. Performance was enhanced by inclusion of self-reported back pain descriptors, removal of which reduced AUC to 0.742 (95% CI: 0.696-0.788) and sensitivity to 66.5%. Health economic modelling to support a future trial was favourable. CONCLUSIONS the Vfrac clinical tool appears to be valid and is improved by the addition of self-reported back pain symptoms. The tool now requires testing to establish real-world clinical and cost-effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tarnjit K Khera
- Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Linda P Hunt
- Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sarah Davis
- School of Health & Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Rachael Gooberman-Hill
- NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Yixin Xu
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Zoe Paskins
- School of Medicine, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
- Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Midland Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
| | - Tim J Peters
- Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jon H Tobias
- Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, UK
| | - Emma M Clark
- Translational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Haeussler K, Wang X, Winfree KB, D'yachkova Y, Traore S, Puri T, Thom H, Papagiannopoulos C, Nassim M, Taipale K. Efficacy and safety of first-line therapies in EGFR-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis. Future Oncol 2022; 18:2007-2028. [PMID: 35187947 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2021-0885] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of identified first-line therapies for patients with EGFR mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with a focus on ramucirumab + erlotinib. Methods: In the absence of head-to-head studies, a Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using randomized clinical trial data to evaluate first-line systemic therapies with erlotinib/gefitinib as the reference treatment. Results: For progression-free survival (PFS), ramucirumab + erlotinib was comparable to osimertinib and dacomitinib in the primary analysis. Conclusion: The analysis showed ramucirumab + erlotinib efficacy to be comparable to best-in-class treatment options for previously untreated patients with EGFRm+ advanced NSCLC. Registration information: PROSPERO ID: CRD42020136247.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Tarun Puri
- Eli Lilly & Company (India) Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon, India
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, UK
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Jones MD, Franklin BD, Raynor DK, Thom H, Watson MC, Kandiyali R. Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of User-Testing of Health Professionals' Guidelines to Reduce the Frequency of Intravenous Medicines Administration Errors by Nurses in the United Kingdom: A Probabilistic Model Based on Voriconazole Administration. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2022; 20:91-104. [PMID: 34403128 PMCID: PMC8752547 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-021-00675-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/12/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
AIM In the UK, injectable medicines are often prepared and administered by nurses following the Injectable Medicines Guide (IMG). Our earlier study confirmed a higher frequency of correct administration with user-tested versus standard IMG guidelines. This current study aimed to model the cost-effectiveness of user-testing. METHODS The costs and cost-effectiveness of user-testing were explored by modifying an existing probabilistic decision-analytic model. The adapted model considered administration of intravenous voriconazole to hospital inpatients by nurses. It included 11 error types, their probability of detection and level of harm. Model inputs (including costs) were derived from our previous study and other published data. Monte Carlo simulation using 20,000 samples (sufficient for convergence) was performed with a 5-year time horizon from the perspective of the 121 NHS trusts and health boards that use the IMG. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for the risk of a medication error and other sources of uncertainty. RESULTS The net monetary benefit at £20,000/quality-adjusted life year was £3,190,064 (95% credible interval (CrI): -346,709 to 8,480,665), favouring user-testing with a 96% chance of cost-effectiveness. Incremental cost-savings were £240,943 (95% CrI 43,527-491,576), also favouring user-tested guidelines with a 99% chance of cost-saving. The total user testing cost was £6317 (95% CrI 6012-6627). These findings were robust to assumptions about a range of input parameters, but greater uncertainty was seen with a lower medication error risk. CONCLUSIONS User-testing of injectable medicines guidelines is a low-cost intervention that is highly likely to be cost-effective, especially for high-risk medicines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew D Jones
- Department of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
| | - Bryony Dean Franklin
- UCL School of Pharmacy, London, UK
- Pharmacy Department, Centre for Medication Safety and Service Quality, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - D K Raynor
- School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- Luto Research, Leeds, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Margaret C Watson
- Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Keeney E, Thom H, Turner E, Martin RM, Morley J, Sanghera S. Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Models in Prostate Cancer: Exploring New Developments in Testing and Diagnosis. Value Health 2022; 25:133-146. [PMID: 35031092 PMCID: PMC8752463 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2021] [Revised: 07/08/2021] [Accepted: 07/09/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Recent innovations in prostate cancer diagnosis include new biomarkers and more accurate biopsy methods. This study assesses the evidence base on cost-effectiveness of these developments (eg, Prostate Health Index and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]-guided biopsy) and identifies areas of improvement for future cost-effectiveness models. METHODS A systematic review using the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, MEDLINE, Embase, Health Technology Assessment databases, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, and United Kingdom National Screening Committee guidance was performed, between 2009 and 2021. Relevant data were extracted on study type, model inputs, modeling methods and cost-effectiveness conclusions, and results narratively synthesized. RESULTS A total of 22 model-based economic evaluations were included. A total of 11 compared the cost-effectiveness of new biomarkers to prostate-specific antigen testing alone and all found biomarkers to be cost saving. A total of 8 compared MRI-guided biopsy methods to transrectal ultrasound-guided methods and found MRI-guided methods to be most cost-effective. Newer detection methods showed a reduction in unnecessary biopsies and overtreatment. The most cost-effective follow-up strategy in men with a negative initial biopsy was uncertain. Many studies did not model for stage or grade of cancer, cancer progression, or the entire testing and treatment pathway. Few fully accounted for uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS This review brings together the cost-effectiveness literature for novel diagnostic methods in prostate cancer, showing that most studies have found new methods to be more cost-effective than standard of care. Several limitations of the models were identified, however, limiting the reliability of the results. Areas for further development include accurately modeling the impact of early diagnostic tests on long-term outcomes of prostate cancer and fully accounting for uncertainty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edna Keeney
- Health Economics Bristol, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK.
| | - Howard Thom
- Health Economics Bristol, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Emma Turner
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Richard M Martin
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK; MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Josie Morley
- Health Economics Bristol, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Sabina Sanghera
- Health Economics Bristol, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Keeney E, Thom H, Turner E, Martin RM, Sanghera S. Response to Comment on Delphi Analysis of Relevant Comparators in a Cost-Effectiveness Model of Prostate Cancer Screening. Pharmacoeconomics 2021; 39:969-970. [PMID: 34273086 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-021-01062-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/13/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Edna Keeney
- Health Economics Bristol (HEB), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
| | - Howard Thom
- Health Economics Bristol (HEB), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and The University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Emma Turner
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK
| | - Richard M Martin
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and The University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK
- MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sabina Sanghera
- Health Economics Bristol (HEB), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Thom H, Walker J, Vickerman P, Hollingworth W. Exploratory comparison of Healthcare costs and benefits of the UK's Covid-19 response with four European countries. Eur J Public Health 2021; 31:619-624. [PMID: 33693615 PMCID: PMC7989397 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckab019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In responding to Covid-19, governments have tried to balance protecting health while minimizing gross domestic product (GDP) losses. We compare health-related net benefit (HRNB) and GDP losses associated with government responses of the UK, Ireland, Germany, Spain and Sweden from UK healthcare payer perspective. METHODS We compared observed cases, hospitalizations and deaths under 'mitigation' to modelled events under 'no mitigation' to 20 July 2020. We thus calculated healthcare costs, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), and HRNB at £20,000/QALY saved by each country. On per population (i.e. per capita) basis, we compared HRNB with forecast reductions in 2020 GDP growth (overall or compared with Sweden as minimal mitigation country) and qualitatively and quantitatively described government responses. RESULTS The UK saved 3.17 (0.32-3.65) million QALYs, £33 (8-38) billion healthcare costs and £1416 (220-1637) HRNB per capita at £20,000/QALY. Per capita, this is comparable to £1455 GDP loss using Sweden as comparator and offsets 46.1 (7.1-53.2)% of total £3075 GDP loss. Germany, Spain, and Sweden had greater HRNB per capita. These also offset a greater percentage of total GDP losses per capita. Ireland fared worst on both measures. Countries with more mask wearing, testing, and population susceptibility had better outcomes. Highest stringency responses did not appear to have best outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Our exploratory analysis indicates the benefit of government Covid-19 responses may outweigh their economic costs. The extent that HRNB offset economic losses appears to relate to population characteristics, testing levels, and mask wearing, rather than response stringency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Josephine Walker
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Peter Vickerman
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Will Hollingworth
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Fang W, Wang Z, Giles MB, Jackson CH, Welton NJ, Andrieu C, Thom H. Multilevel and Quasi Monte Carlo Methods for the Calculation of the Expected Value of Partial Perfect Information. Med Decis Making 2021; 42:168-181. [PMID: 34231446 PMCID: PMC8777326 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x211026305] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
The expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) provides an upper bound
on the value of collecting further evidence on a set of inputs to a
cost-effectiveness decision model. Standard Monte Carlo estimation of EVPPI is
computationally expensive as it requires nested simulation. Alternatives based
on regression approximations to the model have been developed but are not
practicable when the number of uncertain parameters of interest is large and
when parameter estimates are highly correlated. The error associated with the
regression approximation is difficult to determine, while MC allows the bias and
precision to be controlled. In this article, we explore the potential of quasi
Monte Carlo (QMC) and multilevel Monte Carlo (MLMC) estimation to reduce the
computational cost of estimating EVPPI by reducing the variance compared with MC
while preserving accuracy. We also develop methods to apply QMC and MLMC to
EVPPI, addressing particular challenges that arise where Markov chain Monte
Carlo (MCMC) has been used to estimate input parameter distributions. We
illustrate the methods using 2 examples: a simplified decision tree model for
treatments for depression and a complex Markov model for treatments to prevent
stroke in atrial fibrillation, both of which use MCMC inputs. We compare the
performance of QMC and MLMC with MC and the approximation techniques of
generalized additive model (GAM) regression, Gaussian process (GP) regression,
and integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA-GP). We found QMC and MLMC to
