Extrapolating empirical long-term survival data: the impact of updated follow-up data and parametric extrapolation methods on survival estimates in multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: In economic evaluations, survival is often extrapolated to smooth out the Kaplan-Meier estimate and because the available data (e.g., from randomized controlled trials) are often right censored. Validation of the accuracy of extrapolated results can depend on the length of follow-up and the assumptions made about the survival hazard. Here, we analyze the accuracy of different extrapolation techniques while varying the data cut-off to estimate long-term survival in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients. METHODS: Empirical data were available from a randomized controlled trial and a registry for MM patients treated with melphalan + prednisone, thalidomide, and bortezomib- based regimens. Standard parametric and spline models were fitted while artificially reducing follow-up by introducing database locks. The maximum follow-up for these locks varied from 3 to 13 years. Extrapolated (conditional) restricted mean survival time (RMST) was compared to the Kaplan-Meier RMST and models were selected according to statistical tests, and visual fit. RESULTS: For all treatments, the RMST error decreased when follow-up and the absolute number of events increased, and censoring decreased. The decline in RMST error was highest when maximum follow-up exceeded six years. However, even when censoring is low there can still be considerable deviations in the extrapolated RMST conditional on survival until extrapolation when compared to the KM-estimate. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that both standard parametric and spline models could be worthy candidates when extrapolating survival for the populations examined. Nevertheless, researchers and decision makers should be wary of uncertainty in results even when censoring has decreased, and the number of events has increased.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Cardiac Rehabilitation Program Specifically Designed for Patients With Obesity Within the OPTICARE XL Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of a cardiac rehabilitation (CR) program specifically designed for cardiac patients with obesity vs standard CR. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis based on observations in a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Three regional CR centers in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Cardiac patients (N=201) with obesity (BMI≥30 kg/m2) referred to CR. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to a CR program specifically designed for patients with obesity (OPTICARE XL; N=102) or standard CR. OPTICARE XL included aerobic and strength exercise and behavioral coaching on diet and physical activity during 12 weeks, followed by a 9-month after-care program with "booster" educational sessions. Standard CR consisted of a 6- to 12-week aerobic exercise program, supplemented with cardiovascular lifestyle education. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: An economic evaluation, with an 18-month time horizon, in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs from the societal perspective was performed. Costs were reported in 2020 Euros, discounted at a 4% annual rate, and health effects were discounted at a 1.5% annual rate. RESULTS: OPTICARE XL CR and standard CR resulted in comparable health gain per patient (0.958 vs 0.965 QALYs, respectively; P=.96). Overall, OPTICARE XL CR saved costs (-€4542) compared with the standard CR group. The direct costs for OPTICARE XL CR were higher than for standard CR (€10,712 vs €9951), whereas indirect costs were lower (€51,789 vs €57,092), but these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: This economic evaluation showed no differences between OPTICARE XL CR and standard CR in health effects and costs in cardiac patients with obesity.

An implantable device to treat multiple sclerosis: A discrete choice experiment on patient preferences in three European countries.

BACKGROUND: Persons with multiple sclerosis (MS) take their treatment via pills, injections or infusions. A novel mode of disease-modifying treatment administration, an implantable device, is under development. This study determined MS patient preferences for three modes of first-line treatment administration (implant, pills, injectables), and trade-offs regarding treatment characteristics. METHODS: A survey including a discrete choice experiment was conducted among MS patients in the Netherlands, France, and the United Kingdom. Respondents had to repeatedly choose between various treatment scenarios with four treatment characteristics: risk of relapse, reduction of disease progression, risk of side effects and mode of administration. Data was analysed using a panel latent class logit model. RESULTS: Based on the preferences of 753 MS patients (response rate 7%: 753/11202), two latent classes were identified (class probability of 74% vs 26%). Persons with relapsing-remitting MS and who administered medication via injections generally preferred any treatment over no treatment. Patients who could walk without an aid were more likely to prefer no treatment. Reducing disease progression was the most important treatment characteristic class 1. Mode of administration was the most important characteristic in class 2. Patients were willing to accept an increase in risk of relapse and disease progression to get their treatment via an implant rather than injections. Predicted uptake was the highest for the implant, followed by pills, injections, and no treatment. CONCLUSION: We found that a drug-delivery implant could be a potential addition to the MS treatment landscape: MS patients are willing to trade-off risk of relapse and disease progression for an implant, and predicted uptake for an implant is relatively high.

