Commentary: Value of information case study strongly supports use of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC).

A Value of Information (VOI) analysis can play a key role in decision-making for adopting new approach methodologies (NAMs). We applied EPA's recently developed VOI framework to the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC). Obtaining/deriving a TTC value for use as a toxicity reference value (TRV) for substances with limited toxicity data was shown to provide equivalent or greater health protection, immense return on investment (ROI), greater net benefit, and substantially lower costs of delay (CoD) compared with TRVs derived from either traditional human health assessment (THHA) chronic toxicity testing in lab animals or the 5-day in vivo EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Product (ETAP). For all nine exposure scenarios examined, the TTC was more economical terms of CoD and ROI than the ETAP or the THHA; expected net benefit was similar for the TTC and ETAP with both of these more economical than the THHA The TTC ROI was immensely greater (5,000,000-fold on average) than the ROI for THHA and the ETAP ROI (100,000-fold on average). These results support the use of the TTC for substances within its domain of applicability to waive requiring certain in vivo tests, or at a minimum, as an initial screening step before conducting either the ETAP or THHA in vivo studies.

Value of Information Analytical Methods: Report 2 of the ISPOR Value of Information Analysis Emerging Good Practices Task Force.

The allocation of healthcare resources among competing priorities requires an assessment of the expected costs and health effects of investing resources in the activities and of the opportunity cost of the expenditure. To date, much effort has been devoted to assessing the expected costs and health effects, but there remains an important need to also reflect the consequences of uncertainty in resource allocation decisions and the value of further research to reduce uncertainty. Decision making with uncertainty may turn out to be suboptimal, resulting in health loss. Consequently, there may be value in reducing uncertainty, through the collection of new evidence, to better inform resource decisions. This value can be quantified using value of information (VOI) analysis. This report from the ISPOR VOI Task Force describes methods for computing 4 VOI measures: the expected value of perfect information, expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI), expected value of sample information (EVSI), and expected net benefit of sampling (ENBS). Several methods exist for computing EVPPI and EVSI, and this report provides guidance on selecting the most appropriate method based on the features of the decision problem. The report provides a number of recommendations for good practice when planning, undertaking, or reviewing VOI analyses. The software needed to compute VOI is discussed, and areas for future research are highlighted.

Diversity in the incidence and spectrum of organic acidemias, fatty acid oxidation disorders, and amino acid disorders in Asian countries: Selective screening vs. expanded newborn screening.

BACKGROUND: Expanded newborn screening (ENBS) utilizing tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) for inborn metabolic diseases (IMDs), such as organic acidemias (OAs), fatty acid oxidation disorders, (FAODs), and amino acid disorders (AAs), is increasingly popular but has not yet been introduced in many Asian countries. This study aimed to determine the incidence rates of OAs, FAODs, and AAs in Asian countries and Germany using selective screening and ENBS records. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Selective screening for IMDs using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and MS/MS was performed among patients suspected to be afflicted in Asian countries (including Japan, Vietnam, China, and India) between 2000 and 2015, and the results from different countries were compared. Similarly, ENBS results from Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Germany were compared. Additionally, the results of selective screening and ENBS in Japan were compared. RESULTS: Among 39,270 patients who underwent selective screening, IMDs were detected in 1170. Methylmalonic acidemia was frequently identified in several countries, including Japan (81/377 diagnosed IMDs), China (94/216 IMDs), and India (72/293 IMDs). In Vietnam, however, ß-ketothiolase deficiency was particularly frequent (33/250 IMDs). ENBS yielded differences in overall IMD rates by country: 1:8557 in Japan, 1:7030 in Taiwan, 1:13,205 in South Korea, and 1:2200 in Germany. Frequently discovered diseases included propionic acidemia (PPA) and phenylketonuria (PKU) in Japan, 3-methylcrotonyl-CoA carboxylase deficiency (MCCD) and PKU in Taiwan, MCCD and citrullinemia type I in South Korea, and PKU and medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency in Germany. Furthermore, in Japan, selective screening and ENBS yielded respective PPA frequencies of 14.7% and 49.4% among all organic acidemias. CONCLUSION: The incidence rates of IMDs vary by country. Moreover, the disease spectra of IMDs detected via selective screening differ from those detected via ENBS.

When is enough evidence enough? - Using systematic decision analysis and value-of-information analysis to determine the need for further evidence.

Decision analysis (DA) and value-of-information (VOI) analysis provide a systematic, quantitative methodological framework that explicitly considers the uncertainty surrounding the currently available evidence to guide healthcare decisions. In medical decision making under uncertainty, there are two fundamental questions: 1) What decision should be made now given the best available evidence (and its uncertainty)?; 2) Subsequent to the current decision and given the magnitude of the remaining uncertainty, should we gather further evidence (i.e., perform additional studies), and if yes, which studies should be undertaken (e.g., efficacy, side effects, quality of life, costs), and what sample sizes are needed? Using the currently best available evidence, VoI analysis focuses on the likelihood of making a wrong decision if the new intervention is adopted. The value of performing further studies and gathering additional evidence is based on the extent to which the additional information will reduce this uncertainty. A quantitative framework allows for the valuation of the additional information that is generated by further research, and considers the decision maker's objectives and resource constraints. Claxton et al. summarise: "Value of information analysis can be used to inform a range of policy questions including whether a new technology should be approved based on existing evidence, whether it should be approved but additional research conducted or whether approval should be withheld until the additional evidence becomes available." [Claxton K. Value of information entry in Encyclopaedia of Health Economics, Elsevier, forthcoming 2014.] The purpose of this tutorial is to introduce the framework of systematic VoI analysis to guide further research. In our tutorial article, we explain the theoretical foundations and practical methods of decision analysis and value-of-information analysis. To illustrate, we use a simple case example of a foot ulcer (e.g., with diabetes) as well as key references from the literature, including examples for the use of the decision-analytic VoI framework by health technology assessment agencies to guide further research. These concepts may guide stakeholders involved or interested in how to determine whether or not and, if so, which additional evidence is needed to make decisions.