offer substantial computational savings when parameter sets are large and
correlated and when the EVPPI is large. We also found that GP and INLA-GP were
biased in those situations, whereas GAM cannot estimate EVPPI for large
parameter sets.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wei Fang
- Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Zhenru Wang
- Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Michael B Giles
- Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Chris H Jackson
- MRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, UK
| | - Nicky J Welton
- Population Health Science, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Howard Thom
- Population Health Science, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Keeney E, Thom H, Turner E, Martin RM, Sanghera S. Using a Modified Delphi Approach to Gain Consensus on Relevant Comparators in a Cost-Effectiveness Model: Application to Prostate Cancer Screening. Pharmacoeconomics 2021; 39:589-600. [PMID: 33797744 PMCID: PMC8079293 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-021-01009-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/15/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Challenges can exist when framing the decision question in a cost-effectiveness analysis, particularly when there is disagreement among experts on relevant comparators. Using prostate cancer screening and recent developments in risk stratification, early-detection biomarkers, and diagnostic technologies as a case study, we report a modified Delphi approach to handle decision-question uncertainty. METHODS The study involved two rounds of anonymous online questionnaires to identify the prostate cancer screening strategies that international researchers, clinicians and decision makers felt important to consider in a cost-effectiveness model. Both purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit experts. The questionnaire was based on a review of the literature and was piloted for language, comprehension and ease of use prior to dissemination. In Round 1, respondents indicated their preferred screening strategy (including no screening) through a series of multiple-choice questions. The responses informed a set of 13 consensus statements, which respondents ranked their agreement with on a 9-point Likert scale (Round 2). Consensus was considered reached if > 70% of participants indicated agreement and < 15% indicated disagreement. RESULTS Twenty participants completed Round 1 and 17 completed Round 2. Consensus was shown towards comparing no formal screening, age-based, and risk-based strategies. The risk-based approaches included screening only higher-risk men, using shorter screening intervals for higher-risk men, screening higher-risk men at an earlier age, and tailoring screening intervals based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at a previous test. There was agreement that inclusion of MRI in the pathway should be considered, but disagreement on the inclusion of new biomarkers. CONCLUSION In disease areas where technologies are rapidly evolving, a modified Delphi approach provides a useful tool to identify relevant comparators in an economic evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edna Keeney
- Health Economics Bristol (HEB), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
| | - Howard Thom
- Health Economics Bristol (HEB), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Emma Turner
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK
| | - Richard M Martin
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK
- MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sabina Sanghera
- Health Economics Bristol (HEB), Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Marques EMR, Dennis J, Beswick AD, Higgins J, Thom H, Welton N, Burston A, Hunt L, Whitehouse MR, Blom AW. Choice between implants in knee replacement: protocol for a Bayesian network meta-analysis, analysis of joint registries and economic decision model to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of knee implants for NHS patients-The KNee Implant Prostheses Study (KNIPS). BMJ Open 2021; 11:e040205. [PMID: 33408201 PMCID: PMC7789438 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040205] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2020] [Revised: 11/16/2020] [Accepted: 12/02/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Knee replacements are highly successful for many people, but if a knee replacement fails, revision surgery is generally required. Surgeons and patients may choose from a range of implant components and combinations that make up knee replacement constructs, all with potential implications for how long a knee replacement will last. To inform surgeon and patient decisions, a comprehensive synthesis of data from randomised controlled trials is needed to evaluate the effects of different knee replacement implants on overall construct survival. Due to limited follow-up in trials, joint registry analyses are also needed to assess the long-term survival of constructs. Finally, economic modelling can identify cost-effective knee replacement constructs for different patient groups. METHODS AND ANALYSIS In this protocol, we describe systematic reviews and network meta-analyses to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of knee replacement constructs used in total and unicompartmental knee replacement and analyses of two national joint registries to assess long-term outcomes. Knee replacement constructs are defined by bearing materials and mobility, constraint, fixation and patella resurfacing. For men and women in different age groups, we will compare the lifetime cost-effectiveness of knee replacement constructs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Systematic reviews are secondary analyses of published data with no ethical approval required. We will design a common joint registry analysis plan and provide registry representatives with information for submission to research or ethics committees. The project has been assessed by the National Health Service (NHS) REC committee and does not require ethical review.Study findings will be disseminated to clinicians, researchers and administrators through open access articles, presentations and websites. Specific UK-based groups will be informed of results including National Institute for Health Research and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, as well as international orthopaedic associations and charities. Effective dissemination to patients will be guided by our patient-public involvement group and include written lay summaries and infographics. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42019134059 and CRD42019138015.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elsa M R Marques
- Musculoskeletal Research Unit, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
| | - Jane Dennis
- Musculoskeletal Research Unit, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
| | - Andrew D Beswick
- Musculoskeletal Research Unit, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
| | - Julian Higgins
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
- National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
- National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Nicky Welton
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
- National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Amanda Burston
- Musculoskeletal Research Unit, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
| | - Linda Hunt
- Musculoskeletal Research Unit, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
| | - Michael R Whitehouse
- Musculoskeletal Research Unit, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
- National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Ashley W Blom
- Musculoskeletal Research Unit, Bristol Medical School, Bristol, UK
- National Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
McGlone ER, Carey I, Veličković V, Chana P, Mahawar K, Batterham RL, Hopkins J, Walton P, Kinsman R, Byrne J, Somers S, Kerrigan D, Menon V, Borg C, Ahmed A, Sgromo B, Cheruvu C, Bano G, Leonard C, Thom H, le Roux CW, Reddy M, Welbourn R, Small P, Khan OA. Bariatric surgery for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus requiring insulin: Clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness analyses. PLoS Med 2020; 17:e1003228. [PMID: 33285553 PMCID: PMC7721482 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2020] [Accepted: 10/16/2020] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although bariatric surgery is well established as an effective treatment for patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), there exists reluctance to increase its availability for patients with severe T2DM. The aims of this study were to examine the impact of bariatric surgery on T2DM resolution in patients with obesity and T2DM requiring insulin (T2DM-Ins) using data from a national database and to develop a health economic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of surgery in this cohort when compared to best medical treatment (BMT). METHODS AND FINDINGS Clinical data from the National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR), a comprehensive database of bariatric surgery in the United Kingdom, were extracted to analyse outcomes of patients with obesity and T2DM-Ins who underwent primary bariatric surgery between 2009 and 2017. Outcomes for this group were combined with data sourced from a comprehensive literature review in order to develop a state-transition microsimulation model to evaluate cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery versus BMT for patients over a 5-year time horizon. The main outcome measure for the clinical study was insulin cessation at 1-year post-surgery: relative risks (RR) summarising predictive factors were determined, unadjusted, and after adjusting for variables including age, initial body mass index (BMI), duration of T2DM, and weight loss. Main outcome measures for the economic evaluation were total costs, total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) at willingness-to-pay threshold of GBP£20,000. A total of 2,484 patients were eligible for inclusion, of which 1,847 had 1-year follow-up data (mean age of 51 years, mean initial BMI 47.2 kg/m2, and 64% female). 67% of patients no longer required insulin at 1-year postoperatively: these rates persisted for 4 years. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was associated with a higher rate of insulin cessation (71.7%) than sleeve gastrectomy (SG; 64.5%; RR 0.92, confidence interval (CI) 0.86-0.99) and adjustable gastric band (AGB; 33.6%; RR 0.45, CI 0.34-0.60; p < 0.001). When adjusted for percentage total weight loss and demographic variables, insulin cessation following surgery was comparable for RYGB and SG (RR 0.97, CI 0.90-1.04), with AGB having the lowest cessation rates (RR 0.55, CI 0.40-0.74; p < 0.001). Over 5 years, bariatric surgery was cost saving compared to BMT (total cost GBP£22,057 versus GBP£26,286 respectively, incremental difference GBP£4,229). This was due to lower treatment costs as well as reduced diabetes-related complications costs and increased health benefits. Limitations of this study include loss to follow-up of patients within the NBSR dataset and that the time horizon for the economic analysis is limited to 5 years. In addition, the study reflects current medical and surgical treatment regimens for this cohort of patients, which may change. CONCLUSIONS In this study, we observed that in patients with obesity and T2DM-Ins, bariatric surgery was associated with high rates of postoperative cessation of insulin therapy, which is, in turn, a major driver of overall reductions in direct healthcare cost. Our findings suggest that a strategy utilising bariatric surgery for patients with obesity and T2DM-Ins is cost saving to the national healthcare provider (National Health Service (NHS)) over a 5-year time horizon.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma Rose McGlone
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Iain Carey
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s Hospital, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Vladica Veličković
- Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT, Hall in Tirol, Austria
| | - Prem Chana
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Kamal Mahawar
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Rachel L. Batterham
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
- UCL Centre for Obesity Research, Division of Medicine, Rayne Building, University College London, London, United Kingdom
- National Institute of Health Research, UCLH Biomedical Research Centre, London, United Kingdom
| | - James Hopkins
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Peter Walton
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Robin Kinsman
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - James Byrne
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Shaw Somers
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - David Kerrigan
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Vinod Menon
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Cynthia Borg
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ahmed Ahmed
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Bruno Sgromo
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Chandra Cheruvu
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Gul Bano
- St George’s Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Catherine Leonard
- Medtronic Ltd, Croxley Green Business Park, Hatters Lane, Watford, United Kingdom
| | - Howard Thom
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Carel W le Roux
- Diabetes Complications Research Centre, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Marcus Reddy
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Richard Welbourn
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Peter Small