Innovative Medical Technology and the Treatment Decision-Making Process in Multiple Sclerosis: A Focus Group Study to Examine Patient Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Disease-modifying therapies are given to people with multiple sclerosis (MS) to reduce disease progression and relapse frequency. Current modes of administration include oral, injectable and infusion therapy and the treatment decision-making process is complex. A novel mode of treatment administration, an implantable device, is currently under development, yet patient attitudes about the device are unknown. The aim of this study was 1) to understand the treatment decision-making process from the patient perspective and 2) to explore the possible acceptance of an implant to treat MS. METHODS: Focus groups with people with MS were conducted in the Netherlands. Three topics were addressed: the treatment decision-making process, the current treatment landscape, and attitudes about the implantable device. All focus groups were recorded and transcribed and data were analyzed by raw data coding and creating themes. An online survey was conducted in the Netherlands to quantify interest in an implant. RESULTS: Two focus group sessions were held (n=16 participants) and n=93 persons filled out the survey. The main theme that emerged was the constant uncertainty persons with MS face throughout their disease course and during treatment decisions (when to start, stop, continue or switch treatment). Patients were generally positive towards the implant but felt that efficacy and safety should be guaranteed. CONCLUSION: People with MS want some form of control over their disease and treatment course. New medical technologies, such as an implant, may enhance the treatment landscape and with caution we postulate that it may be accepted by patients as a new mode of administration, though further research is needed. For medical technologies to be successful, patients should be engaged early on in the design process.

Patient needs and preferences in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Considering the multiple treatments approved for multiple sclerosis (MS) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA), determining a treatment strategy for patients with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) and relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) can be challenging. To date, an overview of the needs and preferences of patients at each treatment decision-making moment is lacking. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to examine the existing literature about the needs and preferences of patients with CIS and RRMS when making treatment decisions. METHODS: A systematic search was done using Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Eligibility criteria included whether the article described a study of adults with CIS/RRMS and reported patient needs or preferences regarding first-line disease modifying treatment (DMT) decisions. Publications were categorized by treatment decision: initiation of first DMT (D1), DMT adherence/discontinuation (D2a/D2b), and switch to a second DMT (D3). A separate category was created for stated preference studies such as discrete choice experiment methods to examine the relative importance of different treatment attributes. Publications were compared to identify key factors. RESULTS: The search yielded 2789 articles after removal of duplicates and 434 full-text publications were reviewed for eligibility. Twenty-four articles fulfilled all criteria: n = 5 (D1), n = 12 (D2a), n = 13 (D2b), and n = 3 (D3); six articles studied more than one treatment decision. The need for social support is important during D1. The most commonly reported reasons for adherence/discontinuation/switch included forgetfulness, side-effects, and injection-related reasons. Eight articles described preference studies; the most important DMT attributes were efficacy, mode and frequency of administration, and side-effect profile. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the needs and preferences of CIS/RRMS patients regarding DMT attributes and non-treatment related attributes are important to improve treatment decision-making and reduce non-adherence. Studies are needed to understand patient preferences upon treatment initiation. Furthermore, preference studies should include attributes based on the patient perspective.

Health-related quality of life and its determinants in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Based on improvements of progression-free survival (PFS), new agents for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have been approved. It is assumed that one of the benefits is a delay in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) deterioration as a result of a delay in progression of disease. However, little data are available supporting this relationship. This study aims to provide insight into the most important determinants of HRQoL (including progression of disease) of patients with mRCC. METHODS: A patient registry (PERCEPTION) was created to evaluate treatment of patients with (m)RCC in the Netherlands. HRQoL was measured, using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L, every 3 months in the first year of participation in the study, and every 6 months in the second year. Participation started as soon as possible following a diagnosis of (m)RCC. Random effects models were used to study associations between HRQoL and patient and disease characteristics, symptoms and treatment. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients with mRCC completed 304 questionnaires. The average EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status was 69 (SD, 19) before progression and 61 (SD, 22) after progression of disease. Similarly, the average EQ-5D utility was 0.75 (SD, 0.19) before progression and 0.66 (SD, 0.30) after progression of disease. The presence of fatigue, pain, dyspnoea, and the application of radiotherapy were associated with significantly lower EQ-5D utilities. CONCLUSIONS: Key drivers for reduced HRQoL in mRCC are disease symptoms. Since symptoms increase with progression of disease, targeted therapies that increase PFS are expected to postpone reductions in HRQoL in mRCC.

