Dataset Information

Systematic Review and Quality Appraisal of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Pharmacologic Maintenance Treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Methodological Considerations and Recommendations.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Worldwide, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a highly prevalent chronic lung disease with considerable clinical and socioeconomic impact. Pharmacologic maintenance drugs (such as bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids) play an important role in the treatment of COPD. The cost effectiveness of these treatments has been frequently assessed, but studies to date have largely neglected the impact of treatment sequence and the exact stage of disease in which the drugs are used in real life.

Objective

We aimed to systematically review recently published articles that reported the cost effectiveness of COPD maintenance treatments, with a focus on key findings, quality and methodological issues.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search in Embase, PubMed, the UK NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) and EURONHEED (European Network of Health Economics Evaluation Databases) and included all relevant articles published between 2011 and 2015 in either Dutch, English or German. Main study characteristics, methods and outcomes were extracted and critically assessed. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was used as basis for quality assessment, but additional items were also addressed.

Results

The search identified 18 recent pharmacoeconomic analyses of COPD maintenance treatments. Papers reported the cost effectiveness of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy (n = 6), phosphodiesterase (PDE)-4 inhibitors (n = 4), long-acting beta agonist/inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) combinations (n = 4), LABA monotherapy (n = 2) and LABA/LAMA combinations (n = 2). All but two studies were funded by the manufacturer, and all studies indicated favourable cost effectiveness; however, the number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained was small. Less than half of the studies reported a COPD-specific outcome in addition to a generic outcome (mostly QALYs). Exacerbation and mortality rates were found to be the main drivers of cost effectiveness. According to the QHES, the quality of the studies was generally sufficient, but additional assessment revealed that most studies poorly represented the cost effectiveness of real-life medication use.

Conclusions

The majority of studies showed that pharmacologic COPD maintenance treatment is cost effective, but most studies poorly reflected real-life drug use. Consistent and COPD-specific methodology is recommended.

SUBMITTER: van der Schans S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5209411 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic Review and Quality Appraisal of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Pharmacologic Maintenance Treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Methodological Considerations and Recommendations.

van der Schans Simon S Goossens Lucas M A LMA Boland Melinde R S MRS Kocks Janwillem W H JWH Postma Maarten J MJ van Boven Job F M JFM Rutten-van Mölken Maureen P M H MPMH

PharmacoEconomics 20170101 1

<h4>Background</h4>Worldwide, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a highly prevalent chronic lung disease with considerable clinical and socioeconomic impact. Pharmacologic maintenance drugs (such as bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids) play an important role in the treatment of COPD. The cost effectiveness of these treatments has been frequently assessed, but studies to date have largely neglected the impact of treatment sequence and the exact stage of disease in which the d ...[more]

PMID: 27592021

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOvarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer death in women in the US. With poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors having shown promising results in ongoing trials, there is interest in better understanding their economic value.ObjectiveThis study aimed to review and evaluate the quality of published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs), and provide recommendations for CEAs in this setting.MethodsA systematic literature review of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was conducted in June 2019 to identify CEAs of PARP inhibitors in treating advanced ovarian cancer from peer-reviewed journals and conferences. Key information from the identified publications were extracted and reviewed. The quality of full-text studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument. Recommendations for future CEAs were developed based on the findings from the literature review.ResultsEighteen CEAs (five in full texts) met the inclusion criteria. Most adopted a US healthcare or societal perspective. The majority of the studies did not clearly display the economic model structure. No studies reported the validation of model projections based on internal or external data. Surrogate outcomes such as incremental costs per progression-free life-year gained were the most common outcomes reported. The majority of studies drew their conclusions based on surrogate outcomes, even with no theoretical or empirical threshold for cost effectiveness. All five full-text studies included some type of sensitivity or scenario analyses. The key drivers of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were treatment duration, effects, and costs, health utility, and prevalence of BRCA mutations.ConclusionIn the existing CEAs for PARP inhibitors, there were uncertainties and challenges leading to variation in quality. We provided recommendations to improve consistency and quality of CEAs in this setting, which will help to better understand the value of PARP inhibitors, improve decision making, and reduce potential misallocation of resources.

