The use of cost-effectiveness analysis for health benefit package design - should countries follow a sectoral, incremental or hybrid approach?

BACKGROUND: Countries around the world are increasingly rethinking the design of their health benefit package to achieve universal health coverage. Countries can periodically revise their packages on the basis of sectoral cost-effectiveness analyses, i.e. by evaluating a broad set of services against a 'doing nothing' scenario using a budget constraint. Alternatively, they can use incremental cost-effectiveness analyses, i.e. to evaluate specific services against current practice using a threshold. In addition, countries may employ hybrid approaches which combines elements of sectoral and incremental cost-effectiveness analysis - a country may e.g. not evaluate the comprehensive set of all services but rather relatively small sets of services targeting a certain condition. However, there is little practical guidance for countries as to which kind of approach they should follow. METHODS: The present study was based on expert consultation. We refined the typology of approaches of cost-effectiveness analysis for benefit package design, identified factors that should be considered in the choice of approach, and developed recommendations. We reached consensus among experts over the course of several review rounds. RESULTS: Sectoral cost-effectiveness analysis is especially suited in contexts with large allocative inefficiencies in current service provision and can, in theory, realize large efficiency gains. However, it may be challenging to implement a comprehensive redesign of the package in practice. Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis is especially relevant in contexts where specific new services may impact the sustainability of the health system. It may potentially support efficiency improvement, but its focus has typically been on new services while existing inefficiencies remain unchallenged. The use of hybrid approach may be a way forward to address the strengths and weaknesses of sectoral and incremental analysis areas. Such analysis may be especially useful to target disease areas with suspected high inefficiencies in service provision, and would then make good use of the available research capacity and be politically rewarding. However, disease-specific analyses bear the risk of not addressing resource allocation inefficiencies across disease areas. CONCLUSIONS: Countries should carefully select their approach of cost-effectiveness analyses for benefit package design, based on their decision-making context.

Rituximab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Thailand: an economic evaluation and budget impact analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis is an inflammatory demyelination process in the central nervous system (CNS) causing neurological disability and poor quality of life. Currently, Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved disease-modifying therapy is costly, and most patients with multiple sclerosis are ineligible for treatment in Thailand as previous studies have challenged its cost-effectiveness. Off-label use of rituximab is inexpensive and highly effective in treating multiple sclerosis, but evidence of its cost-effectiveness in Thailand is yet to be collected. METHODS: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility and budget impact of rituximab for multiple sclerosis treatment compared with best supportive care, the standard practice in Thailand to treat the disease. A Markov model with a one-month cycle length and lifetime horizon was applied to compare the costs and outcomes of rituximab and best supportive care based on a societal perspective. Accordingly, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to investigate parameter uncertainty. In addition, the Markov model was used to assess the 5-year budget impact from the government perspective. RESULTS: A rituximab biosimilar demonstrated higher effectiveness and lower associated costs, compared to best supportive care, with the highest probability of being cost-effective (96%). The probability of relapse was the most sensitive parameter according to the one-way sensitivity analysis. The calculated budget impact of treating patients with multiple sclerosis in Thailand was 26,360,000 Thai baht (THB) or 844,255 United States dollars (USD) in the first fiscal year, and approximately 20,810,000-23,080,000 THB (666,608-739,388 USD) in the next four fiscal years. CONCLUSION: In Thailand, a rituximab biosimilar would reduce the overall costs of multiple sclerosis treatment and should, therefore, be included in the National List of Essential Medicines.

A Systematic Review of Demand-Side Methods of Estimating the Societal Monetary Value of Health Gain.

