The Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Cryoablation vs First-Line Antiarrhythmic Drugs in Canadian Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The EARLY-AF (NCT02825979), STOP AF First (NCT03118518), and Cryo-FIRST (NCT01803438) randomised controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated that cryoballoon pulmonary vein isolation reduces atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence compared with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). The present study developed a cost-effectiveness model (CEM) of first-line cryoablation compared with first-line AADs for PAF, from the Canadian health care payer's perspective. METHODS: Data from the 3 RCTs were analysed to estimate key CEM parameters. The model structure used a decision tree for the first 12 months and a Markov model with a 3-month cycle length for the remaining lifetime time horizon. Costs were set at 2023 Canadian dollars, health benefits were expressed as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and both were discounted 3% annually. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) considered parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: The statistical analysis estimated that first-line cryoablation generates a 47% reduction (P < 0.001) in the rate of AF recurrence, a 73% reduction in the rate of subsequent ablation (P < 0.001), and a 4.3% (P = 0.025) increase in health-related quality of life, compared with first-line AADs. The PSA indicates that an individual treated with first-line cryoablation accrues less costs (-$3,862) and more QALYs (0.19) compared with first-line AADs. Cryoablation is cost-saving in 98.4% of PSA iterations and has a 99.9% probability of being cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained. Cost-effectiveness results were robust to changes in key model parameters. CONCLUSIONS: First-line cryoballoon ablation is cost-effective when compared with AADs for patients with symptomatic PAF.

Economic evaluation of first-line cryoballoon ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation from an English National Health Service perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Three recent randomised controlled trials have demonstrated that pulmonary vein isolation as an initial rhythm control strategy with cryoablation reduces atrial arrhythmia recurrence in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) compared with antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line cryoablation compared with first-line AADs for treating symptomatic PAF in an English National Health Service (NHS) setting. METHODS: Individual patient-level data from 703 participants with PAF enrolled into Cryo-FIRST (Catheter Cryoablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug as First-Line Therapy of Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation), STOP AF First (Cryoballoon Catheter Ablation in an Antiarrhythmic Drug Naive Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation) and EARLY-AF (Early Aggressive Invasive Intervention for Atrial Fibrillation) were used to derive the parameters applied in the cost-effectiveness model (CEM). The CEM comprised a hybrid decision tree and Markov structure. The decision tree had a 1-year time horizon and was used to inform the initial health state allocation in the first cycle of the Markov model (40-year time horizon; 3-month cycle length). Health benefits were expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per year. Model outcomes were generated using probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: The results estimated that cryoablation would yield more QALYs (+0.17) and higher costs (+£641) per patient over a lifetime than AADs. This produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £3783 per QALY gained. Independent of initial treatment, individuals were expected to receive ~1.2 ablations over a lifetime. There was a 45% relative reduction in time spent in AF health states for those initially treated with cryoablation. DISCUSSION: AF rhythm control with first-line cryoablation is cost effective compared with first-line AADs in an English NHS setting.

An Economic Evaluation of a Streamlined Day-Case Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Protocol and Conventional Cryoballoon Ablation versus Antiarrhythmic Drugs in a UK Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Population.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Symptom control for atrial fibrillation can be achieved by catheter ablation or drug therapy. We assessed the cost effectiveness of a novel streamlined atrial fibrillation cryoballoon ablation protocol (AVATAR) compared with optimised antiarrhythmic drug (AAD) therapy and a conventional catheter ablation protocol, from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. METHODS: Data from the AVATAR study were assessed to determine the cost effectiveness of the three protocols in a two-step process. In the first stage, statistical analysis of clinical efficacy outcomes was conducted considering either a three-way comparison (AVATAR vs. conventional ablation vs. optimised AAD therapies) or a two-way comparison (pooled ablation protocol data vs. optimised AAD therapies). In the second stage, models assessed the cost effectiveness of the protocols. Costs and some of the clinical inputs in the models were derived from within-trial cost analysis and published literature. The remaining inputs were derived from clinical experts. RESULTS: No significant differences between the ablation protocols were found for any of the clinical outcomes used in the model. Results of a within-trial cost analysis show that AVATAR is cost-saving (£1279 per patient) compared with the conventional ablation protocol. When compared with optimised AAD therapies, AVATAR (pooled conventional and AVATAR ablation protocols efficacy) was found to be more costly while offering improved clinical benefits. Over a lifetime time horizon, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of AVATAR was estimated as £21,046 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (95% credible interval £7086-£71,718). CONCLUSIONS: The AVATAR streamlined protocol is likely to be a cost-effective option versus both conventional ablation and optimised AAD therapy in the UK NHS healthcare setting.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Antimicrobial Prescribing in the Treatment of Clostridioides Difficile Infection in England.

BACKGROUND: An economic model was developed with guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 'Managing Common Infections' (MCI) Committee to evaluate the cost effectiveness of different antibiotic treatment sequences for treating Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) in England. METHODS: The model consisted of a 90-day decision tree followed by a lifetime cohort Markov model. Efficacy data were taken from a network meta-analysis and published literature, while cost, utility and mortality data were taken from published literature. A treatment sequence was defined as a first-line intervention or a different second-line intervention, and used constant third- and fourth-line interventions. The possible first- and second-line interventions were vancomycin, metronidazole, teicoplanin and fidaxomicin (standard and extended regimens). Total costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated and were used to run a fully incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. Threshold analysis was conducted around pricing. RESULTS: Sequences including teicoplanin, fidaxomicin (extended regimen) and second-line metronidazole were excluded based on recommendations from the committee. The final pairwise comparison was between first-line vancomycin and second-line fidaxomicin (VAN-FID), and the reverse (FID-VAN). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for FID-VAN compared with VAN-FID was £156,000 per QALY gained, and FID-VAN had a 0.2% likelihood of being cost effective at a £20,000 threshold. CONCLUSION: First-line vancomycin and second-line fidaxomicin was the most cost-effective treatment sequence at the NICE threshold for treating CDI in England. The main limitation of this study was that the initial cure and recurrence rates of each intervention were applied constantly across each line of treatment and each round of recurrence.

Transarterial therapies in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma eligible for transarterial embolization: a US cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) and drug-eluting beads chemoembolization (DEE-TACE) for patients with unresectable early- to intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). DESIGN: A cohort-based Markov model with a five-year time horizon was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the three embolization treatments. Upon entering the model, patients with HCC received either TARE or one of the two other embolization treatments. Patients remained in a "watch and wait" state for tumor downstaging that allowed them to move to health states such as liver transplant, resection, systemic therapies, or cure. Clinical input parameters were retrieved from the published literature, and where values could not be sourced, assumptions were made and validated by clinical experts. Health benefits were quantified using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Cost input parameters were obtained from various sources, including the Medicare Cost Report, IBM® Micromedex RED BOOK, and published literature. RESULTS: At five years, TARE was found to be cost-saving (saving $15,779 per person compared to cTACE) and produced 0.33 more QALYs per person than cTACE. TARE cost $13,696 more but produced 0.33 more QALYs than DEE-TACE, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $41,474 per QALY gained at five years. After accounting for parameter uncertainty, the likelihood of TARE being cost-effective was at least 90% against all comparators at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: TARE produces more QALYs than cTACE and DEE-TACE, with a high probability of being cost-effective against both comparators.

The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer guideline recommends the use of transarterial radioembolization (TARE), conventional (cTACE), or drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEE-TACE) for treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of TARE versus two alternative embolization treatments (cTACE and DEE-TACE) in treating patients with unresectable early- to intermediate-stage HCC.A cohort-based Markov model was developed to analyze the costs and benefits of these treatments from a US healthcare perspective within a 5-year time horizon. A 20-year time horizon was assessed as a scenario. In the model, patients were assigned to receive TARE, cTACE, or DEE-TACE and remained in the "watch and wait" stage for tumor downstaging. Data used in the model was taken from previous studies and in consultation with clinical experts. The benefits of the treatments were measured by considering the impact on the patient's quality of life. The costs associated with the treatments were obtained from various sources, including reports, publicly available databases, and published literature.The findings show that TARE is not only cost-saving compared to cTACE but also results in a higher number of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per person. While TARE was more expensive than DEE-TACE, it produced more QALYs, further indicating more favorable patient outcomes and overall treatment effectiveness. These findings could potentially impact resource allocation and decision-making for the treatment of HCC.

I-PreFer Study: A Discrete Choice Experiment to Explore Patient, Caregiver and Pulmonologist Preferences of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Pharmacological Treatment Options.