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
| | - Omar A. Khan
- National Bariatric Surgical Registry (NBSR)/British Obesity and Metabolic Surgical Society (BOMSS), Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, United Kingdom
- Population Health Research Institute, St George’s Hospital, University of London, London, United Kingdom
- St George’s Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Fahrbach K, Tarpey J, Washington EB, Hughes R, Thom H, Neary MP, Cha A, Gerber R, Cappelleri JC. Correction to: Crisaborole Ointment, 2%, for Treatment of Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Atopic Dermatitis: Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-Analysis. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) 2020; 10:1441-1444. [PMID: 33025454 PMCID: PMC7649182 DOI: 10.1007/s13555-020-00452-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
The authors would like to replace 2 small sections of the published manuscript that refer to a qualitative review of safety data for included studies (together with an associated safety table), to provide some further clarifications on these safety data and to include some quantitative updates for rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyle Fahrbach
- Evidence Synthesis, Modeling & Communication, Evidera, Waltham, MA, USA
| | - Jialu Tarpey
- Evidence Synthesis, Modeling & Communication, Evidera, Waltham, MA, USA
| | | | - Rachel Hughes
- Evidence Synthesis, Modeling & Communication, Evidera, Waltham, MA, USA
| | - Howard Thom
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Clifton Insight, Bristol, UK
| | - Maureen P Neary
- Inflammation and Immunology, Pfizer Inc., Collegeville, PA, USA
| | - Amy Cha
- Inflammation and Immunology, Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA
| | - Robert Gerber
- Inflammation and Immunology, Pfizer Inc., Groton, CT, USA
| | - Joseph C Cappelleri
- Global Biometrics and Data Management (Statistics), Pfizer Inc., Groton, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Elwenspoek MMC, Jackson J, Dawson S, Everitt H, Gillett P, Hay AD, Jones HE, Lane DL, Mallett S, Robins G, Sheppard AL, Stubbs J, Thom H, Watson J, Whiting P. Accuracy of potential diagnostic indicators for coeliac disease: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e038994. [PMID: 33020103 PMCID: PMC7537462 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038994] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Coeliac disease (CD) is a systemic immune-mediated disorder triggered by gluten in genetically predisposed individuals. CD is diagnosed using a combination of serology tests and endoscopic biopsy of the small intestine. However, because of non-specific symptoms and heterogeneous clinical presentation, diagnosing CD is challenging. Early detection of CD through improved case-finding strategies can improve the response to a gluten-free diet, patients' quality of life and potentially reduce the risk of complications. However, there is a lack of consensus in which groups may benefit from active case-finding. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will perform a systematic review to determine the accuracy of diagnostic indicators (such as symptoms and risk factors) for CD in adults and children, and thus can help identify patients who should be offered CD testing. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science will be searched from 1997 until 2020. Screening will be performed in duplicate. Data extraction will be performed by one and checked by a second reviewer. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or referral to a third reviewer. We will produce a narrative summary of identified prediction models. Studies, where 2×2 data can be extracted or reconstructed, will be treated as diagnostic accuracy studies, that is, the diagnostic indicators are the index tests and CD serology and/or biopsy is the reference standard. For each diagnostic indicator, we will perform a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals, academic and public presentations and social media. We will convene an implementation panel to advise on the optimum strategy for enhanced dissemination. We will discuss findings with Coeliac UK to help with dissemination to patients. Ethical approval is not applicable, as this is a systematic review and no research participants will be involved. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42020170766.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martha Maria Christine Elwenspoek
- The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Joni Jackson
- The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sarah Dawson
- The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Hazel Everitt
- Primary Care, Population Sciences and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Peter Gillett
- Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition Department, Royal Hospital for Sick Children, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Alastair D Hay
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Hayley E Jones
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Susan Mallett
- School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, West Midlands, UK
| | - Gerry Robins
- Department of Gastroenterology, York Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, North Yorkshire, UK
| | | | - Jo Stubbs
- Patient representative, Patient representative, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jessica Watson
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Penny Whiting
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Treatment options for preventing vaso-occlusive crises (VOC) among patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) are limited, especially if hydroxyurea treatment has failed or is contraindicated. A systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of crizanlizumab for older adolescent and adult (≥16 years old) SCD patients. METHODS The SLR included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and uncontrolled studies. Bayesian NMA of VOC, all-cause hospitalisation days and adverse events were conducted. RESULTS The SLR identified 51 studies and 9 RCTs on 14 treatments that met the NMA inclusion criteria. The NMA found that crizanlizumab 5.0 mg/kg was associated with a reduction in VOC (HR 0.55, 95% credible interval (0.43, 0.69); Bayesian probability of superiority >0.99), all-cause hospitalisation days (0.58 (0.50, 0.68); >0.99) and no evidence of difference on adverse events (0.91 (0.59, 1.43) 0.66) or serious adverse events (0.93 (0.47, 1.87); 0.59) compared with placebo. The HR for reduction in VOC for crizanlizumab relative to L-glutamine was (0.67 (0.50, 0.88); >0.99). These results were sensitive to assumptions regarding whether patient age is an effect modifier. CONCLUSIONS This NMA provides preliminary evidence comparing the efficacy of crizanlizumab with other treatments for VOC prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jeroen Jansen
- Health Economics, PRECISIONheor, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Jason Shafrin
- Health Economics, PRECISIONheor, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Lauren Zhao
- Health Economics, PRECISIONheor, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - George Joseph
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA
| | | | - Subhajit Gupta
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA
| | - Nirmish Shah
- Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Hollingworth W, Fawsitt CG, Dixon P, Duffy L, Araya R, Peters TJ, Thom H, Welton NJ, Wiles N, Lewis G. Cost-Effectiveness of Sertraline in Primary Care According to Initial Severity and Duration of Depressive Symptoms: Findings from the PANDA RCT. Pharmacoecon Open 2020; 4:427-438. [PMID: 31777008 PMCID: PMC7426336 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-019-00188-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Antidepressants are commonly prescribed for depression, but it is unclear whether treatment efficacy depends on severity and duration of symptoms and how prescribing might be targeted cost-effectively. OBJECTIVES We investigated the cost-effectiveness of the antidepressant sertraline compared with placebo in subgroups defined by severity and duration of depressive symptoms. METHODS We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the NHS and Personal and Social Services (PSS) in the UK alongside the PANDA (What are the indications for Prescribing ANtiDepressants that will leAd to a clinical benefit?) randomised controlled trial (RCT), which compared sertraline with placebo over a 12-week period. Quality of life data were collected at baseline and at 2, 6, and 12 weeks post-randomisation using EQ-5D-5L, from which we calculated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs (in 2017/18£) were collected using patient records and from resource use questionnaires administered at each follow-up interval. Differences in mean costs and mean QALYs and net monetary benefits were estimated. Our primary analysis used net monetary benefit regressions to identify any interaction between the cost-effectiveness of sertraline and subgroups defined by baseline symptom severity (0-11; 12-19; 20+ on the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised) and, separately, duration of symptoms (greater or less than 2 years duration). A secondary analysis estimated the cost-effectiveness of sertraline versus placebo, irrespective of duration or severity. RESULTS There was no evidence of an association between the baseline severity of depressive symptoms and the cost-effectiveness of sertraline. Compared to patients with low symptom severity, the expected net benefits in patients with moderate symptoms were £24 (95% CI - £280 to £328; p value 0.876) and the expected net benefits in patients with high symptom severity were £37 (95% CI - £221 to £296; p value 0.776). Patients who had a longer history of depressive symptoms at baseline had lower expected net benefits from sertraline than those with a shorter history; however, the difference was uncertain (- £27 [95% CI - £258 to £204]; p value 0.817). In the secondary analysis, patients treated with sertraline had higher expected net benefits (£122 [95% CI £18 to £226]; p value 0.101) than those in the placebo group. Sertraline had a high probability (> 95%) of being cost-effective if the health system was willing to pay at least £20,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS We found insufficient evidence of a prespecified threshold based on severity or symptom duration that GPs could use to target prescribing to a subgroup of patients where sertraline is most cost-effective. Sertraline is probably a cost-effective treatment for depressive symptoms in UK primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION Controlled Trials ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN84544741.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Hollingworth
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 5 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1UD UK
| | | | - Padraig Dixon
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 5 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1UD UK
| | - Larisa Duffy
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, 6th Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7NF UK
| | - Ricardo Araya
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings’ College London, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 8AF UK
| | - Tim J. Peters
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 5 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1UD UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 5 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1UD UK
| | - Nicky J. Welton
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 5 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1UD UK
| | - Nicola Wiles
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 5 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol, BS8 1UD UK
| | - Glyn Lewis
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, 6th Floor Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7NF UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Kunst N, Wilson ECF, Glynn D, Alarid-Escudero F, Baio G, Brennan A, Fairley M, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Jackson C, Jalal H, Menzies NA, Strong M, Thom H, Heath A. Computing the Expected Value of Sample Information Efficiently: Practical Guidance and Recommendations for Four Model-Based Methods. Value Health 2020; 23:734-742. [PMID: 32540231 PMCID: PMC8183576 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.02.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2019] [Revised: 12/19/2019] [Accepted: 02/11/2020] [Indexed: 05/09/2023]
Abstract
Value of information (VOI) analyses can help policy makers make informed decisions about whether to conduct and how to design future studies. Historically a computationally expensive method to compute the expected value of sample information (EVSI) restricted the use of VOI to simple decision models and study designs. Recently, 4 EVSI approximation methods have made such analyses more feasible and accessible. Members of the Collaborative Network for Value of Information (ConVOI) compared the inputs, the analyst's expertise and skills, and the software required for the 4 recently developed EVSI approximation methods. Our report provides practical guidance and recommendations to help inform the choice between the 4 efficient EVSI estimation methods. More specifically, this report provides: (1) a step-by-step guide to the methods' use, (2) the expertise and skills required to implement the methods, and (3) method recommendations based on the features of decision-analytic problems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalia Kunst
- Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; LINK Medical Research, Oslo, Norway.