OBJECTIVES: Although many reviews of the literature on cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) exist, the availability of new studies and the absence of a fully comprehensive analysis warrant a new review. This study systematically reviews demand-side methods for estimating the societal monetary value of health gain. METHODS: Several electronic databases were searched from inception to October 2019. To be included, a study had to be an original article in any language, with a clearly described method for estimating the societal monetary values of health gain and with all estimated values reported. Estimates were converted to US dollars ($), using purchasing power parity (PPP) exchange rates and the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (2019). RESULTS: We included 53 studies; 45 used direct approach and 8 used indirect approach. Median estimates from the direct approach were PPP$ 24 942 (range 554-1 301 912) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), which were typically 0.53 (range 0.02-24.08) GDP per capita. Median estimates using the indirect approach were PPP$ 310 051 (range 36 402-7 574 870) per QALY, which accounted for 7.87 (range 0.68-116.95) GDP per capita. CONCLUSIONS: Our review found that the societal values of health gain or CETs were less than GDP per capita. The great variety in methods and estimates suggests that a more standardized and internationally agreed methodology for estimating CET is warranted. Multiple CETs may have a role when QALYs are not equally valued from a societal perspective (eg, QALYs accruing to people near death compared with equivalent QALYs to others).

Safety of Andrographis paniculata: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Andrographis paniculata is one of the commonly used herbal medicines worldwide. Nevertheless, evidences on adverse events (AEs) associated with Andrographis paniculata are very limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to estimate and to compare the AE incidence of oral monotherapy Andrographis paniculata with others among patients with upper respiratory tract infection, noninfective diarrhea, and autoimmune disease. METHODS: Systematic search was performed through six databases from inception until August 2018. Randomized controlled trial (RCT), cohort, or intensive monitoring of AEs was eligible for review if AE incidence was examined. The incidence of AEs was, then, pooled across studies using meta-analysis. RESULTS: Ten RCTs and 3 intensive monitoring studies were included. Incidence of serious AEs was very rare with the pooled incidence (95% CI) from RCTs of 0.02 per 1000 patients (0.0-0.5). However, the incidence of nonserious AEs was considered very common with the pooled incidence (95% CI) from RCTs of 102.6 per 1000 patients (10.7-256.1), and the pooled incidence (95% CI) from intensive monitoring of 34.2 per 1000 patients (0.0-229.6). The most common nonserious AEs were related to gastrointestinal disorder, and skin and subcutaneous disorder system. CONCLUSIONS: Like other medicine, Andrographis paniculata can cause some AEs. However, it may be generally safe. Nevertheless, prospective patients who plan to use Andrographis paniculata should be thoroughly advised and closely monitored for common AEs. Due to the increasing use of Andrographis paniculata worldwide, larger studies with adequate methodological quality are warranted to monitor the safety of such product.

Cost-effectiveness and resource allocation (CERA) 18 years of evolution: maturity of adulthood and promise beyond tomorrow.

Since its inception in 2003, Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation journal has come a long way over the past 18 years. Possibly much longer than many of its contemporaries in the blossoming science of health economics might have anticipated. Today, entering 2020 it celebrates the Age of Maturity. We believe that in the third decade of XXI century the interdisciplinary science of health economics, will rejuvenate and come back to us younger than ever from its early historical roots almost a century ago. The spreading of economic globalization in several distinctive ways, either led by multinational business corporations or newly emerged Asian leadership, or both, is likely to make challenges for contemporary health systems far more serious. The fourth industrial revolution (cyber physical systems and artificial intelligence technology) and accelerated innovation in the field of E-Health and digital health, will probably change the workflow in medical and health care, and inevitably transform the labour market in the upcoming decades. So, let us be up to the task. Let us provide academic centres, industry-sponsored pharmaceutical and medical device innovation hubs, and governing authorities alike, with a powerful forum for debate on cost-effective resource allocation in the years to come.

Cost Utility of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors in the Treatment of Metformin Monotherapy Failed Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and associated ailments are leading economic burdens to society. Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are recent antidiabetic medications with beneficial clinical efficacy. This meta-analysis was conducted to quantitatively pool the incremental net benefit of SGLT2 inhibitors in T2DM patients who failed metformin monotherapy. METHODS: Relevant economic evaluation studies of T2DM patients were identified from PubMed, Scopus, ProQuest, the Cochrane Library, and the Tufts Cost-Effective Analysis Registry until June 2018. Studies were eligible if they studied T2DM patients who failed metformin monotherapy and assessed the cost-effectiveness/utility between SGLT2 inhibitors and other treatments. Details of the study characteristics, economic model inputs, costs, and outcomes were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using the biases in economic studies (ECOBIAS) checklist. The incremental net benefit was calculated with monetary units adjusting for purchasing power parity for 2017 US dollars. This was then pooled across studies stratified by the country's level of income using a random-effect model if heterogeneity was present and with a fixed-effect model otherwise. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Q test and I2 statistic. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies with 22 comparisons, mainly from high-income countries, were eligible. Six and 4 studies compared SGLT2 with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) and sulfonylureas, respectively. The pooled incremental net benefits (95% confidence interval) for these corresponding comparisons were $164.95 (-$534.71 to $864.61; I2 = 0%) and $3675.09 ($1656.46-$5693.71; I2 = 85.4%), respectively. These results indicate that SGLT2s were cost-effective in comparison with sulfonylureas but not DPP4i. CONCLUSION: SGLT2s were cost-effective as compared with sulfonylureas but not DPP4i. Most of the evidence was from high-income countries with few comparative drug groups, and the results might not be representative of the actual global scenario. Further studies from middle and lower economies and other comparators are still required.

Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Support Health Technology Assessment Agencies: Benefits, Limitations, and the Way Forward.

OBJECTIVE: Recent years have witnessed an increased interest in the use of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to support health technology assessment (HTA) agencies for setting healthcare priorities. However, its implementation to date has been criticized for being "entirely mechanistic," ignoring opportunity costs, and not following best practice guidelines. This article provides guidance on the use of MCDA in this context. METHODS: The present study was based on a systematic review and consensus development. We developed a typology of MCDA studies and good implementation practice. We reviewed 36 studies over the period 1990 to 2018 on their compliance with good practice and developed recommendations. We reached consensus among authors over the course of several review rounds. RESULTS: We identified 3 MCDA study types: qualitative MCDA, quantitative MCDA, and MCDA with decision rules. The types perform differently in terms of quality, consistency, and transparency of recommendations on healthcare priorities. We advise HTA agencies to always include a deliberative component. Agencies should, at a minimum, undertake qualitative MCDA. The use of quantitative MCDA has additional benefits but also poses design challenges. MCDA with decision rules, used by HTA agencies in The Netherlands and the United Kingdom and typically referred to as structured deliberation, has the potential to further improve the formulation of recommendations but has not yet been subjected to broad experimentation and evaluation. CONCLUSION: MCDA holds large potential to support HTA agencies in setting healthcare priorities, but its implementation needs to be improved.

Incorporating MCDA into HTA: challenges and potential solutions, with a focus on lower income settings.

BACKGROUND: Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) has the potential to bring more structure and transparency to health technology assessment (HTA). The objective of this paper is to highlight key methodological and practical challenges facing the use of MCDA for HTA, with a particular focus on lower and middle-income countries (LMICs), and to highlight potential solutions to these challenges. METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES: Key lessons from existing applications of MCDA to HTA are summarized, including: that the socio-technical design of the MCDA reflect the local decision problem; the criteria set properties of additive models are understood and applied; and the alternative approaches for estimating opportunity cost, and the challenges with these approaches are understood. PRACTICAL CHALLENGES: Existing efforts to implement HTA in LMICs suggest a number of lessons that can help overcome the practical challenges facing the implementation of MCDA in LMICs, including: adapting inputs from other settings and from expert opinion; investing in technical capacity; embedding the MCDA in the decision-making process; and ensuring that the MCDA design reflects local cultural and social factors. CONCLUSION: MCDA has the potential to improve decision making in LMICs. For this potential to be achieved, it is important that the lessons from existing applications of MCDA are learned.

Budgeting for a billion: applying health technology assessment (HTA) for universal health coverage in India.

