-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of dabigatran etexilate (Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd, UK) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of this drug for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) as part of the NICE single technology appraisal process. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and the Centre for Health Economics at the University of York were commissioned to act as the evidence review group (ERG). This article presents a summary of the manufacturer's submission, the ERG report and the subsequent development of NICE guidance for the use of dabigatran within the UK National Health Service. Dabigatran was granted marketing authorisation by the European Medicines Agency for a sequential dosing regimen (DBG sequential), in which patients under 80 years are treated with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily (DBG150) and patients 80 years and over are given dabigatran 110 mg twice daily (DBG110). NICE decisions are bound by the marketing authorisation; therefore, the decision problem faced by the committee was whether the DBG sequential regimen was effective and cost-effective compared with warfarin or aspirin for patients with non-valvular AF and one or more risk factors. The RE-LY trial, a large multi-centre non-inferiority randomised clinical trial, was the primary source of clinical evidence. DBG150 was shown to be non-inferior, and subsequently superior to warfarin, for the primary outcome of all stroke/systemic embolism. DBG110 was found to be non-inferior to warfarin. Results were presented for a post hoc subgroup analysis for patients under and over 80 years of age, where DBG110 showed a statistically significant reduction of haemorrhagic stroke and intracranial haemorrhage in comparison to warfarin in patients over 80 years of age. This post hoc subgroup analysis by age was the basis for the licensed DBG sequential regimen. The economic evaluation compared the costs and outcomes of DBG110, DBG150 and DBG sequential against warfarin, aspirin, and aspirin plus clopidogrel. Across the three dosing regimens, dabigatran was associated with greater costs and better health outcomes than warfarin; however, DBG150 offered the most benefits and dominated DBG110 and DBG sequential (i.e. less costly and more effective). The cost-effectiveness of DBG150 was less favourable for patients well controlled on warfarin. In the first appraisal meeting, the committee issued a 'minded no' decision until additional analyses on the licensed DBG sequential regimen were presented by the manufacturer. These additional analyses indicated that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the DBG sequential regimen compared with warfarin ranged from £8,388 to £18,987 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained depending on the level of monitoring costs assumed for warfarin. Patients on warfarin would need to be within therapeutic range 83-85 % of the time for the ICER to exceed £30,000 per additional QALY. Following consideration of the additional evidence and the responses from a large number of consultees and commentators, the committee recommended dabigatran as DBG sequential as an option for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in people with non-valvular AF with one or more risk factors for ischaemic stroke.
PharmacoEconomics 04/2013; · 2.66 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of trastuzumab, Roche Pharmaceuticals, to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of this drug for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (aGC), as part of the Institute's single technology appraisal (STA) process. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) and the Centre for Health Economics (CHE) Technology Appraisal Group at the University of York was commissioned to act as the evidence review group (ERG). This article provides a description of the company submission, the ERG report and NICE's subsequent decisions. In the initial appraisal by NICE, trastuzumab was rejected for use in the licensed population. Given this result, the manufacturer submitted additional evidence. In the final appraisal decision, trastuzumab was approved, in accordance with supplementary guidance issued by NICE on appraising life-extending, end-of-life treatments, for patients whose human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status was defined by an immunohistochemistry 3 positive (IHC3+) result. This appraisal highlights the need to fully assess the impact of different approaches to diagnostic testing on the cost effectiveness of targeted treatments. In this appraisal, it was found that the diagnostic strategy influenced the effectiveness and cost of trastuzumab. In the future, different diagnostic strategies should be compared in the incremental cost-effectiveness analysis.