| | - Edward C F Wilson
- Health Economics Group, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, England, UK
| | | | | | | | - Alan Brennan
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK
| | - Michael Fairley
- Stanford Health Policy, Centers for Health Policy and Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert
- Stanford Health Policy, Centers for Health Policy and Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Chris Jackson
- MRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | - Hawre Jalal
- University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Nicolas A Menzies
- Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Mark Strong
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK
| | | | - Anna Heath
- University College London, London, England, UK; The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada; University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Thom H, Norman G, Welton NJ, Crosbie EJ, Blazeby J, Dumville JC. Intra-Cavity Lavage and Wound Irrigation for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2020; 22:144-167. [PMID: 32352895 DOI: 10.1089/sur.2019.318] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are costly and associated with poorer patient outcomes. Intra-operative surgical site irrigation and intra-cavity lavage may reduce the risk of SSIs through removal of dead or damaged tissue, metabolic waste, and site exudate. Irrigation with antibiotic or antiseptic solutions may further reduce the risk of SSI because of bacteriocidal properties. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted comparing irrigation solutions, but important comparisons (e.g., antibiotic vs. antiseptic irrigation) are absent. We use systematic review-based network meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs to compare irrigation solutions for prevention of SSI. Methods: We used Cochrane methodology and included all RCTs of participants undergoing a surgical procedure with primary site closure, in which method of irrigation was the only systematic difference between groups. We used a random effects Bayesian NMA to create a connected network of comparisons. Results are presented as odds ratios (OR) of SSI, where OR <1 indicates a beneficial effect. Results: We identified 42 eligible RCTs with 11,726 participants. Most were at unclear or high risk of bias. The RCTs included groups given no irrigation or non-antibacterial, antiseptic, or antibiotic irrigation. There was substantial heterogeneity, and a random effects model was selected. Relative to non-antibacterial irrigation, mean OR of SSI was 0.439 (95% credible interval: 0.282, 0.667) for antibiotic irrigation and 0.573 (0.321, 0.953) for antiseptic agents. No irrigation was similar to non-antibacterial irrigation (OR 0.959 [0.555, 1.660]). Antibiotic and antiseptic irrigation were ranked as most effective for preventing SSIs; this conclusion was robust to potential bias. Conclusions: Our NMA found that antibiotic and antiseptic irrigation had the lowest odds of SSI. There was high heterogeneity, however, and studies were at high risk of bias. A large RCT directly comparing antibiotic irrigation with both antiseptic and non-antibacterial irrigation is needed to define the standard of care for SSI prevention by site irrigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Population Health Science, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Gill Norman
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Nicky J Welton
- Population Health Science, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Emma J Crosbie
- Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Jane Blazeby
- Population Health Science, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Jo C Dumville
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Agg H, Ndirangu K, Muehlenbein C, Winfree KB, Zhu YE, Thom H, Tongbram V. A network meta-analysis of immunotherapy-based regimens for first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2020. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2020.38.5_suppl.52] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
52 Background: Immunotherapy (IO) for initial treatment of patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (nsqNSCLC) has led to improved progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) vs chemotherapy. The objective of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy of IO-based therapies to chemotherapy in the first-line treatment until progression for advanced nsqNSCLC. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials reporting PFS and/or OS data in adult patients who received first-line treatment for stage IIIB or IV nsqNSCLC until progression. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register were searched from the start of databases to June 2018. The NMA used fixed-effects models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and credible intervals (Crl) for PFS and OS of IO therapies vs pemetrexed + platinum. A subgroup of patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% was also analysed. Results: Evidence networks comprised of 18 studies for the overall population and 3 studies for the PD-L1 TPS ≥50% subgroup. In PFS analysis for the overall population, HRs were lower for atezolizumab + bevacizumab + paclitaxel + platinum (HR 0.62; 95% CrI 0.48, 0.8), ipilimumab + nivolumab (HR 0.55; 95% CrI 0.38, 0.8) and pemetrexed + pembrolizumab + platinum regimens (HR 0.52; 95% CrI 0.43, 0.63) vs pemetrexed + platinum. In the PD-L1 TPS ≥50% subgroup, PFS HRs were lower for pembrolizumab (HR 0.81; 95% CrI 0.67, 0.98) and pemetrexed + pembrolizumab + platinum (HR 0.36; 95% CrI 0.25, 0.52) vs pemetrexed + platinum. In the OS analysis for the overall population, pemetrexed + pembrolizumab + platinum had a lower HR (HR 0.5; 95% CrI 0.4, 0.64) vs pemetrexed + platinum. This difference in OS was magnified in the PD-L1 TPS ≥50% subgroup (HR 0.42; 95% CrI 0.26, 0.68). Conclusions: Among all IO-based therapies in this analysis, pemetrexed + pembrolizumab + platinum had the highest PFS and OS benefit vs pemetrexed + platinum in the first-line treatment until progression for advanced nsqNSCLC for both the overall population and high PD-L1 subgroup. These comparative efficacy data may inform clinicians in treatment selection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Howard Thom
- University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Kandiyali R, Thom H, Young AE, Greenwood R, Welton NJ. Cost-effectiveness and value of information analysis of a low-friction environment following skin graft in patients with burn injury. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2020; 6:8. [PMID: 32021697 PMCID: PMC6995137 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-019-0543-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2019] [Accepted: 12/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Patients with burn injuries may receive a skin graft to achieve healing in a timely manner. However, in around 7% of cases, the skin graft is lost (fails to attach to the wound site) and a re-grafting procedure is necessary. It has been hypothesised that low-friction (smooth, more slippery) bedding may reduce the risk of skin-graft loss. A before and after feasibility study comparing low-friction with standard bedding in skin-grafted patients was conducted in order to collect proof of concept data. The resulting relative risk on the primary outcome (number of patients with skin graft failure) for the non-randomised study provided no evidence of effect but had a large standard error. The aim of this study is to see if an appropriately powered randomised control trial would be worthwhile. Methods A probabilistic decision-analytic model was constructed to compare low-friction bedding to standard care in a population of burn patients who have undergone skin grafting. Results from the before and after study were used as model inputs. The sensitivity of results to bias in the relative risk of graft loss was conducted. Low-friction bedding is considered optimal if expected incremental net benefit (INB) is positive. Uncertainty is assessed using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Expected Value of Perfect Partial Information (EVPPI) provides an upper bound for the potential net health benefits of new research for given model input. Results At a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY, INB = £151 (95% Credible Interval (CrI) −142 to 814), marginally favouring low-friction bedding but with high uncertainty (probability of being cost-effective 70.5%). Expected value of perfect information (EVPI) per patient was £20.29, which results in a population EVPI of £174,765 over a 10-year lifetime for the technology (based on 1000 patients per year who would benefit from the intervention). The parameter contributing most to the uncertainty was the inpatient care cost, i.e. information that could be obtained from the audit of practice and without an expensive trial. These findings were robust to a wide-range of assumptions about the potential bias due to the observational nature of the comparative evidence. Conclusions Our study results suggest that an RCT (randomised controlled trial) is unlikely to be worthwhile, but there may be value in a study to estimate the re-graft rates and associated costs in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca Kandiyali
- 1Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- 1Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Amber E Young
- 1Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.,2University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Nicky J Welton
- 1Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Duarte R, Stainthorpe A, Greenhalgh J, Richardson M, Nevitt S, Mahon J, Kotas E, Boland A, Thom H, Marshall T, Hall M, Takwoingi Y. Lead-I ECG for detecting atrial fibrillation in patients with an irregular pulse using single time point testing: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2020; 24:1-164. [PMID: 31933471 DOI: 10.3310/hta24030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common type of cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with an increased risk of stroke and congestive heart failure. Lead-I electrocardiogram (ECG) devices are handheld instruments that can be used to detect AF at a single time point in people who present with relevant signs or symptoms. OBJECTIVE To assess the diagnostic test accuracy, clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of using single time point lead-I ECG devices for the detection of AF in people presenting to primary care with relevant signs or symptoms, and who have an irregular pulse compared with using manual pulse palpation (MPP) followed by a 12-lead ECG in primary or secondary care. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print and MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Database of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Assessment Database. METHODS The systematic review methods followed published guidance. Two reviewers screened the search results (database inception to April 2018), extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy were calculated using bivariate models. An economic model consisting of a decision tree and two cohort Markov models was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lead-I ECG devices. RESULTS No studies were identified that evaluated the use of lead-I ECG devices for patients with signs or symptoms of AF. Therefore, the diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact results presented are derived from an asymptomatic population (used as a proxy for people with signs or symptoms of AF). The summary sensitivity of lead-I ECG devices was 93.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 86.2% to 97.4%] and summary specificity was 96.5% (95% CI 90.4% to 98.8%). One study reported limited clinical outcome data. Acceptability of lead-I ECG devices was reported in four studies, with generally positive views. The de novo economic model yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The results of the pairwise analysis show that all lead-I ECG devices generated ICERs per QALY gained below the £20,000-30,000 threshold. Kardia Mobile (AliveCor Ltd, Mountain View, CA, USA) is the most cost-effective option in a full incremental analysis. LIMITATIONS No published data evaluating the diagnostic accuracy, clinical impact or cost-effectiveness of lead-I ECG devices for the population of interest are available. CONCLUSIONS Single time point lead-I ECG devices for the detection of AF in people with signs or symptoms of AF and an irregular pulse appear to be a cost-effective use of NHS resources compared with MPP followed by a 12-lead ECG in primary or secondary care, given the assumptions used in the base-case model. FUTURE WORK Studies assessing how the use of lead-I ECG devices in this population affects the number of people diagnosed with AF when compared with current practice would be useful. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018090375. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rui Duarte
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Angela Stainthorpe
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Janette Greenhalgh
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Marty Richardson
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Sarah Nevitt
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.,Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - James Mahon
- Coldingham Analytical Services, Berwickshire, UK
| | - Eleanor Kotas
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Angela Boland
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG), Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Tom Marshall