BACKGROUND: India recently launched the largest universal health coverage scheme in the world to address the gaps in providing healthcare to its population. Health technology assessment (HTA) has been recognised as a tool for setting priorities as the government seeks to increase public health expenditure. This study aims to understand the current situation for healthcare decision-making in India and deliberate on the opportunities for introducing HTA in the country. METHODS: A paper-based questionnaire, adapted from a survey developed by the International Decision Support Initiative (iDSI), was administered on the second day of the Topic Selection Workshop that was conducted as part of the HTA Awareness Raising Workshop held in New Delhi on 25-27 July, 2016. Participants were invited to respond to questions covering the need, demand and supply for HTA in their context as well as the role of their organisation vis-à-vis HTA. The response rate for the survey was about 68% with 41 participants having completed the survey. RESULTS: Three quarters of the respondents (71%) stated that the government allocated healthcare resources on the basis of expert opinion. Most respondents indicated reimbursement of individual health technologies and designing a basic health benefit package (93% each) were important health policy areas while medical devices and screening programmes were cited as important technologies (98% and 92%, respectively). More than half of the respondents noted that relevant local data was either not available or was limited. Finally, technical capacity was seen as a strength and a constraint facing organisations. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study shed light on the current situation, the opportunities, including potential topics, and challenges in conducting HTA in India. There are limitations to the study and further studies may need to be conducted to inform the role that HTA will play in the design or implementation of universal health coverage in India.

Development of a Health Screening Package Under the Universal Health Coverage: The Role of Health Technology Assessment.

This study reports the systematic development of a population-based health screening package for all Thai people under the universal health coverage (UHC). To determine major disease areas and health problems for which health screening could mitigate health burden, a consultation process was conducted in a systematic, participatory, and evidence-based manner that involved 41 stakeholders in a half-day workshop. Twelve diseases/health problems were identified during the discussion. Subsequently, health technology assessments, including systematic review and meta-analysis of health benefits as well as economic evaluations and budget impact analyses of corresponding population-based screening interventions, were completed. The results led to advice against elements of current clinical practice, such as annual chest X-rays and particular blood tests (e.g. kidney function test), and indicated that the introduction of certain new population-based health screening programs, such as for chronic hepatitis B, would provide substantial health and economic benefits to the Thais. The final results were presented to a wide group of stakeholders, including decision-makers at the Ministry of Public Health and the public health insurance schemes, to verify and validate the findings and policy recommendations. The package has been endorsed by the Thai UHC Benefit Package Committee for implementation in fiscal year 2016.

Application of HTA research on policy decision-making.

This article provides an overview of the potential uses of health technology assessment (HTA) in health technology or health intervention-related policy decision-making. It summarises the role of HTA in policy planning, health system investment, price negotiation, development of clinical practice guidelines, and communication with health professionals. While the multifaceted nature of HTA means that some aspects of the data can result in conflicting conclusions, the comprehensive approach of HTA is still recommended. To help minimise the potential conflicts within HTA data, a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach is recommended as a way to assess a number of decision criteria simultaneously. A combination of HTA with MCDA allows policy decision-making to be undertaken in an empirically rigorous and rational way. This combination can be used to support policy decision-makers in Thailand and help them prioritise topics for assessment and make informed health benefit package coverage decisions. This approach enhances the legitimacy of policy decisions by increasing the transparency, systematic nature, and inclusiveness of the process.

Cost-utility and budget impact analysis of neoadjuvant dual HER2 targeted therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer in Sri Lanka.

This study aimed to assess the cost-utility and budget impact of dual to single HER2 targeted neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer in Sri Lanka. A five-health state Markov model with lifetime horizon was used to assess the cost-utility of neoadjuvant trastuzumab (T) plus pertuzumab (P) or lapatinib (L) compared to single therapy of T with chemotherapy (C), in public healthcare system and societal perspectives. Input parameters were estimated using local data, network meta-analysis, published reports and literature. Costs were adjusted to year 2021 (1USD = LKR194.78). Five-year budget impact for public healthcare system was assessed. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in societal perspective for neoadjuvantLTC plus adjuvantT (strategy 3), neoadjuvantPTC plus adjuvantT (strategy 2), neoadjuvantLTC plus adjuvantLT (strategy 5), and neoadjuvantPTC plus adjuvantPT (strategy 4) compared to neoadjuvantTC plus adjuvantT (strategy 1) were USD2716, USD5600, USD6878, and USD12127 per QALY gained, respectively. One GDP per-capita (USD3815) was considered as the cost-effectiveness threshold for the analysis. Even though only the ICER for strategy 3 was cost-effective, uncertainty of efficacy parameter was revealed. For strategy 2 neoadjuvant PTC plus adjuvant T, a 25% reduction of neoadjuvant regimen cost was required to be cost effective for use in early HER2 positive breast cancer.