Potential health gains for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in daily clinical practice: A real-world cost-effectiveness analysis of sequential first- and second-line treatments.

INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials have shown that targeted therapies like sunitinib are effective in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Little is known about the current use of these therapies, and their associated costs and effects in daily clinical practice. We estimated the real-world cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies comprising one or more sequentially administered drugs. METHODS: Analyses were performed using patient-level data from a Dutch population-based registry including patients diagnosed with primary mRCC from January 2008 to December 2010 (i.e., treated between 2008 and 2013). The full disease course of these patients was estimated using a patient-level simulation model based on regression analyses of the registry data. A healthcare sector perspective was adopted; total costs included healthcare costs related to mRCC. Cost-effectiveness was expressed in cost per life-year and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to estimate the overall uncertainty surrounding cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: In current daily practice, 54% (336/621) of all patients was treated with targeted therapies. Most patients (84%; 282/336) received sunitinib as first-line therapy. Of the patients receiving first-line therapy, 30% (101/336) also received second-line therapy; the majority was treated with everolimus (40%, 40/101) or sorafenib (28%, 28/101). Current treatment practice (including patients not receiving targeted therapy) led to 0.807 QALYs; mean costs were €58,912. This resulted in an additional €105,011 per QALY gained compared to not using targeted therapy at all. Forty-six percent of all patients received no targeted therapy; of these patients, 24% (69/285) was eligible for sunitinib. If these patients were treated with first-line sunitinib, mean QALYs would improve by 0.062-0.076 (where the range reflects the choice of second-line therapy). This improvement is completely driven by the health gain seen amongst patients eligible to receive sunitinib but did not receive it, who gain 0.558-0.684 QALYs from sunitinib. Since additional costs would be €7,072-9,913, incremental costs per QALY gained are €93,107-111,972 compared to current practice. DISCUSSION: Health can be gained if more treatment-eligible patients receive targeted therapies. Moreover, it will be just as cost-effective to treat these patients with sunitinib as current treatment practice.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of new generation coronary CT scanners for difficult-to-image patients.

AIMS: New generation dual-source coronary CT (NGCCT) scanners with more than 64 slices were evaluated for patients with (known) or suspected of coronary artery disease (CAD) who are difficult to image: obese, coronary calcium score > 400, arrhythmias, previous revascularization, heart rate > 65 beats per minute, and intolerance of betablocker. A cost-effectiveness analysis of NGCCT compared with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) was performed for these difficult-to-image patients for England and Wales. METHODS AND RESULTS: Five models (diagnostic decision model, four Markov models for CAD progression, stroke, radiation and general population) were integrated to estimate the cost-effectiveness of NGCCT for both suspected and known CAD populations. The lifetime costs and effects from the National Health Service perspective were estimated for three strategies: (1) patients diagnosed using ICA, (2) using NGCCT, and (3) patients diagnosed using a combination of NGCCT and, if positive, followed by ICA. In the suspected population, the strategy where patients only undergo a NGCCT is a cost-effective option at accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds. The strategy of using NGCCT in combination with ICA is the most favourable strategy for patients with known CAD. The most influential factors behind these results are the percentage of patients being misclassified (a function of both diagnostic accuracy and the prior likelihood), the complication rates of the procedures, and the cost price of a NGCCT scan. CONCLUSION: The use of NGCCT might be considered cost-effective in both populations since it is cost-saving compared to ICA and generates similar effects.

How to prepare a systematic review of economic evaluations for informing evidence-based healthcare decisions: data extraction, risk of bias, and transferability (part 3/3).