PharmacoEconomics 02/2013; · 2.66 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: There is growing interest internationally in linking reimbursement decisions with recommendations for further research. In the UK, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) can issue guidance to approve the routine use of a health intervention, reject routine use or recommend use within a research programme. These latter recommendations have restricted use to 'only in research' (OIR) or have recommended further research alongside routine use ('approval with research' or AWR). However, it is not currently clear when such recommendations are likely to be made. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to identify NICE technology appraisals where OIR or AWR recommendations were made and to examine the key considerations that led to those decisions. METHODS: Draft and final guidance including OIR/AWR recommendations were identified. The documents were reviewed to establish the characteristics of the technology appraisal, the cost effectiveness of the technologies, the key considerations that led to the recommendations and the types of research required. RESULTS: In total, 29 final and 31 draft guidance documents included OIR/AWR recommendations up to January 2010. Overall, 86 % of final guidance included OIR recommendations. Of these, the majority were for technologies considered to be cost ineffective (83 %) and the majority of final guidance (66 %) specified the need for further evidence on relative effectiveness. The use of OIR/AWR recommendations is decreasing over time and they have rarely been used in appraisals conducted through the single technology appraisal process. CONCLUSION: NICE has used its ability to recommend technologies within research programmes, although predominantly within the multiple technology appraisal process. OIR recommendations have been most frequently issued for technologies considered cost ineffective and the most frequently cited consideration is uncertainty related to relative effectiveness. Key considerations cited for most AWR recommendations and some OIR recommendations included a need for further evidence on long-term outcomes and adverse effects of treatment.
PharmacoEconomics 01/2013; · 2.66 Impact Factor
-
Heart (British Cardiac Society) 06/2012; 98(15):1182. · 4.22 Impact Factor
-
Heart (British Cardiac Society) 06/2012; 98(16):1258. · 4.22 Impact Factor
-
Claire McKenna,
Simon Walker,
Paula Lorgelly,
Elisabeth Fenwick,
Jane Burch,
Sara Suekarran,
Ameet Bakhai,
Klaus Witte,
Melissa Harden,
Kath Wright,
Nerys Woolacott, Stephen Palmer
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the cost-effectiveness of eplerenone versus spironolactone as an adjunctive therapy to standard care in patients with heart failure (HF) following a myocardial infarction (post-MI) from the perspective of the National Health Service in the United Kingdom.
A systematic review was conducted, and a Bayesian meta-regression approach was used to establish the relative effectiveness of eplerenone and spironolactone by using evidence from randomized controlled trials. A decision analytic model was developed to assess the costs and consequences associated with the primary outcome of the trials over a lifetime time horizon.
The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of eplerenone compared with that of standard care alone was £ 4457 and £ 7893 for each additional quality-adjusted life-year when 2-year and lifetime treatment duration was assumed, respectively. In both scenarios, spironolactone did not appear cost-effective compared with eplerenone. The results were sensitive to the higher relative effectiveness estimated for eplerenone compared with spironolactone from the meta-regression. When a class effect was assumed for the effect on mortality and hospitalizations, spironolactone emerged as the most cost-effective treatment.
Eplerenone appears more cost-effective than spironolactone for the treatment of post-MI HF. These findings, however, remain subject to important uncertainties regarding the effects of treatment on major clinical events. An adequately powered, well-conducted randomized controlled trial that directly compares spironolactone and eplerenone may be required to provide more robust evidence on the optimal management of post-MI HF. Despite these uncertainties, the use of an aldosterone antagonist was consistently demonstrated to be a highly cost-effective strategy for the management of post-MI HF in the National Health Service.
Value in Health 05/2012; 15(3):420-8. · 2.19 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of dronedarone (Multaq®, Sanofi-Aventis Limited, UK) to submit evidence on the clinical and cost effectiveness of the anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter, as part of the Institute's single technology appraisal (STA) process. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and the Centre for Health Economics, both at the University of York, were commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article provides a description of the company submission, the ERG review and NICE's subsequent decisions regarding the use of dronedarone within the UK NHS. The ERG review comprised a critique of the submitted evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of dronedarone. The ERG examined the search strategy used to obtain relevant evidence, the selection of studies included in the assessment, outcome measures chosen and statistical methods employed. The ERG also validated the manufacturer's decision analytic model and used it to explore the robustness of the cost-effectiveness results to key assumptions. The main clinical effectiveness evidence supporting the use of dronedarone as a treatment for AF came from four randomized controlled trials. These trials were compared with a broader set of trials examining the effectiveness of other AADs for AF: amiodarone, sotalol and class 1c agents (flecainide and propafenone). The evidence suggested that all AADs decreased the recurrence of AF but dronedarone had the smallest effect. A mixed treatment comparison analysis of the trials showed that dronedarone was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality than other AADs, but this was highly uncertain. There was limited evidence to assess the effect of dronedarone on stroke, and no statistically significant differences between dronedarone and other AADs were found for treatment discontinuation. From the evidence presented by the manufacturer, dronedarone appeared highly cost effective in each of the population groups examined compared with using standard baseline therapy alone as first-line treatment, or compared with sotalol or amiodarone as first-line AAD, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) well below £20,000 per QALY gained. The ICER for dronedarone relative to class 1c agents was around £19,000 per QALY. Although the evidence presented by the manufacturer indicated that dronedarone was cost effective, the estimates of treatment effect relative to other AADs and safety in the longer term were highly uncertain. The NICE Appraisal Committee in its preliminary guidance did not recommend the use of dronedarone for AF. However, following the response from a large number of consultees and commentators, NICE revised its preliminary guidance to allow the use of the drug in a specific subgroup of AF patients with additional cardiovascular risk factors.