Treatment seeking experiences of ACS patients in Yogyakarta, Indonesia during COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study.

Delay in treatment seeking is recognized as a major contributor for Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) mortality in Indonesia. Despite the significance of timely treatment, decline in admission and delay in presentation of patients with ACS were consistently reported during the COVID-19 pandemic. These suggested that treatment seeking performance of patients during the pandemic might be different from the previous period. This qualitative study aimed to explore treatment seeking behaviour, barriers in seeking medical treatment, and experiences of patients with ACS in Yogyakarta, Indonesia during COVID-19 pandemic. In depth-interviews were carried out with 30 patients, who were hospitalized with ACS at one of the three selected hospitals in Yogyakarta during the pandemic period. Thematic analysis was performed to create vital explanations for treatment seeking practices of patients with ACS during pandemic. Three significant themes were identified: treatment seeking decisions, barriers in seeking medical treatment during COVID-19, and experiencing both good and bad impression from entering and staying in the hospital. The intensity of ACS symptoms and fear of COVID-19 infection dominated the delay in seeking medical treatment. Strict safety measures, religious belief, and fear of ACS helped patients overcome barriers and seek medical treatment during pandemic. ACS patients also had convenient medical care during the pandemic and believed medical staff would provide excellent care to them. However, visit restriction policy could cause psychological discomfort. Increase awareness of ACS symptoms and the risk of delays ACS treatment are essential to support patients' decisions to seek medical helps in a timely manner at any situations including pandemic. Interventions aim at alleviating psychological distress should also be designed and implemented to improve treatment experiences of ACS patients, who sought medical treatment during the pandemic crisis.

Economic evaluation of diagnosis and treatment for latent tuberculosis infection among contacts of pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Thailand.

Currently, interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) is costly and not included as latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) screening test strategy in Thailand's Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) benefit package. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-utility of LTBI screening strategies among tuberculosis (TB) contacts in Thailand. A hybrid decision tree and Markov model was developed to compare the lifetime costs and health outcomes of tuberculin skin test (TST) and IGRA, in comparison to no screening, based on a societal perspective. Health outcomes were the total number of TB cases averted and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with results presented as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore uncertainties in all parameters. The ICER of TST compared with no screening was 27,645 baht per QALY gained, while that of IGRA compared to TST was 851,030 baht per QALY gained. In a cohort of 1000 TB contacts, both TST and IGRA strategies could avert 282 and 283 TB cases, respectively. At the Thai societal willingness-to-pay threshold of 160,000 baht per QALY gained, TST was deemed cost-effective, whereas IGRA would not be cost-effective, unless the cost of IGRA was reduced to 1,434 baht per test.

Systematic review of the impact of health care expenditure on health outcome measures: implications for cost-effectiveness thresholds.

OBJECTIVE: Empirical estimates of the impact of healthcare expenditure on health outcome measures may inform the cost-effectiveness threshold (CET) for guiding funding decisions. This study aims to systematically review studies that estimated this, summarize and compare the estimates by country income level. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, York Research database, and [anonymized] for Reviews and Dissemination database from inception to 1 August 2023. For inclusion, a study had to be an original article, estimating the impact of healthcare expenditure on health outcome measures at a country level, and presented estimates, in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) or disability-adjusted life year (DALY). RESULTS: We included 18 studies with 385 estimates. The median (range) estimates were PPP$ 11,224 (PPP$ 223 - PPP$ 288,816) per QALY gained and PPP$ 5,963 (PPP$ 71 - PPP$ 165,629) per DALY averted. As ratios of Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDPPC), these estimates were 0.376 (0.041-182.840) and 0.318 (0.004-37.315) times of GDPPC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The commonly used CET of GDPPC seems to be too high for all countries, but especially low-to-middle-income countries where the potential health losses from misallocation of the same money are greater. REGISTRATION: The review protocol was published and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020147276).

Catastrophic costs incurred by tuberculosis affected households from Thailand's first national tuberculosis patient cost survey.