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Mark Hall
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Yemisi Takwoingi
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.,NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Thom H, López‐López JA, Welton NJ. Shared parameter model for competing risks and different data summaries in meta-analysis: Implications for common and rare outcomes. Res Synth Methods 2020; 11:91-104. [PMID: 31330089 PMCID: PMC7003901 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1371] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2018] [Revised: 06/24/2019] [Accepted: 07/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
This paper considers the problem in aggregate data meta-analysis of studies reporting multiple competing binary outcomes and of studies using different summary formats for those outcomes. For example, some may report numbers of patients with at least one of each outcome while others may report the total number of such outcomes. We develop a shared parameter model on hazard ratio scale accounting for different data summaries and competing risks. We adapt theoretical arguments from the literature to demonstrate that the models are equivalent if events are rare. We use constructed data examples and a simulation study to find an event rate threshold of approximately 0.2 above which competing risks and different data summaries may bias results if no adjustments are made. Below this threshold, simpler models may be sufficient. We recommend analysts to consider the absolute event rates and only use a simple model ignoring data types and competing risks if all of underlying events are rare (below our threshold of approximately 0.2). If one or more of the absolute event rates approaches or exceeds our informal threshold, it may be necessary to account for data types and competing risks through a shared parameter model in order to avoid biased estimates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health SciencesUniversity of BristolBristolUK
| | - José A. López‐López
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health SciencesUniversity of BristolBristolUK
- Department of Basic Psychology & Methodology, Faculty of PsychologyUniversity of MurciaMurciaSpain
| | - Nicky J. Welton
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health SciencesUniversity of BristolBristolUK
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Duarte R, Stainthorpe A, Mahon J, Greenhalgh J, Richardson M, Nevitt S, Kotas E, Boland A, Thom H, Marshall T, Hall M, Takwoingi Y. Lead-I ECG for detecting atrial fibrillation in patients attending primary care with an irregular pulse using single-time point testing: A systematic review and economic evaluation. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0226671. [PMID: 31869370 PMCID: PMC6927656 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2019] [Accepted: 12/02/2019] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common type of cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with increased risk of stroke and congestive heart failure. Lead-I electrocardiogram (ECG) devices are handheld instruments that can detect AF at a single-time point. Purpose To assess the diagnostic test accuracy, clinical impact and cost effectiveness of single-time point lead-I ECG devices compared with manual pulse palpation (MPP) followed by a 12-lead ECG for the detection of AF in symptomatic primary care patients with an irregular pulse. Methods Electronic databases (MEDLINE, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print and MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Database of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment Database) were searched to March 2018. Two reviewers screened the search results, extracted data and assessed study quality. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy were calculated using bivariate models. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an economic model consisting of a decision tree and two cohort Markov models. Results Diagnostic accuracy The diagnostic accuracy (13 publications reporting on nine studies) and clinical impact (24 publications reporting on 19 studies) results are derived from an asymptomatic population (used as a proxy for people with signs or symptoms of AF). The summary sensitivity of lead-I ECG devices was 93.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86.2% to 97.4%) and summary specificity was 96.5% (95% CI: 90.4% to 98.8%). Cost effectiveness The de novo economic model yielded incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The results of the pairwise analysis show that all lead-I ECG devices generate ICERs per QALY gained below the £20,000-£30,000 threshold. Kardia Mobile is the most cost effective option in a full incremental analysis. Lead-I ECG tests may identify more AF cases than the standard diagnostic pathway. This comes at a higher cost but with greater patient benefit in terms of mortality and quality of life. Limitations No published data evaluating the diagnostic accuracy, clinical impact or cost effectiveness of lead-I ECG devices for the target population are available. Conclusions The use of single-time point lead-I ECG devices in primary care for the detection of AF in people with signs or symptoms of AF and an irregular pulse appears to be a cost effective use of NHS resources compared with MPP followed by a 12-lead ECG, given the assumptions used in the base case model. Registration The protocol for this review is registered on PROSPERO as CRD42018090375.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rui Duarte
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
- * E-mail:
| | - Angela Stainthorpe
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research Ltd, Cardiff, United Kingdom
| | - James Mahon
- Coldingham Analytical Services, Berwickshire, United Kingdom
| | - Janette Greenhalgh
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
| | - Marty Richardson
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah Nevitt
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
| | - Eleanor Kotas
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
- York Health Economics Consortium, University of York, York, United Kingdom
| | - Angela Boland
- Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Tom Marshall
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Mark Hall
- Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom
| | - Yemisi Takwoingi
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Duffy L, Lewis G, Ades A, Araya R, Bone J, Brabyn S, Button K, Churchill R, Croudace T, Derrick C, Dixon P, Dowrick C, Fawsitt C, Fusco L, Gilbody S, Harmer C, Hobbs C, Hollingworth W, Jones V, Kendrick T, Kessler D, Khan N, Kounali D, Lanham P, Malpass A, Munafo M, Pervin J, Peters T, Riozzie D, Robinson J, Salaminios G, Sharp D, Thom H, Thomas L, Welton N, Wiles N, Woodhouse R, Lewis G. Antidepressant treatment with sertraline for adults with depressive symptoms in primary care: the PANDA research programme including RCT. Programme Grants Appl Res 2019. [DOI: 10.3310/pgfar07100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
Background
Despite a growing number of prescriptions for antidepressants (over 70 million in 2018), there is uncertainty about when people with depression might benefit from antidepressant medication and concern that antidepressants are prescribed unnecessarily.
Objectives
The main objective of the PANDA (What are the indications for Prescribing ANtiDepressAnts that will lead to a clinical benefit?) research programme was to provide more guidance about when antidepressants are likely to benefit people with depression. We aimed to estimate the minimal clinically important difference for commonly used self-administered scales for depression and anxiety, and to understand more about how patients respond to such assessments. We carried out an observational study of patients with depressive symptoms and a placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial of sertraline versus placebo to estimate the treatment effect in UK primary care. The hypothesis was that the severity and duration of symptoms were related to treatment response.
Design
The programme consisted of three phases. The first phase relied on the secondary analysis of existing data extracted from published trials. The second phase was the PANDA cohort study of patients with depressive symptoms who presented to primary care and were followed up 2, 4 and 6 weeks after a baseline assessment. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used in the analysis. The third phase was a multicentre randomised placebo-controlled double-blind trial of sertraline versus placebo in patients presenting to primary care with depressive symptoms.
Setting
UK primary care in Bristol, London, Liverpool and York.
Participants
Patients aged 18–74 years who were experiencing depressive symptoms in primary care. Eligibility for the PANDA randomised controlled trial included that there was uncertainty about the benefits about treatment with an antidepressant.
Interventions
In the PANDA randomised controlled trial, patients were individually randomised to 100 mg daily of sertraline or an identical placebo. The PANDA cohort study was an observational study.
Main outcome measures
Depressive symptoms measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire were the primary outcome for the randomised controlled trial. Other outcomes included anxiety symptoms using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7; depressive symptoms using the Beck Depression Inventory, version 2; health-related quality of life; self-reported improvement; and cost-effectiveness.
Results
The secondary analysis of existing randomised controlled trials [GENetic and clinical Predictors Of treatment response in Depression (GenPod), TREAting Depression with physical activity (TREAD) and Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cognitive Behavioural Therapy as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for treatment-resistant depression in primary care (CoBalT)] found evidence that the minimal clinically important difference increased as the initial severity of depressive symptoms rose. Our estimates of minimal clinically important difference were a 17% and 18% reduction in Beck Depression Inventory scores for GenPod and TREAD, respectively. In CoBalT, a 32% reduction corresponded to the minimal clinically important difference but the participants in this study had depression that had not responded to antidepressants. In the PANDA study cohort, and from our analyses in existing data, we found that the minimal clinically important difference varies considerably with the initial severity of depressive and anxiety symptoms. Expressing the minimal clinically important difference as a percentage reduction reduces this variation at higher scores, but at low scores the percentage reduction increased substantially. The results from the qualitative studies pointed out many limitations of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items in assessing change and recovery from depression. In the PANDA randomised controlled trial, there was no evidence that sertraline resulted in a reduction in depressive symptoms within 6 weeks of randomisation, but there was some evidence of a reduction by 12 weeks. However, sertraline led to a reduction in anxiety symptoms, an improvement of mental health-related quality of life and an increased likelihood of reporting improvement. The mean Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items score at 6 weeks was 7.98 (standard deviation 5.63) in the sertraline group and 8.76 (standard deviation 5.86) in the placebo group (5% relative reduction, 95% confidence interval –7% to 15%; p = 0.41). Of the secondary outcomes, there was strong evidence that sertraline reduced anxiety symptoms (Generalised Anxiety Disorder-7 score reduced by 17% (95% confidence interval 9% to 25%; p = 0.00005). Sertraline had a high probability (> 90%) of being cost-effective at 12 weeks. The PANDA randomised controlled trial found no evidence that treatment response or cost-effectiveness was related to severity or duration of depressive symptoms. The minimal clinically important difference estimates suggested that sertraline’s effect on anxiety, but not on depression, was likely to be clinically important.
Limitations
The results from the randomised controlled trial and the estimates of minimal clinically important difference were not sufficiently precise to provide specific clinical guidance for individuals. We had low power in testing whether or not initial severity and duration of depressive symptoms are related to treatment response.
Conclusions
The results of the trial support the use of sertraline and probably other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors because of their action in reducing anxiety symptoms and the likelihood of longer-term benefit on depressive symptoms. Sertraline could be prescribed for anxiety symptoms that commonly occur with depression and many patients will experience a clinical benefit. The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items and similar self-administered scales should not be used on their own to assess clinical outcome, but should be supplemented with further clinical assessment.
Future work
We need to examine the longer-term effects of antidepressant treatment. We need more precise estimates of the treatment effects and minimal clinically important difference at different severities to provide more specific guidance for individuals. However, the methods we have developed provide an approach towards providing such detailed guidance.
Trial registration
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN84544741 and EudraCT number 2013-003440-22.
