The 2017 Women's Health Initiative study and use of hormone therapy: an emulated repeated cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Hormone therapy (HT) use among menopausal women declined after negative information from the 2002 Women's Health Initiative (WHI) HT study. The 2017 post-intervention follow-up WHI study revealed that HT did not increase long-term mortality. However, studies on the effects of the updated WHI findings are lacking. Thus, we assessed the impact of the 2017 WHI findings on HT use in Taiwan. METHODS: We identified 1,869,050 women aged 50-60 years, between June and December 2017, from health insurance claims data to compare HT use in the 3 months preceding and following September 2017. To address the limitations associated with interval-censored data, we employed an emulated repeated cross-sectional design. Using logistic regression analysis, we evaluated the impact of the 2017 WHI study on menopausal symptom-related outpatient visits and HT use. In a scenario analysis, we examined the impact of the 2002 trial on HT use to validate our study design. RESULTS: Study participants' baseline characteristics before and after the 2017 WHI study were not significantly different. Logistic regressions demonstrated that the 2017 study had no significant effect on outpatient visits for menopause-related symptoms or HT use among women with outpatient visits. The scenario analysis confirmed the negative impact of the 2002 WHI trial on HT use. CONCLUSIONS: The 2017 WHI study did not demonstrate any impact on either menopause-related outpatient visits or HT use among middle-aged women in Taiwan. Our emulated cross-sectional study design may be employed in similar population-based policy intervention studies using interval-censored data.

Cost-effectiveness of ivosidenib versus chemotherapy for previously treated IDH1-mutant advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend ivosidenib followed by modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX) for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations. Taiwan National Health Insurance covers only fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) chemotherapy for this ICC group, and there has been no prior economic evaluation of ivosidenib. Therefore, we aimed to assess ivosidenib's cost-effectiveness in previously treated, advanced ICC-presenting IDH1 mutations compared with mFOLFOX or 5-FU/LV. METHODS: A 3-state partitioned survival model was employed to assess ivosidenib's cost-effectiveness over a 10-year horizon with a 3% discount rate, setting the willingness-to-pay threshold at 3 times the 2022 GDP per capita. Efficacy data for Ivosidenib, mFOLFOX, and 5-FU/LV were sourced from the ClarIDHy, ABC06, and NIFTY trials, respectively. Ivosidenib's cost was assumed to be NT$10,402/500 mg. Primary outcomes included incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and net monetary benefit. Deterministic sensitivity analyses (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were employed to evaluate uncertainty and explore price reduction scenarios. RESULTS: Ivosidenib exhibited ICERs of NT$6,268,528 and NT$5,670,555 compared with mFOLFOX and 5-FU/LV, respectively, both exceeding the established threshold. PSA revealed that ivosidenib was unlikely to be cost-effective, except when it was reduced to NT$4,161 and NT$5,201/500 mg when compared with mFOLFOX and 5-FU/LV, respectively. DSA underscored the significant influence of ivosidenib's cost and utility values on estimate uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: At NT$10,402/500 mg, ivosidenib was not cost-effective for IDH1-mutant ICC patients compared with mFOLFOX or 5-FU/LV, indicating that a 50-60% price reduction is necessary for ivosidenib to be cost-effective in this patient group.