PharmacoEconomics 12/2011; 30(1):35-46. · 2.66 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) compared with medical management in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are ineligible for conventional aortic valve replacement (SAVR) from the perspective of the UK National Health Service.
Probabilistic decision analytical model.
A decision analytical model was developed to assess the costs and benefits associated with both interventions over a 10-year time horizon. A literature review was performed to identify relevant clinical evidence. Health-related quality of life and mortality were included using data from the PARTNER clinical trial (cohort B). Unit costs were taken from national databases. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per year, and extensive sensitivity analyses (probabilistic and deterministic) were performed to explore the impact of uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness estimates.
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with benefits expressed as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
The base case ICER was approximately £16,100 per QALY gained. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained, the probability that TAVI was cost-effective compared with medical management was 1.00. The results were robust to changes in key clinical parameters as well as choice of baseline survival data. The observed PARTNER survival data only have to be extrapolated for 2 years to generate an ICER below £30 000 per QALY gained, which is the upper value of the threshold range used by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the UK.
TAVI is highly likely to be a cost-effective treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are currently ineligible for SAVR.
Heart (British Cardiac Society) 11/2011; 98(5):370-6. · 4.22 Impact Factor
-
Harry Hemingway,
Peter Philipson,
Ruoling Chen,
Natalie K Fitzpatrick,
Jacqueline Damant,
Martin Shipley,
Keith R Abrams,
Santiago Moreno,
Kate S L McAllister, Stephen Palmer,
Juan Carlos Kaski,
Adam D Timmis,
Aroon D Hingorani
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Systematic evaluations of the quality of research on a single prognostic biomarker are rare. We sought to evaluate the quality of prognostic research evidence for the association of C-reactive protein (CRP) with fatal and nonfatal events among patients with stable coronary disease.
We searched MEDLINE (1966 to 2009) and EMBASE (1980 to 2009) and selected prospective studies of patients with stable coronary disease, reporting a relative risk for the association of CRP with death and nonfatal cardiovascular events. We included 83 studies, reporting 61,684 patients and 6,485 outcome events. No study reported a prespecified statistical analysis protocol; only two studies reported the time elapsed (in months or years) between initial presentation of symptomatic coronary disease and inclusion in the study. Studies reported a median of seven items (of 17) from the REMARK reporting guidelines, with no evidence of change over time. The pooled relative risk for the top versus bottom third of CRP distribution was 1.97 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.78-2.17), with substantial heterogeneity (I(2) = 79.5). Only 13 studies adjusted for conventional risk factors (age, sex, smoking, obesity, diabetes, and low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol) and these had a relative risk of 1.65 (95% CI 1.39-1.96), I(2) = 33.7. Studies reported ten different ways of comparing CRP values, with weaker relative risks for those based on continuous measures. Adjusting for publication bias (for which there was strong evidence, Egger's p<0.001) using a validated method reduced the relative risk to 1.19 (95% CI 1.13-1.25). Only two studies reported a measure of discrimination (c-statistic). In 20 studies the detection rate for subsequent events could be calculated and was 31% for a 10% false positive rate, and the calculated pooled c-statistic was 0.61 (0.57-0.66).
