Corrigendum to "Disease burden and unmet need for acute allergic reactions - A patient perspective" [World Allergy Organ J 17(4) (2024 Apr) 100896].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.waojou.2024.100896.].

Treatment Preferences for Acute Allergic Reactions: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Background: Timely treatment of acute allergic reactions (AARs) is important to minimize reaction severity. Corticosteroid tablets dissolved in water are commonly used in mainstay treatment. A new oral film that dissolves on the tongue provides a faster and less cumbersome alternative to tablets for corticosteroid administration during AARs. This study evaluated patients' preferences for attributes related to administration mode of corticosteroids in AARs. Methods: A web-based survey was sent to a sample from the adult Swedish population (≥18 years) with experience of corticosteroid treatment for AAR. We assessed the willingness to pay (WTP) for attributes related to corticosteroid treatment by applying a discrete choice experiment (DCE) approach. DCE attributes were administration mode, time to symptom relief, and price. The WTP for each attribute was derived using the attribute's coefficient in a logistic regression analysis. We specified a forced choice (FC) and an unforced choice (UC) model. In the FC model, the respondents chose between 2 hypothetical treatments and in the UC model, between any of 2 hypothetical treatments and their current treatment. Results: The final study population included 348 subjects, of which 80% were women. All the evaluated DCE attributes were significant predictors for the treatment choice (p<.001). In the FC model, the incremental WTP for an oral film compared with tablets was 409 Swedish kronor (SEK [≈€36.7]), with no other factors considered. In the UC model, the incremental WTP for the oral film compared with tablets was 574 SEK (≈€51.7). After considering the value of the respondents' current treatment, the WTP for the oral film decreased to 336 SEK (≈€30.3). The total WTP was reduced by 17 SEK (≈€1.5) per minute of shorter time to symptom relief. Subgroup analyses showed that people with circulatory symptoms and experience of swallowing difficulties related to allergy medication had higher WTP for the oral film than the average respondent. Conclusion: The findings show a substantial economic benefit of the oral film vs tablets for patients with AARs in Sweden. This result remained also after compensation for the full value of the patients' current treatment.

Disease burden and unmet need for acute allergic reactions - A patient perspective.

Background: Acute allergic reactions (AARs) occur shortly after exposure to an allergen, and the severity is on a continuum. Systemic corticosteroids (CS) are mainstay treatment of moderate to severe AARs, whereas those at risk of the most severe AARs (ie, anaphylaxis) are also recommended prescription of epinephrine autoinjectors. There is limited research on the impact of AARs not fulfilling the criteria for anaphylaxis. We have characterized a sample with a history of moderate to severe AARs and evaluated their self-reported disease burden (ie, daily life impact, anxiety, and treatment impediments). Methods: Survey study of adults with experience of AARs treated with CS. Participants recruited from a web-based panel and using social media were asked to complete a questionnaire related to their allergy and experience of AARs. The results were summarized for the whole sample and across subgroups with and without prescription of epinephrine. Results: The final study sample included 387 participants (80% women, mean age 41), of which 129 (33%) had at some point been prescribed epinephrine. The most common symptoms were respiratory (80%) and skin (78%) manifestations, and the mean (standard deviation, SD) self-rated severity score (scale from 0 [very mild] to 10 [very severe]) of the most recent AAR was 6.1 (2.0). More than 80% had experience of AARs interrupting daily activities and 50% of AARs that had limited work/studies or participation in leisure activities. Most of the respondents reported some degree of anxiety related to AARs and 43% had feared for their lives. Moreover, difficulties swallowing allergy medicine at an AAR was experienced by 26% and not having the medicine available when needed by 66%. Participants with prescription of epinephrine experienced more severe AARs than those without such prescription (mean [SD] severity 6.8 [2.1] vs 5.8 [1.8], p < 0.0001); however, also those without epinephrine prescription reported considerable anxiety and impact on daily life and to a similar degree as those with prescription. Conclusions: In this sample, subjects with experience of AARs treated with CS showed a considerable disease burden with anxiety and interruption on daily life, as well as problems related to access to, and swallowing of, medication. Although respondents with epinephrine prescription had more severe disease, a high disease burden was also evident among those without epinephrine. The study increases the knowledge of people with moderate to severe AARs, a patient population that has previously been underrepresented in the research literature.

Cost-Effectiveness of Vaccination of Older Adults with an MF59®-Adjuvanted Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine Compared to Standard-Dose and High-Dose Vaccines in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.