INTRODUCTION: This article is part of the series "How to Prepare a Systematic Review (SR) of Economic Evaluations (EE) for Informing Evidence-based Healthcare Decisions" in which a five-step-approach for conducting a SR of EE is proposed. Areas covered: This paper explains the data extraction process, the risk of bias assessment and the transferability of EEs by means of a narrative review and expert opinion. SRs play a critical role in determining the comparative cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions. It is important to determine the risk of bias and the transferability of an EE. Expert commentary: Over the past decade, several criteria lists have been developed. This article aims to provide recommendations on these criteria lists based on the thoroughness of development, feasibility, overall quality, recommendations of leading organizations, and widespread use.

Variation in use of targeted therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from a Dutch population-based registry.

BACKGROUND: For patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), targeted therapies have entered the market since 2006. The aims of this study were to evaluate the uptake and use of targeted therapies for mRCC in The Netherlands, examine factors associated with the prescription of targeted therapies in daily clinical practice and study their effectiveness in terms of overall survival (OS). METHODS: Two cohorts from PERCEPTION, a population-based registry of mRCC patients, were used: a 2008-2010 Cohort (n = 645) and a 2011-2013 Cohort (n = 233). Chi-squared tests for trend were used to study time trends in the use of targeted therapy. Patients were grouped based on the eligibility criteria of the SUTENT trial, the trial that led to sunitinib becoming standard of care, to investigate the use of targeted therapies amongst patients fulfilling those criteria. Multi-level logistic regression was used to identify patient subgroups that are less likely to receive targeted therapies. RESULTS: Approximately one-third of patients fulfilling SUTENT trial eligibility criteria did not receive any targeted therapy (29 % in the 2008-2010 Cohort; 35 % in the 2011-2013 Cohort). Patients aged 65+ years were less likely to receive targeted therapy in both cohorts and different risk groups (odds ratios range between 0.84-0.92); other factors like number of metastatic sites were of influence in some subgroups. Amongst treated patients, there was a decreasing trend in sunitinib use over time (p = 0.0061), and an increasing trend in pazopanib use (p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Targeted therapies have largely replaced interferon-alfa as first-line standard of care. Nevertheless, many eligible patients in Dutch daily practice did not receive targeted therapies despite their ability to improve survival. Reasons for their apparent underutilisation should be examined more carefully.

Cost-effectiveness of pharmacogenetic-guided dosing of warfarin in the United Kingdom and Sweden.

We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of pharmacogenetic-guided dosing of warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in the United Kingdom and Sweden. Data from EU-PACT, a randomized controlled trial in newly diagnosed AF patients, were used to model the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained by pharmacogenetic-guided warfarin dosing versus standard treatment over a lifetime horizon. Incremental lifetime costs were £26 and 382 Swedish kronor (SEK) and incremental QALYs were 0.0039 and 0.0015 in the United Kingdom and Sweden, respectively. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were £6 702 and 253 848 SEK per QALY gained. The ICER was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained in 93% of the simulations in the United Kingdom and below 500 000 SEK in 67% of the simulations in Sweden. Our data suggest that pharmacogenetic-guided dosing of warfarin is a cost-effective strategy to improve outcomes of patients with AF treated with warfarin in the United Kingdom and in Sweden.

Cost-effectiveness of Elective Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Versus Open Surgical Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to estimate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) in the Netherlands, based on recently published literature. METHODS: A model was developed to simulate a cohort of individuals (age 72 years, 87% men) with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) diameter of at least 5.5 cm and considered fit for both repairs. The model consisted of two sub-models that estimated the lifetime cost-effectiveness of EVAR versus OSR: (1) a decision tree for the first 30 post-operative days; and (2) a Markov model for the period thereafter (31 days-30 years). RESULTS: In the base case analysis, EVAR was slightly more effective (4.704 vs. 4.669 quality adjusted life years) and less expensive (€24,483 vs. €25,595) than OSR. Improved effectiveness occurs because EVAR can reduce 30 day mortality risk, as well as the risk of events following the procedure, while lower costs are primarily due to a reduction in length of hospital stay. The cost-effectiveness of EVAR is highly dependent on the price of the EVAR device and the reduction in hospital stay, complications, and 30 day mortality. CONCLUSION: EVAR and OSR can be considered equally effective, while EVAR can be cost saving compared with OSR. EVAR can therefore be considered as a cost-effective solution for patients with AAAs.