Multiple types of reporting bias, and publication bias, make the magnitude of any independent association between CRP and prognosis among patients with stable coronary disease sufficiently uncertain that no clinical practice recommendations can be made. Publication of prespecified statistical analytic protocols and prospective registration of studies, among other measures, might help improve the quality of prognostic biomarker research.
PLoS Medicine 06/2010; 7(6):e1000286. · 16.27 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Elicitation can be used to characterize structural uncertainty within a decision analytic model. This allows the value of acquiring further evidence to resolve these uncertainties to be established.
This article demonstrated the use of expert elicitation for this purpose and also compared the elicited results with the results from alternative assumptions previously used to characterize the uncertainties.
Distributions for two unknown parameters were elicited. These were used within a model developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of infliximab and etanercept for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis (PsA), compared with palliative care. The experts' distributions were synthesized using two approaches: linear pooling and random effects meta-analysis. Weighting of experts is also explored.
The four methods produce broadly similar results, and in each, the choice of optimum strategy is between etanercept and palliative care (incremental cost-effective ratio for etanercept is between pound29,021 and pound39,259 per costs and quality adjusted life years). Decision uncertainty, at a pound30,000 threshold, is high in all of the synthesis models thus generating high values of further research at between pound141 and pound634 million. In each model, the greatest value of further research was for the short-term effectiveness of treatment ( pound47- pound406 million).
Although the cost-effectiveness results do not differ substantially between the models using the elicited values and the original scenarios, there are some stark contrasts in terms of the values of further research generated.
Elicitation offers a feasible method to generate evidence for the missing information but there are a number of key issues for which further research is required.
Value in Health 03/2010; 13(5):557-64. · 2.19 Impact Factor
-
Martin Henriksson, Stephen Palmer,
Ruoling Chen,
Jacqueline Damant,
Natalie K Fitzpatrick,
Keith Abrams,
Aroon D Hingorani,
Ulf Stenestrand,
Magnus Janzon,
Gene Feder,
Bruce Keogh,
Martin J Shipley,
Juan-Carlos Kaski,
Adam Timmis,
Mark Sculpher,
Harry Hemingway
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To determine the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of using information from circulating biomarkers to inform the prioritisation process of patients with stable angina awaiting coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
Decision analytical model comparing four prioritisation strategies without biomarkers (no formal prioritisation, two urgency scores, and a risk score) and three strategies based on a risk score using biomarkers: a routinely assessed biomarker (estimated glomerular filtration rate), a novel biomarker (C reactive protein), or both. The order in which to perform coronary artery bypass grafting in a cohort of patients was determined by each prioritisation strategy, and mean lifetime costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were compared.
Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (9935 patients with stable angina awaiting coronary artery bypass grafting and then followed up for cardiovascular events after the procedure for 3.8 years), and meta-analyses of prognostic effects (relative risks) of biomarkers.
The observed risk of cardiovascular events while on the waiting list for coronary artery bypass grafting was 3 per 10,000 patients per day within the first 90 days (184 events in 9935 patients). Using a cost effectiveness threshold of pound20,000- pound30,000 (euro22,000-euro33,000; $32,000-$48,000) per additional QALY, a prioritisation strategy using a risk score with estimated glomerular filtration rate was the most cost effective strategy (cost per additional QALY was < pound410 compared with the Ontario urgency score). The impact on population health of implementing this strategy was 800 QALYs per 100,000 patients at an additional cost of pound 245,000 to the National Health Service. The prioritisation strategy using a risk score with C reactive protein was associated with lower QALYs and higher costs compared with a risk score using estimated glomerular filtration rate.
Evaluating the cost effectiveness of prognostic biomarkers is important even when effects at an individual level are small. Formal prioritisation of patients awaiting coronary artery bypass grafting using a routinely assessed biomarker (estimated glomerular filtration rate) along with simple, routinely collected clinical information was cost effective. Prioritisation strategies based on the prognostic information conferred by C reactive protein, which is not currently measured in this context, or a combination of C reactive protein and estimated glomerular filtration rate, is unlikely to be cost effective. The widespread practice of using only implicit or informal means of clinically ordering the waiting list may be harmful and should be replaced with formal prioritisation approaches.
BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 01/2010; 340:b5606.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The study aimed to compare the short-term costs and long-term cost-effectiveness of 2 antithrombotics, fondaparinux and enoxaparin, for non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome in the United States.
It was based on a large randomized trial of 20,078 patients Fifth Organization to Assess Strategies in Acute Ischemic Syndromes Investigators [OASIS-5] comparing the therapies in these patients. In OASIS-5, fondaparinux patients had about half the rate of major bleeding 9 days after randomization and at least as good clinical outcomes (death, myocardial infarction, major bleeding and stroke) after 6 months of follow-up. Health care resource use and clinical efficacy data from the trial were incorporated into a cost-effectiveness model as applied to a general US health care system both for the time horizon of the study (6 months) and over the longer term.
The 180-day cost analysis indicates that fondaparinux would generate a cost saving of $547 per patient (95% CI $207-$924). Sensitivity analysis suggested that savings could vary between $494 and $733. When 180-day cost and clinical results were extrapolated to long-term cost-effectiveness, fondaparinux was dominant (less costly and more effective in terms of quality-adjusted life-years) under most scenarios.
Fondaparinux is a more cost-effective antithrombotic agent than enoxaparin in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. This is true across the range of event risks seen in OASIS-5.
American heart journal 06/2009; 157(5):845-52. · 4.65 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The characterization of uncertainty is critical in cost-effectiveness analysis, particularly when considering whether additional evidence is needed. In addition to parameter and methodological uncertainty, there are other sources of uncertainty which include simplifications and scientific judgments that have to be made when constructing and interpreting a model of any sort. These have been classified in a number of different ways but can be referred to collectively as structural uncertainties.
Separate reviews were undertaken to identify what forms these other sources of uncertainty take and what other forms of potential methods to explicitly characterize these types of uncertainties in decision analytic models. These methods were demonstrated through application to four decision models each representing one of the four types of uncertainty.
These sources of uncertainty fall into four general themes: 1) inclusion of relevant comparators; 2) inclusion of relevant events; 3) alternative statistical estimation methods; and 4) clinical uncertainty.Two methods to explicitly characterize such uncertainties were identified: model selection and model averaging. In addition, an alternative approach, adding uncertain parameters to represent the source of uncertainty was also considered.The applications demonstrate that cost-effectiveness may be sensitive to these uncertainties and the methods used to characterize them. The value of research was particularly sensitive to these uncertainties and the methods used to characterize it. It is therefore important, for decision-making purposes, to incorporate such uncertainties into the modeling process.
Only parameterizing the uncertainty directly in the model can inform the decision to conduct further research to resolve this source of uncertainty.
Value in Health 02/2009; 12(5):739-49. · 2.19 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) compared with anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) from the perspective of the UK NHS.
Bayesian evidence synthesis and decision analytical model.
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted and Bayesian statistical methods used to synthesise the effectiveness evidence from randomised control trials. A decision analytical model was developed to assess the costs and consequences associated with the primary outcome of the trials over a lifetime time horizon.
Costs from a health service perspective and outcomes measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of RFCA varied between pound7763 and pound7910 for each additional QALY according to baseline risk of stroke, with a probability of being cost-effective from 0.98 to 0.99 for a cost-effectiveness threshold of pound20 000. Results were sensitive to the duration of quality of life benefits from treatment.
RFCA is potentially cost-effective for the treatment of paroxysmal AF in patients' predominantly refractory to AAD therapy provided the quality-of-life benefits from treatment are maintained for more than 5 years. These findings remain subject to limitations in the existing evidence regarding the nature of life benefits and the prognostic importance of restoring normal sinus rhythm conferred using RFCA.
Heart (British Cardiac Society) 01/2009; 95(7):542-9. · 4.22 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of routine screening for postnatal depression in primary care.
Cost effectiveness analysis with a decision model of alternative methods of screening for depression, including standardised postnatal depression and generic depression instruments. The performance of screening instruments was derived from a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis at a range of instrument cut points; estimates of other relevant parameters were derived from literature sources and relevant databases. A decision tree considered the full treatment pathway from the possible onset of postnatal depression through identification, treatment, and possible relapse.
Primary care.
A hypothetical population of women assessed for postnatal depression either via routine care only or supplemented by use of formal identification methods six weeks postnatally, as recommended in recent guidelines.
Costs expressed in 2006-7 prices and impact on health outcomes expressed in terms of quality adjusted life years (QALYs). The time horizon of the analysis was one year.
The routine application of either postnatal or general depression questionnaires did not seem to be cost effective compared with routine care only. The Edinburgh postnatal depression scale (at a cut point of 16) had an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of pound 41,103 (euro 45,398, $67,130) per QALY compared with routine care only. The ICER for all other strategies ranged from pound 49,928 to pound 272,463 per QALY versus routine care only, while the probability that no formal identification strategy was cost effective was 88% (59%) at a cost effectiveness threshold of pound 20,000 ( pound 30,000) per QALY. While sensitivity analysis indicated that the cost of managing incorrectly identified depression (false positive result) was an important driver of the model, formal identification approaches did not seem to be cost effective at any feasible estimate of this cost.
Formal identification methods for postnatal depression do not seem to represent value for money for the NHS. The major determinant of cost effectiveness seems to be the potential additional costs of managing women incorrectly diagnosed as depressed. Formal identification methods for postnatal depression do not currently satisfy the National Screening Committee's criteria for the adoption of a screening strategy as part of national health policy.
BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 01/2009; 339:b5203.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To assess the cost effectiveness of primary angioplasty, compared with medical management with thrombolytic drugs, to achieve reperfusion after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) from the perspective of the UK NHS.
Bayesian evidence synthesis and decision analytic model.
A systematic review was conducted and Bayesian statistical methods used to synthesise evidence from 22 randomised control trials. Resource utilisation was based on UK registry data, published literature and national databases, with unit costs taken from routine NHS sources and published literature.
Costs from a health service perspective and outcomes measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
For the base case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of primary angioplasty was 9241 pounds sterling for each additional QALY, with a probability of being cost effective of 0.90 for a cost-effectiveness threshold of 20,000 pounds sterling. Results were sensitive to variations in the additional time required to initiate treatment with primary angioplasty.
Primary angioplasty is cost effective for the treatment of AMI on the basis of threshold cost-effectiveness values used in the NHS and subject to a delay of up to about 80 minutes. These findings are mainly explained by the superior mortality benefit and the prevention of non-fatal outcomes associated with primary angioplasty for delays of up to this length.
Heart (British Cardiac Society) 11/2007; 93(10):1238-43. · 4.22 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Meta-analyses of trials have shown greater benefits from angioplasty than thrombolysis after an acute myocardial infarction, but the time delay in initiating angioplasty needs to be considered.
To extend earlier meta-analyses by considering 1- and 6-month outcome data for both forms of reperfusion. To use Bayesian statistical methods to quantify the uncertainty associated with the estimated relationships.
A systematic review and meta-analysis published in 2003 was updated. Data on key clinical outcomes and the difference between time-to-balloon and time-to-needle were independently extracted by two researchers. Bayesian statistical methods were used to synthesise evidence despite differences between reported follow-up times and outcomes. Outcomes are presented as absolute probabilities of specific events and odds ratios (ORs; with 95% credible intervals (CrI)) as a function of the additional time delay associated with angioplasty.
22 studies were included in the meta-analysis, with 3760 and 3758 patients randomised to primary angioplasty and thrombolysis, respectively. The mean (SE) angioplasty-related time delay (over and above time to thrombolysis) was 54.3 (2.2) minutes. For this delay, mean event probabilities were lower for primary angioplasty for all outcomes. Mortality within 1 month was 4.5% after angioplasty and 6.4% after thrombolysis (OR = 0.68 (95% CrI 0.46 to 1.01)). For non-fatal reinfarction, OR = 0.32 (95% CrI 0.20 to 0.51); for non-fatal stroke OR = 0.24 (95% CrI 0.11 to 0.50). For all outcomes, the benefit of angioplasty decreased with longer delay from initiation.