Individuals aged 65 years and above are at increased risk of complications and death from influenza compared with any other age group. Enhanced vaccines, as the MF59®-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV) and the high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (HD-QIV), provide increased protection for older adults in comparison to the traditional standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccines (SD-QIV). This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of aQIV compared to SD-QIV and HD-QIV in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden for adults aged ≥65 years. A static decision tree model was used to evaluate costs and outcomes of different vaccination strategies from healthcare payer and societal perspectives. This model projects that compared to SD-QIV, vaccination with aQIV could prevent a combined total of 18,772 symptomatic influenza infections, 925 hospitalizations, and 161 deaths in one influenza season across the three countries. From a healthcare payer perspective, the incremental costs per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained with aQIV versus SD-QIV were EUR 10,170/QALY in Denmark, EUR 12,515/QALY in Norway, and EUR 9894/QALY in Sweden. The aQIV was cost saving compared with HD-QIV. This study found that introducing aQIV to the entire population aged ≥65 years may contribute to reducing the disease and economic burden associated with influenza in these countries.

The Potential Cost and Cost-Effectiveness Impact of Using a Machine Learning Algorithm for Early Detection of Sepsis in Intensive Care Units in Sweden.

Background: Early diagnosis of sepsis has been shown to reduce treatment delays, increase appropriate care, and reduce mortality. The sepsis machine learning algorithm NAVOY® Sepsis, based on variables routinely collected at intensive care units (ICUs), has shown excellent predictive properties. However, the economic consequences of forecasting the onset of sepsis are unknown. Objectives: The potential cost and cost-effectiveness impact of a machine learning algorithm forecasting the onset of sepsis was estimated in an ICU setting. Methods: A health economic model has been developed to capture short-term and long-term consequences of sepsis. The model is based on findings from a randomized, prospective clinical evaluation of NAVOY® Sepsis and from literature sources. Modeling the relationship between time from sepsis onset to treatment and prevalence of septic shock and in-hospital mortality were of particular interest. The model base case assumes that the time to treatment coincides with the time to detection and that the algorithm predicts sepsis 3 hours prior to onset. Total costs include the costs of the prediction algorithm, days spent at the ICU and hospital ward, and long-term consequences. Costs are estimated for an average patient admitted to the ICU and for the healthcare system. The reference method is sepsis diagnosis in accordance with clinical practice. Results: In Sweden, the total cost per patient amounts to €16 436 and €16 512 for the algorithm and current practice arms, respectively, implying a potential cost saving per patient of €76. The largest cost saving is for the ICU stay, which is reduced by 0.16 days per patient (5860 ICU days for the healthcare sector) resulting in a cost saving of €1009 per ICU patient. Stochastic scenario analysis showed that NAVOY® Sepsis was a dominant treatment option in most scenarios and well below an established threshold of €20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. A 3-hour faster detection implies a reduction in in-hospital mortality, resulting in 356 lives saved per year. Conclusions: A sepsis prediction algorithm such as NAVOY® Sepsis reduces the cost per ICU patient and will potentially have a substantial cost-saving and life-saving impact for ICU departments and the healthcare system.

JAK2 V617F as a Marker for Long-Term Disease Progression and Mortality in Polycythemia Vera and its Role in Economic Modeling.

BACKGROUND: In order to facilitate sound economic evaluations of novel treatments, health-economic models of polycythemia vera (PV) must combine effects on surrogate endpoints in trials with disease progression (DP) and mortality in long-term cohort data. OBJECTIVE: We validate an economic model for PV that uses Janus Kinase 2 (JAK2) burden as a surrogate endpoint to predict DP (thrombosis, myelofibrosis, and acute leukemia) and overall survival (OS) based on progression-specific mortality. METHODS: Long-term observational studies that include information about baseline JAK2 burden were identified via PubMed searches and used to validate the model. Kaplan-Meier (KM) OS curves were extracted using a digitizing software. External validity of the model was analyzed by visually comparing OS curves of the model with the KM curves of the included studies, as well as calculating differences in mean OS estimated as area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: The model's predictions of cumulative DP were somewhat lower than the published studies. Over 20 years' time, our base case model predicted a mean OS for a PV patient (15.0-16.5 years), which was in line with the published studies (15.8-17.5 years). Modeled mean OS was almost two years longer (1.6-1.9 years) for patients with JAK2 <50% than patients with JAK2 ≥50%. Only three long-term observational studies that satisfied the predefined criteria were found and could be used in the validation, but these studies did not capture JAK2 evolution over time. Improved model predictions of DP and mortality based on the longitudinal evolution of JAK2 could be derived from real-world data sources. Such data are currently scarce and future observational studies should be designed to capture the long-term impact of JAK2 on DP and mortality in PV. CONCLUSIONS: Our model, based on JAK2 burden as a marker for DP, generated OS estimations that are in line with results of published data.