Treatment variation in stent choice in patients with stable or unstable coronary artery disease.

AIM: Variations in treatment are the result of differences in demographic and clinical factors (e.g. anatomy), but physician and hospital factors may also contribute to treatment variation. The choice of treatment is considered important since it could lead to differences in long-term outcomes. This study explores the associations with stent choice: i.e. drug-eluting stent (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) for Dutch patients diagnosed with stable or unstable coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS & RESULTS: Associations with treatment decisions were based on a prospective cohort of 692 patients with stable or unstable CAD. Of those patients, 442 patients were treated with BMS or DES. Multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to identify variables associated with stent choice. Bivariate analyses showed that NYHA class, number of diseased vessels, previous percutaneous coronary intervention, smoking, diabetes, and the treating hospital were associated with stent type. After correcting for other associations the treating hospital remained significantly associated with stent type in the stable CAD population. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that several factors were associated with stent choice. While patients generally appear to receive the most optimal stent given their clinical characteristics, stent choice seems partially determined by the treating hospital, which may lead to differences in long-term outcomes.

Cost-Effectiveness of Including a Nurse Specialist in the Treatment of Urinary Incontinence in Primary Care in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: Incontinence is an important health problem. Effectively treating incontinence could lead to important health gains in patients and caregivers. Management of incontinence is currently suboptimal, especially in elderly patients. To optimise the provision of incontinence care a global optimum continence service specification (OCSS) was developed. The current study evaluates the costs and effects of implementing this OCSS for community-dwelling patients older than 65 years with four or more chronic diseases in the Netherlands. METHOD: A decision analytic model was developed comparing the current care pathway for urinary incontinence in the Netherlands with the pathway as described in the OCSS. The new care strategy was operationalised as the appointment of a continence nurse specialist (NS) located with the general practitioner (GP). This was assumed to increase case detection and to include initial assessment and treatment by the NS. The analysis used a societal perspective, including medical costs, containment products (out-of-pocket and paid by insurer), home care, informal care, and implementation costs. RESULTS: With the new care strategy a QALY gain of 0.005 per patient is achieved while saving €402 per patient over a 3 year period from a societal perspective. In interpreting these findings it is important to realise that many patients are undetected, even in the new care situation (36%), or receive care for containment only. In both of these groups no health gains were achieved. CONCLUSION: Implementing the OCSS in the Netherlands by locating a NS in the GP practice is likely to reduce incontinence, improve quality of life, and reduce costs. Furthermore, the study also highlighted that various areas of the continence care process lack data, which would be valuable to collect through the introduction of the NS in a study setting.

Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in Pompe disease.

PURPOSE: Comparative studies between Euroqol-5D (EQ-5D) and ShortForm 6D (SF-6D) utilities have been performed for a number of diseases, but not yet for orphan diseases. Pompe disease is an orphan disease with a prevalence of <5/10,000, characterized by impaired ambulatory and pulmonary functioning. We compared the psychometric properties of EQ-5D and SF-6D in patients with this disease and assessed their convergent validity, discriminative ability and sensitivity to change. METHODS: EQ-5D utilities and SF-6D utilities were computed using the UK value set. Dimensions and utilities of the two instruments were compared by correlation coefficients and descriptive statistics. We assessed whether EQ-5D and SF-6D were able to discriminate between different levels of severity and examined sensitivity to change for patients with multiple observations. RESULTS: Correlations between theoretically related dimensions of the EQ-5D and SF-6D were highly significant and were moderate to strong (range rho = 0.409-0.564). Utility values derived from the two instruments were similar (mean EQ-5D = 0.670; mean SF-6D = 0.699) and correlated strongly (rho = 0.591). Discriminative properties were somewhat better for EQ-5D; mean changes and effect sizes were better for SF-6D. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we conclude that both instruments appear to be equally appropriate with respect to assessing utilities in Pompe disease, but neither of them performed excellently. The descriptive system of the SF-6D describes health states for Pompe disease more accurately. EQ-5D showed better discriminative properties. The SF-6D performed better with respect to sensitivity to change.

Real-world resource use and costs of adjuvant treatment for stage III colon cancer.

Since the generalisability of trial-based economic evaluations may be limited, there is an increasing focus on real-world cost-effectiveness. Real-world studies involve evaluating the effects and costs of treatments in daily clinical practice. This study reports on the real-world resource use and costs of adjuvant treatments of stage III colon cancer in a population-based observational study. Analyses were based on a detailed retrospective medical chart review which was conducted for 206 patients with colon cancer treated in 2005 and 2006 in the Netherlands. Mean total costs per patient were €9681 for 5-FU/LV, €9736 for capecitabine, €32,793 for FOLFOX and €18,361 for CAPOX. Drug costs and the costs related to hospitalisations for chemotherapy administration were the main cost drivers. We identified a potential for substantial cost-savings when the 48 h administration of 5FU/LV in the FOLFOX regimen were to take place in an outpatient setting or be replaced by oral capecitabine as in the CAPOX regimen. This analysis based on detailed real-life data clearly indicates that clinical choices made in oncology based on efficacy of therapy have economic consequences. Considering today's reality of finite healthcare resources, these economic consequences deserve a formal role in clinical decision making, for instance in guideline development.

Is it cost-effective to use a test to decide which individuals with an intermediate cardiovascular disease risk would benefit from statin treatment?

BACKGROUND: The 2012 European guidelines recommend statins for intermediate-risk individuals with elevated cholesterol levels. Improved discrimination of intermediate-risk individuals is needed to prevent both cardiovascular disease (CVD) and statin side-effects (e.g. myopathy) efficiently since only 3-15 in every 100 individuals actually experience a cardiovascular event in the next 10 years. We estimated the potential cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical test which helps to determine which individuals will benefit from statins. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prognosis of different age- and gender-specific cohorts with an intermediate risk was simulated with a Markov model to estimate the potential costs and quality-adjusted life-years for four strategies: treat all with statins, treat none with statins, treat according to the European guidelines, or use a test to select individuals for statin treatment. The test-first strategy dominated the other strategies if the hypothetical test was 100% accurate and cost no more than €237. This strategy and the treat-all strategy were equally effective but the test generated lower costs by reducing statin usage and side-effects. The treat-none strategy was the least effective strategy. Threshold analyses show that the test must be highly accurate (especially sensitive) and inexpensive to be the most cost-effective strategy, since myopathy has a negligible impact on cost-effectiveness and statin costs are low. CONCLUSION: Use of a highly accurate prognostic test could reduce overall CVD risk, frequency of drug side-effects and lifetime costs. However, no additional test would add usefully to risk prediction over SCORE when it does not satisfy the costs and accuracy requirements.

Patient perspective on remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices: rationale and design of the REMOTE-CIED study.

BACKGROUND: Remote patient monitoring is a safe and effective alternative for the in-clinic follow-up of patients with cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). However, evidence on the patient perspective on remote monitoring is scarce and inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of the REMOTE-CIED study is to evaluate the influence of remote patient monitoring versus in-clinic follow-up on patient-reported outcomes. Secondary objectives are to: 1) identify subgroups of patients who may not be satisfied with remote monitoring; and 2) investigate the cost-effectiveness of remote monitoring. METHODS: The REMOTE-CIED study is an international randomised controlled study that will include 900 consecutive heart failure patients implanted with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) compatible with the Boston Scientific LATITUDE® Remote Patient Management system at participating centres in five European countries. Patients will be randomised to remote monitoring or in-clinic follow-up. The In-Clinic group will visit the outpatient clinic every 3-6 months, according to standard practice. The Remote Monitoring group only visits the outpatient clinic at 12 and 24 months post-implantation, other check-ups are performed remotely. Patients are asked to complete questionnaires at five time points during the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: The REMOTE-CIED study will provide insight into the patient perspective on remote monitoring in ICD patients, which could help to support patient-centred care in the future.