Project description:In this review, we summarize evidence regarding the use of routine and investigational pharmacologic interventions for pregnant and lactating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Antenatal corticosteroids may be used routinely for fetal lung maturation between 24 and 34 weeks' gestation, but decisions in those with critical illness and those < 24 or > 34 weeks' gestation should be made on a case-by-case basis. Magnesium sulfate may be used for seizure prophylaxis and fetal neuroprotection, albeit cautiously in those with hypoxia and renal compromise. There are no contraindications to using low-dose aspirin to prevent placenta-mediated pregnancy complications when indicated. An algorithm for thromboprophylaxis in pregnant patients with COVID-19 is presented, which considers disease severity, timing of delivery in relation to disease onset, inpatient vs outpatient status, underlying comorbidities and contraindications to the use of anticoagulation. Nitrous oxide may be administered for labor analgesia while using appropriate personal protective equipment. Intravenous remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia should be used with caution in patients with respiratory depression. Liberal use of neuraxial labor analgesia may reduce the need for emergency general anesthesia which results in aerosolization. Short courses of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can be administered for postpartum analgesia, but opioids should be used with caution due to the risk of respiratory depression. For mechanically ventilated pregnant patients, neuromuscular blockade should be used for the shortest duration possible and reversal agents should be available on hand if delivery is imminent. To date, dexamethasone is the only proven and recommended experimental treatment for pregnant patients with COVID-19 who are mechanically ventilated or who require supplemental oxygen. Although hydroxycholoroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir and remdesivir may be used during pregnancy and lactation within the context of clinical trials, data from non-pregnant populations have not shown benefit. The role of monoclonal antibodies (tocilizumab), immunomodulators (tacrolimus), interferon, inhaled nitric oxide and convalescent plasma in pregnancy and lactation needs further evaluation. © 2020 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Project description:BackgroundA key priority in developing policies for providing affordable cancer care is measuring the value for money of new therapies using cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). For CEA to be useful it should focus on relevant outcomes and include thorough investigation of uncertainty. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of five years of aromatase inhibitors (AI) versus five years of tamoxifen in the treatment of post-menopausal women with early stage breast cancer, show benefit of AI in terms of disease free survival (DFS) but not overall survival (OS) and indicate higher risk of fracture with AI. Policy-relevant CEA of AI versus tamoxifen should focus on OS and include analysis of uncertainty over key assumptions.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of published CEAs comparing an AI to tamoxifen. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews without language restrictions. We selected CEAs with outcomes expressed as cost per life year or cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY). We assessed quality using the Neumann checklist. Using structured forms two abstractors collected descriptive information, sources of data, baseline assumptions on effectiveness and adverse events, and recorded approaches to assessing parameter uncertainty, methodological uncertainty, and structural uncertainty.ResultsWe identified 1,622 citations and 18 studies met inclusion criteria. All CE estimates assumed a survival benefit for aromatase inhibitors. Twelve studies performed sensitivity analysis on the risk of adverse events and 7 assumed no additional mortality risk with any adverse event. Sub-group analysis was limited; 6 studies examined older women, 2 examined women with low recurrence risk, and 1 examined women with multiple comorbidities.ConclusionPublished CEAs comparing AIs to tamoxifen assumed an OS benefit though none has been shown in RCTs, leading to an overestimate of the cost-effectiveness of AIs. Results of these CEA analyses may be suboptimal for guiding policy.

Project description:BackgroundTreatment of metastatic prostate cancer is associated with high personal and economic burden. Recently, new treatment options for castration-resistant prostate cancer became available with promising survival advantages. However, cost-effectiveness of those new treatment options is sometimes ambiguous or given only under certain circumstances. The aim of this study was to systematically review studies on the cost-effectiveness of treatments and costs of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and metastasizing castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) on their methodological quality and the risk of bias.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed in the databases PubMed, CINAHL Complete, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science Core Collection for costs-effectiveness analyses, model-based economic evaluations, cost-of-illness analyses and budget impact analyses. Reported costs were inflated to 2015 US$ purchasing power parities. Quality assessment and risk of bias assessment was performed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist and the Bias in Economic Evaluations checklist, respectively.ResultsIn total, 38 articles were identified by the systematic literature search. The methodological quality of the included studies varied widely, and there was considerable risk of bias. The cost-effectiveness treatments for CRPC and mCRPC was assessed with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from dominance for mitoxantrone to $562,328 per quality-adjusted life year gained for sipuleucel-T compared with prednisone alone. Annual costs for the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer ranged from $3,067 to $77,725.ConclusionThe cost-effectiveness of treatments of CRPC strongly depended on the willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year gained/life-year saved throughout all included costs-effectiveness analyses and model-based economic evaluations. High-quality cost-effectiveness analyses based on randomized controlled trials are needed in order to make informed decisions on the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer and the resulting financial impact on the healthcare system.

Project description:BackgroundClinical guidelines recommend a stepped-escalation treatment strategy for type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Across multiple treatment strategies varying in efficacy and costs, no clinical or economic studies directly compared them. This study aims to estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of 10 commonly used pharmacologic combination strategies for T2DM.MethodsBased on Chinese guideline and practice, 10 three-stepwise add-on strategies were identified, which start with metformin, then switch to metformin plus one oral drug (i.e., sulfonylurea, thiazolidinedione, α-glucosidase inhibitor, glinide, or DPP-4 inhibitor) as second line, and finally switch to metformin plus one injection (i.e., insulin or GLP-1 receptor agonist) as third line. A cohort of 10,000 Chinese patients with newly diagnosed T2DM was established. From a healthcare system perspective, the Cardiff model was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the strategies, with clinical data sourced from a systematic review and indirect treatment comparison of 324 trials, costs from claims data of 1164 T2DM patients, and utilities from an EQ-5D study. Outcome measures include costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and net monetary benefits (NMBs).ResultsOver 40-year simulation, the costs accumulated for a patient ranged from $7661 with strategy 1 to $14,273 with strategy 10, while the QALY gains ranged from 13.965 with strategy 1 to 14.117 with strategy 8. Strategy 7 was dominant over seven strategies (strategies 2~6, 9~10) with higher QALYs but lower costs. Additionally, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,787/QALY (i.e., 3 times GDP/capita for China), strategy 7 was cost-effective compared with strategy 1 (ICER of strategy 7 vs. 1, $3371/QALY) and strategy 8 (ICER of strategy 8 vs. 7, $132,790/QALY). Ranking the strategies by ICERs and NMBs, strategy 7 provided the best value for money when compared to all other strategies, followed by strategies 5, 9, 8, 1, 3, 6, 10, 2, and 4. Scenario analyses showed that patients insist on pharmacologic treatments increased their QALYs (0.456~0.653) at an acceptable range of cost increase (ICERs, $1450/QALY~$12,360/QALY) or even at cost saving compared with those not receive treatments.ConclusionsThis study provides evidence-based references for diabetes management. Our findings can be used to design the essential drug formulary, infer clinical practice, and help the decision-maker design reimbursement policy.

Dataset Information

Systematic Review and Quality Appraisal of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Pharmacologic Maintenance Treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Methodological Considerations and Recommendations.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Systematic Review and Quality Appraisal of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Pharmacologic Maintenance Treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Methodological Considerations and Recommendations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets