RESUMO
Background: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is recommended for most individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF), including those who are frail. Based on previous literature, those who are frail may be less likely to be prescribed OAC, and up to one-third may receive an inappropriate dose if prescribed a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). The objectives of this study were to determine the proportion of frail ambulatory older adults with AF who are prescribed OAC, compare the rates of OAC use across the frailty spectrum, assess the appropriateness of DOAC dosing, and identify if frailty and geriatric syndromes impact OAC prescribing patterns. Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional review of individuals with AF referred to an ambulatory clinic for older adults living with frailty and/or geriatric syndromes. Rockwood clinical frailty score of ≥4 was used to define frailty and DOAC appropriateness was assessed based on the Canadian Cardiovascular Society AF guidelines. Results: Two hundred and ten participants were included. The mean age was 84 years, 49% were female and the median frailty score was 5. Of the 185 participants who were frail, 82% were prescribed an OAC (83% with frailty score of 4, 85% with a frailty score of 5, and 78% with a frailty score of 6). Of those prescribed a DOAC, 70% received a guideline-approved dose. Conclusions: Over 80% of ambulatory older adults with frailty and AF were prescribed an OAC. However, of those prescribed a DOAC, 30% received an unapproved dose, suggesting more emphasis should be placed on initial and ongoing dosage selection.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to summarize all available evidence on the cost effectiveness of potentially curative gene therapies and identify challenges that economic evaluations face in this area. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of four databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, EconLit) and grey literature sources. We conducted the search on August 23, 2019 and updated it on November 26, 2020. We included all English, French and Spanish language studies that addressed a gene therapy that had received regulatory approval or had entered a phase III trial, and also reported on costs related to the therapy. Critical appraisal was conducted to assess quality of reporting in included studies. RESULTS: Fifty-six studies were identified. Of the 42 full economic evaluations, 71% (n = 30) evaluated chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies, most used either a Markov model (n = 17, 40%) and/or a partitioned survival model (n = 17, 40%), and 76% (n = 32) adopted a public or private payer perspective. The model characteristics with the greatest impact on cost effectiveness included assumptions about the efficacy of the treatment and the comparators used. CONCLUSION: All gene therapies in this review were shown to be more effective than their comparators, although due to high costs not all were considered cost effective at standard cost-effectiveness thresholds. Despite their high cost, some gene therapies have the potential to dominate the alternatives in conditions with high mortality/disability. The choice of comparator and assumptions regarding long-term effectiveness had substantial impacts on cost-effectiveness estimates and need to be carefully considered. Both the quality of inputs and the quality of reporting were highly variable.