Tuberculosis (TB) causes an economic impact on the patients and their households. Although Thailand has expanded the national health benefit package for TB treatment, there was no data on out-of-pocket payments and income losses due to TB from patients and their household perspectives. This national TB patient cost survey was conducted to examine the TB-related economic burden, and assess the proportion of TB patients and their households facing catastrophic total costs because of TB disease. A cross-sectional TB patient cost survey was employed following WHO methods. Structured interviews with a paper-based questionnaire were conducted from October 2019 to July 2021. Both direct and indirect costs incurred from the patient and their household perspective were valued in 2021 and estimated throughout pre- and post-TB diagnosis episodes. We assessed the proportion of TB-affected households facing costs > 20% of household expenditure due to TB. We analyzed 1400 patients including 1382 TB (first-line treatment) and 18 drug-resistant TB patients (DR-TB). The mean total costs per TB episode for all study participants were 903 USD (95% confident interval; CI 771-1034 USD). Of these, total direct non-medical costs were the highest costs (mean, 402 USD, and 95%CI 334-470 USD) incurred per TB-affected household followed by total indirect costs (mean, 393 USD, and 95%CI 315-472 USD) and total direct medical costs (mean, 107 USD, and 95%CI 81-133 USD, respectively. The proportion of TB-affected households facing catastrophic costs was 29.5% (95%CI 25.1-34.0%) for TB (first-line), 61.1% (95%CI 29.6-88.1%) for DR-TB and 29.9% (95%CI 25.6-34.4%) overall. This first national survey highlighted the economic burden on TB-affected households. Travel, food/nutritional supplementation, and indirect costs contribute to a high proportion of catastrophic total costs. These suggest the need to enhance financial and social protection mechanisms to mitigate the financial burden of TB-affected households.

Economic costs of alcohol consumption in Thailand, 2021.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol is one of the leading risk factors contributing to avoidable economic loss worldwide. Estimates from the economic cost of alcohol consumption studies play an important role in prioritizing healthcare resource use, supporting policy decisions, and justifying budgets for alcohol policy. This study aimed to estimate the economic burden associated with alcohol consumption in Thailand in 2021. METHODS: Prevalence-based cost of illness methodology was employed. The following costs were included in the analysis: healthcare costs; cost of law enforcement; cost of property damage due to road traffic accidents; cost of premature mortality; and cost of absenteeism from out-patient hospital visits and hospitalization. Human capital approach was adopted. All costs were presented in Thai baht, 2021. RESULTS: Alcohol consumption incurred a total estimated economic cost of 165,450.5 million baht, equivalent to 1.02% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 2500 baht per capita. Cost of premature mortality was estimated at 157,918.7 million baht and accounted for the largest proportion of the total cost (95.45%). Healthcare cost was found to be the second highest share representing 4370.1 million baht (2.7% of the total cost). The number of premature death attributable to alcohol consumption in 2021 was estimated at 22,804. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol continues to impose a substantial economic burden in Thailand. Enforcement of existing well-formulated alcohol control policies is urgently required to mitigate the economic impact of alcohol consumption in the country.

Thai stakeholders' awareness and perceptions of the patient adverse event reporting system for herbal medicines: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: In Thailand, the consumption of herbal medicines has been increasing. Adverse events (AEs) of herbal medicines have been identified through the spontaneous reporting system. However, the number of patients reporting AEs of herbal medicines remains limited. AIM: To explore the awareness and perceptions about the patient reporting system and to explore attitudes towards safety of herbal medicines, experiences, and intention to report AEs of herbal medicines. METHOD: Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with stakeholders (patients, community pharmacists, village health volunteers, and consumers who had experienced submitting a complaint about health products to the Consumers Foundation). Additionally, a focus group discussion was held with stakeholders (academics, herbal medicine manufacturers, healthcare professionals, policy maker who was responsible for promoting the use of herbal medicines, pharmacovigilance staff, patient, and representative from patient organisations). The data were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifty participants were interviewed and the focus group discussion included 12 participants. Patients had positive attitudes towards the safety of herbal medicines. Lack of awareness of the patient reporting system was identified. Nevertheless, all stakeholders acknowledged the importance of the safety monitoring of herbal medicines and indicated a willingness to report AEs via the patient reporting system in the future. A simple reporting system, a variety of reporting channels, the provision of feedback, and providing rewards would motivate patients to report AEs. CONCLUSION: Although there is a lack of awareness, this provides a great opportunity to improve patient AE reporting system for herbal medicines in Thailand.

Efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibody therapy in patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Introduction: Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is a devastating inflammatory CNS demyelinating disease. Two groups of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are used to prevent disease relapse, i.e., Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved mAbs (e.g., eculizumab satralizumab, inebilizumab), and off-label mAb drugs (e.g., rituximab and tocilizumab). The FDA-approved mAbs have high efficacy but more expensive compared to the off-labels, and thus are less accessible. This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to assess the efficacy and safety of both classes of mAbs compared to the current standard treatments. Methods: Systematically searches were conducted in MEDLINE and SCOPUS from inception until July 2021. Randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible if they compared any pair of treatments (mAbs, immunosuppressive drugs, or placebo) in adult patients with NMOSD. Studies with AQP4-IgG positive or negative were used in the analysis. Probability of relapse and time to event were extracted from the Kaplan-Meier curves using Digitizer. These data were then converted into individual patient time-to-event data. A one-stage mixed-effect survival model was applied to estimate the median time to relapse and relative treatment effects using hazard ratios (HR). Two-stage NMA was used to determine post-treatment annualized relapse rate (ARR), expanded disability status score (EDSS) change, and serious adverse events (SAE). Risk of bias was assessed using the revised cochrane risk of bias tool. Results: A total of 7 RCTs with 776 patients were eligible in the NMA. Five of the seven studies were rated low risk of bias. Both FDA-approved and off-label mAbs showed significantly lower risk of relapse than standard treatments, with HR (95% CI) of 0.13 (0.07, 0.24) and 0.16 (0.07, 0.37) respectively. In addition, the FDA-approved mAbs had 20% lower risk of relapse than the off-label mAbs, but this did not reach statistical significance. The ARRs were also lower in FDA-approved and off-label mAbs than the standard treatments with the mean-difference of-0.27 (-0.37,-0.16) and-0.31(-0.46,-0.16), respectively. Conclusion: The off-label mAbs may be used as the first-line treatment for improving clinical outcomes including disease relapse, ARR, and SAEs for NMOSD in countries where resources and accessibility of the FDA-approved mAbs are limited. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=283424, identifier: CRD42021283424.

Efficacy of anti-tuberculosis drugs for the treatment of latent tuberculosis infection: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Despite the availability of three network meta-analyses (NMA) examining the efficacy, treatment completion, and adverse events associated with all latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) treatments, there is currently no evidence to support the notion that the benefits of these treatments outweigh the potential risks. This NMA aimed to conduct a comprehensive comparison and update of the efficacy, treatment completion rates and adverse events associated with recommended treatment options for LTBI for individuals with confirmed LTBI, as outlined in the 2020 World Health Organization (WHO) Consolidated Guidelines for TB preventive treatment. A comprehensive search of the MEDLINE and Scopus databases was conducted until April 2023. The NMA was applied to estimate the risk difference and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using a combination of direct and indirect evidence. The risk-benefit assessment was employed to evaluate the feasibility of the extra benefits in relation to the extra risks. The primary outcomes of interest in this study were active TB disease, completion rates, and adverse events. The meta-analysis incorporated data from 15 studies, which collectively demonstrated that the administration of a placebo resulted in a significant increase in the risk of developing TB disease by 1.279%, compared to the daily intake of isoniazid for 6 months (6H). Furthermore, treatment completion rates were significantly higher when using isoniazid plus rifapentine weekly for 3 months (3HP) and rifampicin daily for 4 months (4R), as compared to 6H. Considering adverse events, the combination of 3HP, 4R, and isoniazid administered daily for 9 months (referred to as 9H) significantly decreased adverse events by 4.53% in comparison to 6H. The risk-benefit assessment showed that alternative treatment regimens (9H, 4R, 3HR and 3HP) had a lower incidence of adverse events, while demonstrating a higher efficacy in preventing TB, as compared to 6H. This review indicates that there were no significant differences observed among various active treatment options in terms of their efficacy in preventing active TB. Moreover, completion rates were higher in 3HP and 4R, and a reduction in adverse events was observed in 3HP, 4R, and 9H.