Economic Analysis of Panitumumab Compared With Cetuximab in Patients With Wild-type KRAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer That Progressed After Standard Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti-epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT. FINDINGS: The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab. IMPLICATIONS: These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377.

Health economic modeling of the potential cost saving effects of Neurally Adjusted Ventilator Assist.

OBJECTIVES: Asynchrony between patient and ventilator breaths is associated with increased duration of mechanical ventilation (MV). Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) controls MV through an esophageal reading of diaphragm electrical activity via a nasogastric tube mounted with electrode rings. NAVA has been shown to decrease asynchrony in comparison to pressure support ventilation (PSV). The objective of this study was to conduct a health economic evaluation of NAVA compared with PSV. METHODS: We developed a model based on an indirect link between improved synchrony with NAVA versus PSV and fewer days spent on MV in synchronous patients. Unit costs for MV were obtained from the Swedish intensive care unit register, and used in the model along with NAVA-specific costs. The importance of each parameter (proportion of asynchronous patients, costs, and average MV duration) for the overall results was evaluated through sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Base case results showed that 21% of patients ventilated with NAVA were asynchronous versus 52% of patients receiving PSV. This equals an absolute difference of 31% and an average of 1.7 days less on MV and a total cost saving of US$7886 (including NAVA catheter costs). A breakeven analysis suggested that NAVA was cost effective compared with PSV given an absolute difference in the proportion of asynchronous patients greater than 2.5% (49.5% versus 52% asynchronous patients with NAVA and PSV, respectively). The base case results were stable to changes in parameters, such as difference in asynchrony, duration of ventilation and daily intensive care unit costs. CONCLUSION: This study showed economically favorable results for NAVA versus PSV. Our results show that only a minor decrease in the proportion of asynchronous patients with NAVA is needed for investments to pay off and generate savings. Future studies need to confirm this result by directly relating improved synchrony to the number of days on MV.

Cost-minimization analysis of panitumumab compared with cetuximab for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of first-line treatment with panitumumab + FOLFOX in comparison to cetuximab + FOLFIRI among patients with wild-type (WT) RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the US. METHODS: A cost-minimization model was developed assuming similar treatment efficacy between both regimens. The model estimated the costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration frequency (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions. Average anti-EGFR doses were calculated from the ASPECCT clinical trial, and average doses of chemotherapy regimens were based on product labels. Using the medical component of the consumer price index, adverse event costs were inflated to 2014 US dollars, and all other costs were reported in 2014 US dollars. The time horizon for the model was based on average first-line progression-free survival of a WT RAS patient, estimated from parametric survival analyses of PRIME clinical trial data. RESULTS: Relative to cetuximab + FOLFIRI in the first-line treatment of WT RAS mCRC, the cost-minimization model demonstrated lower projected drug acquisition, administration, and adverse event costs for patients who received panitumumab + FOLFOX. The overall cost per patient for first-line treatment was $179,219 for panitumumab + FOLFOX vs $202,344 for cetuximab + FOLFIRI, resulting in a per-patient saving of $23,125 (11.4%) in favor of panitumumab + FOLFOX. CONCLUSIONS: From a value perspective, the cost-minimization model supports panitumumab + FOLFOX instead of cetuximab + FOLFIRI as the preferred first-line treatment of WT RAS mCRC patients requiring systemic therapy.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin) compared with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). DESIGN: A semi-Markov model was constructed from a French health collective perspective, with health states related to first-line treatment (progression-free), disease progression with and without subsequent active treatment, resection of metastases, disease-free after successful resection and death. METHODS: Parametric survival analyses of patient-level progression-free and overall survival data from the only head-to-head clinical trial of panitumumab and bevacizumab (PEAK) were performed to estimate transitions to disease progression and death. Additional data from PEAK informed the amount of each drug consumed, duration of therapy, subsequent therapy use, and toxicities related to mCRC treatment. Literature and French public data sources were used to estimate unit costs associated with treatment and duration of subsequent active therapies. Utility weights were calculated from patient-level data from panitumumab trials in the first-, second- and third-line settings. A life-time perspective was applied. Scenario, one-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Based on a head-to-head clinical trial that demonstrates better efficacy outcomes for patients with wild-type RAS mCRC who receive panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6, the incremental cost per life-year gained was estimated to be €26,918, and the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was estimated to be €36,577. Sensitivity analyses indicate the model is robust to alternative parameters and assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental cost per QALY gained indicates that panitumumab plus mFOLFOX6 represents good value for money in comparison to bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 and, with a willingness-to-pay ranging from €40,000 to €60,000, can be considered cost-effective in first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS mCRC.