The benefit of primary angioplasty, over thrombolysis, depends on the former's additional time delay. For delays of 30-90 minutes, angioplasty is superior for 1-month fatal and non-fatal outcomes. For delays of around 90 minutes thrombolysis may be the preferred option as assessed by 6-month mortality; there is considerable uncertainty for longer time delays.
Heart (British Cardiac Society) 11/2007; 93(10):1244-50. · 4.22 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Event based models are driven by the occurrence of clinical events such as primary clinical endpoints in randomised trials or adverse events associated with treatment. Statistical analyses of individual-patient data are used to determine event rates and further statistical analyses are performed to estimate survival, costs and health-related quality of life conditional on an event having occurred. For economic evaluations of health-care programmes such an approach has several advantages as extrapolation is facilitated, it is possible to explore cost-effectiveness in different risk groups and it makes it possible to bring in relevant external evidence such as pooled treatment effect. However, event based modelling also poses methodological challenges concerning not only technical issues but also conceptual ones regarding the scientific method. The aim of this paper is to explore and discuss these methodological challenges. Methods: Published event based models were reviewed and examples from a recently developed event based model in acute coronary syndrome were used to discuss and exemplify several of the methodological issues involving event based modelling. Results: The event based modelling approach normally uses randomised evidence to determine rates of clinical events, but given that an event has occurred, life expectancy, costs and health-related quality of life are estimated conditional on the event rather than randomised treatment. Some would argue this is appropriate as treatment only affect costs and quality of life through the impact of events rates. However, others would argue that such an approach is inappropriate as it adds 'structure' to the randomised evidence in terms of costs, life-expectancy and quality of life assuming conditional independence. Regarding more technical aspects, several methodological issues need to be considered as relatively advanced statistical models are combined in a decision-analytic framework to determine cost-effectiveness. The most important advantage of event based modelling identified in this work is that it provides a tool to estimate cost-effectiveness in a way relevant for policy, i.e. enabling the estimation of lifetime costs and health outcomes in different subgroups utilising all relevant evidence. Some of the challenges identified in this work include the choice of covariates to be included in the statistical analyses and the presentation of the results and probabilistic sensitivity analyses as much of the inputs into the cost-effectiveness model will be based on risk equations which can potentially define a very large number of subgroups. Conclusion: Although there are still methodological issues that need addressing in this framework, event based modelling is a useful method for providing relevant cost-effectiveness evidence.
HEN: Cost Measurement (Sub-Topic). 06/2007;
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This paper demonstrates the value of practicality of applying an iterative framework for managing the dynamic process of health technology assessment. The framework uses Bayesian statistical decision theory and value of information (VOI) analysis to inform decision-making regarding appropriate patient management and to direct future research effort over the lifetime of a technology. Within the paper, the framework is applied to a policy decision regarding pre-operative patient management before major elective surgery, for which trial data is available. The evidence available prior to the trial is used to determine the appropriate method of patient management and to ascertain whether, at the time of commissioning, the trial was potentially worthwhile. The prior information is then updated with the trial data via a Bayesian analysis using informative priors. This post-trial information set is then used to re-assess the appropriate method for patient management and to determine whether there is a requirement for any further research.
HEN: Econometrics (Topic). 06/2007;
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This article examines the role of National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal in detail, focussing on the process itself and the methods used to establish cost-effective practices for the National Health Service (NHS).
Approaches to identifying both effective and cost-effective practices have become central to rationing decisions in the NHS. The establishment of the NICE, which produces guidance on what treatments should be provided by the NHS, represents the most visible approach to introducing economic considerations into these decisions.
The decisions over which activities will be displaced by NICE approved treatments are made at a local level, while the cost-effectiveness threshold used to evaluate technologies is set nationally. This may result in treatments being displaced which are more cost-effective than those being introduced. AREAS TO DEVELOP RESEARCH: The introduction of programmes looking at disinvestment opportunities to help aid local decision makers is a key step in improving the allocation of NHS resources and removing geographical inequalities.
British Medical Bulletin 02/2007; 81-82:51-64. · 4.54 Impact Factor