Funding
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 7, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Larisa Duffy
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK
| | - Gemma Lewis
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK
| | - Anthony Ades
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Ricardo Araya
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Jessica Bone
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK
| | - Sally Brabyn
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | | | - Rachel Churchill
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK
| | - Tim Croudace
- School of Nursing and Health Studies, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
| | | | - Padraig Dixon
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Christopher Dowrick
- Institute of Psychology Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Louise Fusco
- Institute of Psychology Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Simon Gilbody
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | | | | | | | - Vivien Jones
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Tony Kendrick
- Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - David Kessler
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Naila Khan
- Institute of Psychology Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Daphne Kounali
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Paul Lanham
- Patient and public involvement contributor, UK
| | - Alice Malpass
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Marcus Munafo
- Department of Psychology and Integrated Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jodi Pervin
- Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Tim Peters
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Jude Robinson
- Department of Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | | | - Debbie Sharp
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Laura Thomas
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Nicky Welton
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Nicola Wiles
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Glyn Lewis
- Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Ramasamy K, Dhanasiri S, Thom H, Buchanan V, Robinson S, D'Souza VK, Weisel K. Relative efficacy of treatment options in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: results from a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis. Leuk Lymphoma 2019; 61:668-679. [PMID: 31709875 DOI: 10.1080/10428194.2019.1683736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
Established treatments for transplant-ineligible (TNE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) include melphalan and prednisone (MP) combined with either bortezomib (VMP) or thalidomide (MPT), or lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd). New treatments for TNE NDMM include Rd plus bortezomib (RVd) and daratumumab plus VMP (VMP + D), daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (D + Rd). Relative efficacy of these treatments was compared using a network meta-analysis. Eight trials identified by a systematic literature review were included in the primary analysis; hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were used. Rd was superior to other MP-based regimens for OS and PFS. There was strong evidence that, compared with Rd, both D + Rd and RVd improved PFS (HR 0.57; 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.43, 0.73 and HR 0.72; 95% CrI 0.56, 0.91, respectively). However, there was strong evidence only for RVd in respect to OS (HR 0.72; 95% CrI 0.52, 0.96).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karthik Ramasamy
- National Institute for Health Research, Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | | | | | - Katja Weisel
- Department of Oncology, Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation with Section of Pneumology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Thom H, Ender F, Samavedam S, Perez Vivez C, Gupta S, Dhariwal M, de Haan J, O’Boyle D. Effect of AcrySof versus other intraocular lens properties on the risk of Nd:YAG capsulotomy after cataract surgery: A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0220498. [PMID: 31425548 PMCID: PMC6699683 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220498] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2018] [Accepted: 07/09/2019] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of different intraocular lens materials (IOL) and optic edge designs on the incidence of Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy. METHODS Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting incidence of Nd:YAG capsulotomy in patients with monofocal IOLs were identified for systematic literature review (SLR) using Cochrane methodology. A network meta-analysis was conducted under a Bayesian framework. Mean hazard ratios (HRs), 95% credible intervals, and one-sided p-values were estimated for Nd:YAG capsulotomy incidence by comparing AcrySof IOLs with a group of non-AcrySof hydrophobic acrylic, hydrophilic acrylic, silicone, and PMMA IOLs. Sensitivity analysis was conducted comparing the risk of Nd:YAG capsulotomy between sharp- and round-edged designs of the above IOLs. RESULTS AcrySof IOLs had a lower risk of Nd:YAG capsulotomy compared to hydrophobic acrylic (HR: 2.68; 95% CrI: 1.41, 4.77; p < 0.01), hydrophilic acrylic (HR: 7.54; 95% CrI: 4.24, 14.06; p < 0.001), PMMA (HR: 3.64, 95% CrI: 1.87, 6.33; p < 0.001), and silicone (HR: 1.13; 95% CrI: 0.59, 1.91; p <0.1) IOLs. The risk for Nd:YAG was highest among sharp-edged IOLs for hydrophilic acrylic IOLs (HR: 9.32; 95% CrI: 4.32, 19.29; p < 0.01), followed by other hydrophobic acrylic (HR: 2.91; 95% CrI: 1.27, 5.88; p < 0.01), silicone (HR: 0.838; 95% CrI: 0.328, 1.74; p = 0.69), and PMMA (HR: 0.39; 95% CrI: 0.042, 1.49; p = 0.93) IOLs, compared to AcrySof. Acrysof IOLs had a lower risk of Nd:YAG compared to PMMA (HR: 3.25; 95% CrI: 1.21, 7.37; p < 0.01) and silicone, round edge IOLs (HR: 3.84; 95% CrI: 1.08, 10.64; p = 0.015). CONCLUSION The risk of Nd:YAG capsulotomy is lower in eyes implanted with AcrySof IOLs compared to non-AcrySof hydrophobic or hydrophilic acrylic IOLs. Sharp-edged AcrySof, PMMA, and silicone IOLs are comparable in terms of reducing the risk of Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | | | - Mukesh Dhariwal
- Alcon Vision LLC., Fort Worth, Texas, United States of America
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Mease P, Choy E, Nash P, Kalyvas C, Hunger M, Pricop L, Gandhi KK, Jugl SM, Thom H. Comparative effectiveness of secukinumab and etanercept in biologic-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis assessed by matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Eur J Rheumatol 2019; 6:113-121. [PMID: 31364979 PMCID: PMC6668637 DOI: 10.5152/eurjrheum.2019.19057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2019] [Accepted: 04/22/2019] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) can be used to assess the comparative effectiveness of two treatments indirectly using data from randomized placebo-controlled trials. This MAIC assessed the comparative effectiveness of secukinumab (an anti-interleukin-17A) and etanercept (a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor) in a target population of biologic-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS Individual patient data pooled from FUTURE 2 (NCT01752634), FUTURE 3 (NCT01989468), and FUTURE 5 (NCT02404350) (secukinumab: 150 mg, n=458 and 300 mg, n=461) were matched to data from the population in the NCT00317499 trial (etanercept 25 mg, n=101) using MAIC methodology, by adjusting for clinical and demographic baseline characteristics. Recalculated outcomes from FUTURE 2, 3, and 5 (150 mg, effective sample size (ESS) post-matching=104; 300 mg, ESS=75; and placebo, ESS=159) were compared with the NCT00317499 trial. Pairwise comparisons using odds ratios (ORs) were performed for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, 50, and 70 response criteria at week 12 (placebo-adjusted) and week 24 (non-placebo-adjusted). RESULTS At week 12, there were no significant differences in ACR responses between secukinumab and etanercept. There was no significant difference between secukinumab 150 mg and etanercept at week 24 with respect to ACR 20 and 50 response rates; however, ACR 70 response rates were higher for secukinumab 150 mg (OR (95% confidence interval (CI)): 4.48 (2.01-9.99), p<0.001). ACR 20, 50, and 70 response rates were higher with secukinumab 300 mg than with etanercept at this time point (OR (95% CI): ACR 20, 3.28 (1.69-6.38), p<0.001; ACR 50, 1.90 (1.04-3.50), p=0.038; and ACR 70, 3.56 (1.51-8.40), p=0.004). CONCLUSION In this MAIC, secukinumab was associated with higher ACR 20 and 50 (secukinumab 300 mg) and 70 (secukinumab 150 mg and 300 mg) response rates at week 24 than etanercept in biologic-naïve patients with active PsA, whereas no significant difference was observed in the short-term at week 12.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip Mease
- Swedish Medical Center and University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Ernest Choy
- CREATE Centre, Section of Rheumatology, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK
| | - Peter Nash
- University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | | | - Matthias Hunger
- ICON plc (formerly Mapi Group), Houten, Netherlands
- ICON plc (formerly Mapi Group), Munich, Germany
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Thom H, Visan AC, Keeney E, Dorobantu DM, Fudulu D, T A Sharabiani M, Round J, Stoica SC. Clinical and cost-effectiveness of the Ross procedure versus conventional aortic valve replacement in young adults. Open Heart 2019; 6:e001047. [PMID: 31275578 PMCID: PMC6546187 DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2019-001047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2019] [Revised: 04/08/2019] [Accepted: 04/14/2019] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Objectives In young and middle-aged adults, there are three current options for aortic valve replacement (AVR), namely mechanical AVR (mechAVR), tissue AVR (biological AVR) and the Ross operation, with no clear guidance on the best option. We aim to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Ross procedure with conventional AVR in young and middle-aged adults. Methods This is a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of AVR options. Markov multistate model was adopted to compare cost-effectiveness. Lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), net monetary benefit (NMB), population expected value of perfect information (EVPI) and expected value of partial perfect information were estimated. Results We identified 48 cohorts with a total number of 12 975 patients (mean age 44.5 years, mean follow-up 7.1 years). Mortality, bleeding and thromboembolic events over the follow-up period were lowest after the Ross operation, compared with mechAVR and biological AVR (p<0.001). Aortic reoperation rates were lower after Ross compared with biological AVR, but slightly higher when compared with mechAVR (p<0.001). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20effective. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20, 000 per QALY000 per QALY, the Ross procedure is more cost-effective compared the Ross procedure is more cost-effective compared withwith conventional AVR, with a lifetime incremental NMB of £60 conventional AVR, with a lifetime incremental NMB of £60 952 (952 (££3030 236236 to to ££7979 464). Incremental costs were £12464). Incremental costs were £12 323 (323 (££61086108 to to ££1515 972) and incremental QALYs 3.66 (1.81972) and incremental QALYs 3.66 (1.81 to to 4.76). The population EVPI indicates that a trial costing up to £2.03 million could be cost 4.76). The population EVPI indicates that a trial costing up to £2.03 million could be cost--effective. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per QALY, the Ross procedure is more cost-effective compared with conventional AVR, with a lifetime incremental NMB of £60 952 (£30 236 to £79 464). Incremental costs were £12 323 (£6108 to £15 972) and incremental QALYs 3.66 (1.81 to 4.76). The population EVPI indicates that a trial costing up to £2.03 million could be cost-effective. Conclusions In young and middle-aged adults with aortic valve disease, the Ross procedure may confer greater quality of life and be more cost-effective than conventional AVR. A high-quality randomised trial could be warranted and cost-effective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Alexandru Ciprian Visan
- Cardiothoracic Surgery, Bristol Heart Institute, Bristol, UK.,Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Edna Keeney
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Dan Mihai Dorobantu
- Cardiac Surgery, Bristol Royal Hospital for Children, Bristol, UK.,Cardiology, Institutul de Urgenta pentru Boli Cardiovasculare Prof Dr C C Iliescu, Bucuresti, Romania
| | - Daniel Fudulu
- Cardiothoracic Surgery, Bristol Heart Institute, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Jeff Round
- Institute of Health Economics, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Incerti D, Thom H, Baio G, Jansen JP. R You Still Using Excel? The Advantages of Modern Software Tools for Health Technology Assessment. Value Health 2019; 22:575-579. [PMID: 31104737 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.01.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2018] [Revised: 01/12/2019] [Accepted: 01/17/2019] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