Purpose: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic, progressive, and ultimately fatal lung disease that, while rare, has seen incidence rise over time. There is no cure for IPF other than a lung transplant, though two antifibrotic (AF) drugs do exist to slow disease progression. While these drugs are efficacious, they are both associated with differing profiles of adverse events. This study aimed to elicit patient, caregiver and pulmonologist preferences on the treatment profiles of AFs via a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Patients and Methods: The DCE and associated survey were distributed across 7 European countries, and bespoke DCEs were developed for patients/caregivers and pulmonologists. After collaboration with European Pulmonary Fibrosis & Related Disorders Federation (EU-PFF) and expert pulmonologists, respectively, a patient/caregiver DCE with 5 attributes and a pulmonologist DCE with 6 attributes were finalized. The DCEs had a blocked approach to reduce participant burden and were distributed on an online survey platform. Preferences were estimated through conditional multinomial logit regression analysis. Results: Ninety-five patients, 22 caregivers and 115 pulmonologists fully completed their respective DCEs. Overall, patients and caregivers preferred management of treatment-related adverse events over both survival benefits and disease progression. Nearly all preference levels were found to be significantly different from their reference level. In contrast, pulmonologists showed a greater preference for control of lung function and exacerbations over adverse events. Although there were relative differences between the univariate subgroups in terms of the preference weights, most of these were not statistically significant. Conclusion: The outcomes from this study suggest that while patients and caregivers had similar preferences for characteristics of IPF treatments, pulmonologists did not share those same preferences. Patients and caregivers preferred safety, while pulmonologists preferred efficacy. These differences should be considered by clinicians to better involve the patient in treatment decision-making for IPF.

I-PreFer Study: A Questionnaire to Explore Patient, Caregiver and Pulmonologist Preferences of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Treatment Options.

Introduction: Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) is a rare disease that causes shortness of breath, dry cough, and tiredness. While there is no cure for IPF, current therapeutic treatments aim to slow lung degeneration while managing side effects. There is little known about patient experience and attitude with regards to their disease and medication. Purpose: To understand the perceptions, behaviors and drivers of treatment decision-making among patients, caregivers and pulmonologists in IPF. Patients and Methods: Online surveys to patients with IPF, caregivers and pulmonologists were developed and administered in Belgium, Finland, France, Greece (pulmonologists only), the Netherlands, Ireland and the United Kingdom between November 2021 and January 2022. Results: A total of 111 patients, 22 caregivers and 140 pulmonologists participated. Half (47%) of patients rated their disease as "severe", while pulmonologists reported that a quarter of their patients had a low Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) (below 50% of the predicted value). Between 21% and 42% of the patients do not take an IPF medication (patients' perception) or antifibrotic (physicians' perception). Pulmonologists reported that a total of 58% of their patients were receiving antifibrotic medication, any IPF medication, while around 53%, 55%, 35% and 73% of the patients limited their exposure (sometimes or often) to the sun due to IPF, considered taking medication against diarrhea, nausea/vomiting and heartburn, respectively. Treatment adherence was relatively high (81%), in line with the caregivers' view and the pulmonologists' expectations. Overall, cultural, clinical or socio-demographic factors impacted patients' perceptions or behaviors. Conclusion: This study shows there is a significant proportion of IPF patients who remain untreated, a misalignment of disease severity between patients and their physicians and patient background impacts behavior. Overall, more in-depth patient-physician communication is needed to improve treatment experience.

An economic evaluation of first-line cryoballoon ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation from a U.S. Medicare perspective.

Background: Three recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that, as an initial rhythm control strategy, first-line cryoballoon ablation (cryoablation) reduces atrial arrhythmia recurrence compared with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). Objective: The study sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line cryoablation compared with first-line AADs for treating symptomatic PAF from a U.S. Medicare payer perspective. Methods: Individual patient-level data from 703 participants with PAF enrolled into the Cryo-FIRST (NCT01803438), STOP AF First (NCT03118518), and EARLY-AF (NCT02825979) trials were used to derive parameters for the cost-effectiveness model. The cost-effectiveness model used a hybrid decision tree and Markov structure. The decision tree had a 1-year time horizon and was used to inform the initial health state allocation in the first cycle of the Markov model. The Markov model used a 40-year time horizon (3-month cycle length). Health benefits were expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs and benefits were discounted at 3% per year. Results: Cryoablation was estimated to yield higher QALYs (+0.17) and higher costs (+$4274) per patient over a 40-year time horizon than AADs. Ultimately, this produced an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $24,637 per QALY gained. Independent of initial treatment, individuals were expected to receive ∼1.2 ablations over a lifetime. There was a 45% relative reduction in time spent in atrial fibrillation health states for those initially treated with cryoablation compared with AADs. Conclusion: Initial rhythm control with first-line cryoballoon ablation is highly cost-effective compared with first-line AADs from a U.S. Medicare payer perspective.