Economic models are used in health technology assessments (HTAs) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of competing medical technologies and inform the efficient use of healthcare resources. Historically, these models have been developed with specialized commercial software (such as TreeAge) or more commonly with spreadsheet software (almost always Microsoft Excel). Although these tools may be sufficient for relatively simple analyses, they put unnecessary constraints on the analysis that may ultimately limit its credibility and relevance. In contrast, modern programming languages such as R, Python, Matlab, and Julia facilitate the development of models that are (i) clinically realistic, (ii) capable of quantifying decision uncertainty, (iii) transparent and reproducible, and (iv) reusable and adaptable. An HTA environment that encourages use of modern software can therefore help ensure that coverage and pricing decisions confer greatest possible benefit and capture all scientific uncertainty, thus enabling correct prioritization of future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Devin Incerti
- Innovation and Value Initiative, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| | - Howard Thom
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| | - Gianluca Baio
- Department of Statistical Science, University College London, London, England, UK
| | - Jeroen P Jansen
- Innovation and Value Initiative, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Health Research & Policy-Epidemiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Leahy J, Thom H, Jansen JP, Gray E, O'Leary A, White A, Walsh C. Incorporating single-arm evidence into a network meta-analysis using aggregate level matching: Assessing the impact. Stat Med 2019; 38:2505-2523. [PMID: 30895655 DOI: 10.1002/sim.8139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2017] [Revised: 11/27/2018] [Accepted: 02/14/2019] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
Increasingly, single-armed evidence is included in health technology assessment submissions when companies are seeking reimbursement for new drugs. While it is recognized that randomized controlled trials provide a higher standard of evidence, these are not available for many new agents that have been granted licenses in recent years. Therefore, it is important to examine whether alternative strategies for assessing this evidence may be used. In this work, we examine approaches to incorporating single-armed evidence formally in the evaluation process. We consider matching aggregate level covariates to comparator arms or trials and including this evidence in a network meta-analysis. We consider two methods of matching: (i) we include the chosen matched arm in the data set itself as a comparator for the single-arm trial; (ii) we use the baseline odds of an event in a chosen matched trial to use as a plug-in estimator for the single-arm trial. We illustrate that the synthesis of evidence resulting from such a setup is sensitive to the between-study variability, formulation of the prior for the between-design effect, weight given to the single-arm evidence, and extent of the bias in single-armed evidence. We provide a flowchart for the process involved in such a synthesis and highlight additional sensitivity analyses that should be carried out. This work was motivated by a hepatitis C data set, where many agents have only been examined in single-arm studies. We present the results of our methods applied to this data set.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joy Leahy
- School of Computer Science and Statistics, Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.,National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics, St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jeroen P Jansen
- Department of Health Research and Policy Epidemiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Emma Gray
- School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Aisling O'Leary
- National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics, St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Arthur White
- School of Computer Science and Statistics, Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.,National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics, St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Cathal Walsh
- National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics, St. James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.,Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Health Research Institute and MACSI, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Strand V, McInnes I, Mease P, Nash P, Thom H, Kalyvas C, Hunger M, Gandhi K, Pricop L, Jugl S, Choy E. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison: secukinumab versus infliximab in biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis. J Comp Eff Res 2019; 8:497-510. [PMID: 30806520 DOI: 10.2217/cer-2018-0141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim: To compare secukinumab with infliximab in biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis using matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Patients & methods: Individual patient baseline data for secukinumab were matched to published aggregate data for infliximab by key baseline characteristics, with matching weights determined by logistic regression, and used to recalculate American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses for secukinumab, for comparison with infliximab. Results: There were no differences in outcomes between secukinumab and infliximab at weeks 6/8 and 14/16. At weeks 24 and 54/52, ACR 20 responses were higher with secukinumab 150 mg than infliximab. At week 54/52, ACR 20/50 responses were higher for secukinumab 300 mg than infliximab. Conclusion: In the mid to long term, patients receiving secukinumab were more likely to achieve ACR 20/50 responses than those receiving infliximab.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vibeke Strand
- Biopharmaceutical Consultant, 306 Ramona Road, Portola Valley, CA 94028, USA
| | - Iain McInnes
- Institute of Infection, Immunity & Inflammation, College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Sir Graeme Davies Building, 120 University Place, Glasgow, G12 8TA, UK
| | - Philip Mease
- Swedish Medical Center & University of Washington, Department of Medicine, 601 Broadway, Suite 600, Seattle, WA 98122, USA
| | - Peter Nash
- Department of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK
| | - Chrysostomos Kalyvas
- Mapi, an ICON plc company, De Molen 84, 3995 AX, Houten, Netherlands (address at the time that the study was conducted)
| | - Matthias Hunger
- Mapi, an ICON plc company, Konrad-Zuse-Platz 11, 81829 Munich, Germany
| | - Kunal Gandhi
- Immunology & Dermatology Franchise, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, One Health Plaza, Building 337, B04.3B, East Hanover, NJ, USA
| | - Luminita Pricop
- Immunology & Dermatology Franchise, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, One Health Plaza, Building 337, B04.3B, East Hanover, NJ, USA
| | - Steffen Jugl
- Global Patient Access Immunology, Hepatology & Dermatology, Novartis Pharma AG, Postfach, Basel, CH-4002, Switzerland
| | - Ernest Choy
- CREATE Centre, Section of Rheumatology - Division of Infection & Immunity, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Tenovus Building, Heath Park Campus, Cardiff, CF14 4XN, UK
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
McCool R, Wilson K, Arber M, Fleetwood K, Toupin S, Thom H, Bennett I, Edwards S. Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing ocrelizumab with other treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2019; 29:55-61. [PMID: 30677733 DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2018.12.040] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2018] [Revised: 12/05/2018] [Accepted: 12/31/2018] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Ocrelizumab was approved for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) and primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS) by the US Food and Drug Administration in March 2017 and by the European Medicines Agency in January 2018. These approvals were based on two pivotal randomized controlled trials (RCTs), OPERA I and OPERA II, comparing ocrelizumab 600 mg with an active comparator, interferon β-1a 44 μg (Rebif), and the first trial with positive results in patients with PPMS, which compared ocrelizumab with placebo. However, direct evidence of the efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab in RMS compared with other disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) approved for RMS is not available from RCTs. In the absence of such RCTs, network meta-analyses (NMAs) were conducted to compare indirectly the relative efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab with all other approved DMTs for the treatment of RMS. METHODS Systematic literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, trial registers, relevant conference websites and health technology assessment agency websites. Eligible RCTs evaluated approved treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) in which more than 75% of patients had a relapsing form of MS. NMAs were conducted for four efficacy and three safety outcomes, and treatment hierarchies were generated for each outcome using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values. RESULTS Results suggest that ocrelizumab has superior efficacy to 10 of the 17 treatments in the 12-week confirmed disability progression network and 12 of the 17 treatments in the annualized relapse rate network (both including placebo). The efficacy of ocrelizumab was comparable with the other treatments in both networks. In the serious adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events networks, ocrelizumab demonstrated a safety profile comparable with all other treatments (including placebo). SUCRA values consistently ranked ocrelizumab among the most effective or tolerable treatments across all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Results suggest that ocrelizumab has an efficacy superior to or comparable with all other currently approved DMTs across all endpoints analyzed, and a similar safety profile, indicating it offers a valuable package for the treatment of patients with RMS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachael McCool
- York Health Economics Consortium, Enterprise House, Innovation Way, University of York, York YO10 5NQ, UK
| | - Katy Wilson
- York Health Economics Consortium, Enterprise House, Innovation Way, University of York, York YO10 5NQ, UK
| | - Mick Arber
- York Health Economics Consortium, Enterprise House, Innovation Way, University of York, York YO10 5NQ, UK
| | - Kelly Fleetwood
- Quantics Biostatistics, West End House, 28 Drumsheugh Gardens, Edinburgh EH3 7RN, UK
| | - Sydney Toupin
- Quantics Biostatistics, West End House, 28 Drumsheugh Gardens, Edinburgh EH3 7RN, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK
| | - Iain Bennett
- Health Economics and Evidence Synthesis, Global Access Center of Excellence, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Grenzacherstrasse 124, Basel, CH-4070, Switzerland
| | - Susan Edwards
- Health Economics and Evidence Synthesis, Global Access Center of Excellence, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Grenzacherstrasse 124, Basel, CH-4070, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Thom H, White IR, Welton NJ, Lu G. Automated methods to test connectedness and quantify indirectness of evidence in network meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods 2018; 10:113-124. [PMID: 30403829 PMCID: PMC6492288 DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1329] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2017] [Revised: 04/07/2018] [Accepted: 10/30/2018] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Network meta‐analysis compares multiple treatments from studies that form a connected network of evidence. However, for complex networks, it is not easy to see if the network is connected. We use simple techniques from graph theory to test the connectedness of evidence networks in network meta‐analysis. The method is to build the adjacency matrix for a network, with rows and columns corresponding to the treatments in the network and entries being one or zero depending on whether the treatments have been compared or not, and with zeros along the diagonal. Manipulation of this matrix gives the indirect connection matrix. The entries of this matrix determine whether two treatments can be compared, directly or indirectly. We also describe the distance matrix, which gives the minimum number of steps in the network required to compare a pair of treatments. This is a useful assessment of an indirect comparison as each additional step requires further assumptions of homogeneity in, for example, design and target populations of included trials. If there are no loops in the network, the distance is a measure of the degree of assumptions needed; it is approximately this with loops. We illustrate our methods using several constructed examples and giving R code for computation. We have also implemented the techniques in the Stata package “network.” The methods provide a fast way to ensure comparisons are only made between connected treatments and to assess the degree of indirectness of a comparison.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Ian R White
- MRC Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, UK
| | - Nicky J Welton
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Guobing Lu
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Maksymowych WP, Strand V, Nash P, Yazici Y, Thom H, Hunger M, Kalyvas C, Gandhi KK, Porter B, Jugl SM. Comparative effectiveness of secukinumab and adalimumab in ankylosing spondylitis as assessed by matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Eur J Rheumatol 2018; 5:216-223. [PMID: 30388073 PMCID: PMC6267743 DOI: 10.5152/eurjrheum.2018.18162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2018] [Accepted: 10/05/2018] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Matching-adjusted indirect comparison was used to assess the comparative effectiveness of secukinumab 150 mg and adalimumab 40 mg in biologic-naïve patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) for up to 1 year. Methods Pooled individual patient data from the secukinumab arms of MEASURE 1 (NCT01358175) and MEASURE 2 (NCT01649375) trials (n=197) were matched against the ATLAS (NCT00085644) adalimumab population (n=208). Logistic regression analysis was used to determined weights to match for age, sex, Bath AS Functional Index, C-reactive protein levels, and previous tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy. Recalculated Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) 20 and 40 responses at weeks 8, 12, 16, 24, and 52 from MEASURE 1/2 (effective sample size=120) were compared with those of ATLAS. Anchored (placebo-adjusted) comparisons were possible until week 12, and unanchored (non-placebo-adjusted) comparisons were necessary thereafter. Results For placebo-anchored ASAS 20 and 40 comparisons up to week 12, there were no differences between secukinumab and adalimumab. For unanchored comparisons at week 16, ASAS 20 was higher for secukinumab [odds ratio 1.60 (95% confidence interval, 1.01–2.54); p=0.047]; at week 24, ASAS 20 and 40 were higher for secukinumab [1.76 (1.11–2.79); p=0.017 and 1.79 (1.14–2.82); p=0.012, respectively]; and at week 52, ASAS 40 was higher for secukinumab [1.54 (1.06–2.23); p=0.023] than for adalimumab. Conclusion There were no differences observed in placebo-adjusted ASAS 20 and 40 responses up to 12 weeks between secukinumab- and adalimumab-treated patients with ankylosing spondylitis. After week 12, secukinumab demonstrated signs of greater improvement in non-placebo-adjusted ASAS 20 and 40 responses than adalimumab.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Walter P Maksymowych
- Division of Rheumatology, University of Alberta School of Medicine and Dentistry, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Vibeke Strand
- Division Immunology-Rheumatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, USA
| | - Peter Nash
- Department of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Yusuf Yazici
- New York University School of Medicine, New York, USA
| | | | | | | | - Kunal K Gandhi
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA
| | - Brian Porter
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
McInnes IB, Nash P, Ritchlin C, Choy EH, Kanters S, Thom H, Gandhi K, Pricop L, Jugl SM. Secukinumab for psoriatic arthritis: comparative effectiveness versus licensed biologics/apremilast: a network meta-analysis. J Comp Eff Res 2018; 7:1107-1123. [PMID: 30230361 DOI: 10.2217/cer-2018-0075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
AIM A network meta-analysis using randomized controlled trial data compared psoriatic arthritis (PsA) outcomes (American College of Rheumatology [ACR], Psoriasis Area Severity Index [PASI] and Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria [PsARC] response rates) at 12-16 weeks for secukinumab, adalimumab, apremilast, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab and ustekinumab. PATIENTS & METHODS Trials were identified by systematic review. Separate networks were developed for the full-study populations, biologic-naive patients and biologic-experienced patients. RESULTS In the full populations, secukinumab, adalimumab, golimumab and infliximab demonstrated the highest ACR response rates. Secukinumab and infliximab demonstrated the highest PASI response rates, and infliximab and etanercept demonstrated the highest PsARC response rates. CONCLUSION In the full populations, secukinumab demonstrated good efficacy across all outcomes. All treatments for active PsA included in this comprehensive network meta-analysis demonstrated superiority to placebo.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iain B McInnes
- University of Glasgow, Institute of Infection, Immunity & Inflammation, College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Sir Graeme Davies Building, 120 University Place, Glasgow G12 8TA, UK
| | - Peter Nash
- Department of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia
| | - Christopher Ritchlin
- Division of Allergy, Immunology & Rheumatology, University of Rochester, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 695, Rochester, NY 1464, USA
| | - Ernest H Choy
- Institute of Infection & Immunity, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Tenovus Building, Heath Park Campus, Cardiff CF14 4XN, UK
| | - Steve Kanters
- Precision Xtract, 1505 West 2nd Avenue, Suite 300, Vancouver, BC V6H 3Y4, Canada
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK
| | - Kunal Gandhi
- Oncology Global Development Unit, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, One Health Plaza, Building 337, B04.3B, East Hanover, NJ, USA
| | - Luminita Pricop
- Immunology & Dermatology Franchise, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, One Health Plaza, Building 337, B04.3B, East Hanover, NJ, USA
| | - Steffen M Jugl
- Global Patient Access Immunology & Dermatology, Novartis Pharma AG, Asklepios 8-1.001.11, Postfach, Basel, CH-4001, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Kaul A, Strand V, McInnes I, Mease P, Choy E, Nash P, Thom H, Kalyvas C, Gandhi K, Pricop L, Jugl S. 175 Comparative effectiveness of secukinumab and infliximab in psoriatic arthritis assessed by matching-adjusted indirect comparison using pivotal Phase III clinical trial data. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2018. [DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/key075.399] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Arvind Kaul
- Rheumatology, St George's Hospital and Medical School, London, UNITED KINGDOM
| | - Vibeke Strand
- Immunology and Rheumatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA
| | - Iain McInnes
- Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UNITED KINGDOM
| | - Philip Mease
- Rheumatology, Swedish Medical Center and University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Ernest Choy
- CREATE Centre, Division of Infection and Immunity, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UNITED KINGDOM
| | - Peter Nash
- Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, AUSTRALIA
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UNITED KINGDOM
| | | | - Kunal Gandhi
- Worldwide Medical Affairs, Immunology and Dermatology, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA
| | - Luminita Pricop
- Clinical Development, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA
| | - Steffen Jugl
- Immunology and Dermatology, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, SWITZERLAND
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Tahir H, Maksymowych W, Choy E, Yazici Y, Walsh J, Thom H, Kalyvas C, Fox T, Gandi K, Jugl S. 173 Comparative effectiveness of secukinumab and golimumab in ankylosing spondylitis assessed by matching-adjusted indirect comparison using pivotal phase III clinical trial data. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2018. [DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/key075.397] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Hasan Tahir
- Rheumatology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UNITED KINGDOM
| | | | - Ernest Choy
- CREATE Centre, Division of Infection and Immunity, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UNITED KINGDOM
| | - Yusuf Yazici
- Rheumatology, New York University School of Medicine, New York City, NY, USA
| | - Jessica Walsh
- Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UNITED KINGDOM
| | | | - Todd Fox
- Immunology and Dermatology, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, SWITZERLAND
| | - Kunal Gandi
- Worldwide Medical Affairs, Immunology and Dermatology, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA
| | - Steffen Jugl
- Immunology and Dermatology, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, SWITZERLAND
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Palmer S, Cramp F, Clark E, Lewis R, Brookes S, Hollingworth W, Welton N, Thom H, Terry R, Rimes KA, Horwood J. The feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of physiotherapy for adults with joint hypermobility syndrome. Health Technol Assess 2018; 20:1-264. [PMID: 27365226 DOI: 10.3310/hta20470] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Joint hypermobility syndrome (JHS) is a heritable disorder associated with laxity and pain in multiple joints. Physiotherapy is the mainstay of treatment, but there is little research investigating its clinical effectiveness. OBJECTIVES To develop a comprehensive physiotherapy intervention for adults with JHS; to pilot the intervention; and to conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine the feasibility of conducting a future definitive RCT. DESIGN Patients' and health professionals' perspectives on physiotherapy for JHS were explored in focus groups (stage 1). A working group of patient research partners, clinicians and researchers used this information to develop the physiotherapy intervention. This was piloted and refined on the basis of patients' and physiotherapists' feedback (stage 2). A parallel two-arm pilot RCT compared 'advice' with 'advice and physiotherapy' (stage 3). Random allocation was via an automated randomisation service, devised specifically for the study. Owing to the nature of the interventions, it was not possible to blind clinicians or patients to treatment allocation. SETTING Stage 1 - focus groups were conducted in four UK locations. Stages 2 and 3 - piloting of the intervention and the pilot RCT were conducted in two UK secondary care NHS trusts. PARTICIPANTS Stage 1 - patient focus group participants (n = 25, three men) were aged > 18 years, had a JHS diagnosis and had received physiotherapy within the preceding 12 months. The health professional focus group participants (n = 16, three men; 14 physiotherapists, two podiatrists) had experience of managing JHS. Stage 2 - patient participants (n = 8) were aged > 18 years, had a JHS diagnosis and no other musculoskeletal conditions causing pain. Stage 3 - patient participants for the pilot RCT (n = 29) were as for stage 2 but the lower age limit was 16 years. INTERVENTION For the pilot RCT (stage 3) the advice intervention was a one-off session, supplemented by advice booklets. All participants could ask questions specific to their circumstances and receive tailored advice. Participants were randomly allocated to 'advice' (no further advice or physiotherapy) or 'advice and physiotherapy' (an additional six 30-minute sessions over 4 months). The physiotherapy intervention was supported by a patient handbook and was delivered on a one-to-one patient-therapist basis. It aimed to increase patients' physical activity through developing knowledge, understanding and skills to better manage their condition. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Data from patient and health professional focus groups formed the main outcome from stage 1. Patient and physiotherapist interview data also formed a major component of stages 2 and 3. The primary outcome in stage 3 related to the feasibility of a future definitive RCT [number of referrals, recruitment and retention rates, and an estimate of the value of information (VOI) of a future RCT]. Secondary outcomes included clinical measures (physical function, pain, global status, self-reported joint count, quality of life, exercise self-efficacy and adverse events) and resource use (to estimate cost-effectiveness). Outcomes were recorded at baseline, 4 months and 7 months. RESULTS Stage 1 - JHS is complex and unpredictable. Physiotherapists should take a long-term holistic approach rather than treating acutely painful joints in isolation. Stage 2 - a user-informed physiotherapy intervention was developed and evaluated positively. Stage 3 - recruitment to the pilot RCT was challenging, primarily because of a perceived lack of equipoise between advice and physiotherapy. The qualitative evaluation provided very clear guidance to inform a future RCT, including enhancement of the advice intervention. Some patients reported that the advice intervention was useful and the physiotherapy intervention was again evaluated very positively. The rate of return of questionnaires was low in the advice group but reasonable in the physiotherapy group. The physiotherapy intervention showed evidence of promise in terms of primary and secondary clinical outcomes. The advice arm experienced more adverse events. The VOI analysis indicated the potential for high value from a future RCT. Such a trial should form the basis of future research efforts. CONCLUSION A future definitive RCT of physiotherapy for JHS seems feasible, although the advice intervention should be made more robust to address perceived equipoise and subsequent attrition. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN29874209. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 47. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shea Palmer
- Department of Allied Health Professions, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
| | - Fiona Cramp
- Department of Allied Health Professions, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
| | - Emma Clark
- Musculoskeletal Research Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Sara Brookes
- Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | | | - Nicky Welton
- Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Howard Thom
- Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Rohini Terry
- Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Katharine A Rimes
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Jeremy Horwood
- Bristol Randomised Trials Collaboration, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|