An Investigation of Age-Related Differential Item Functioning in the EQ-5D-5L Using Item Response Theory and Logistic Regression.

OBJECTIVES: In economic evaluations, quality of life is measured using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), such as the EQ-5D-5L. A key assumption for the validity of PROMs data is measurement invariance, which requires that PROM items and response options are interpreted the same across respondents. If measurement invariance is violated, PROMs exhibit differential item functioning (DIF), whereby individuals from different groups with the same underlying health respond differently, potentially biasing scores. One important group of healthcare consumers who have been shown to have different views or priorities over health is older adults. This study investigates age-related DIF in the EQ-5D-5L using item response theory (IRT) and ordinal logistic regression approaches. METHODS: Multiple-group IRT models were used to investigate DIF, by assessing whether older adults aged 65+ years and younger adults aged 18 to 64 years with the same underlying health had different IRT parameter estimates and expected item and EQ-5D-5L level sum scores. Ordinal logistic regression was also used to examine whether DIF resulted in meaningful differences in expected EQ level sum scores. Effect sizes examined whether DIF indicated meaningful score differences. RESULTS: The anxiety/depression item exhibited meaningful DIF in both approaches, with older adults less likely to report problems. Pain/discomfort and mobility exhibited DIF to a lesser extent. CONCLUSIONS: When using the EQ-5D-5L to evaluate interventions and make resource allocation decisions, scoring bias due to DIF should be controlled for to prevent inefficient service provision, where the most cost-effective services are not provided, which could be detrimental to patients and the efficiency of health budgets.

A Qualitative Investigation of Older Adults' Conceptualization of Quality of Life and a Think-Aloud Content Validation of the EQ-5D-5L, SF-12v2, Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale, and Office of National Statistics-4.

OBJECTIVES: Old age is characterized by declining health, comorbidities, and increasing health and social care service use. Traditionally, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the EQ-5D-5L and SF-12v2 have focused on health. Nevertheless, aged care often aims to improve broader elements of quality of life (QoL), captured by well-being measures, such as the Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) and Office of National Statistics-4 (ONS-4). This study investigates older adults' conceptualization of QoL and the content validity of the EQ-5D-5L, SF-12v2, WEMWBS, and ONS-4 in measuring their QoL. METHODS: Qualitative cognitive think-aloud interviews were undertaken with older adults aged 75+, exploring their views on what was important to QoL and, for each measure, the relevance, acceptability, and interpretation of items; suitability of response options; and the comprehensiveness of the measure. Conceptualization of QoL was analyzed thematically and content validity using framework analysis. RESULTS: Twenty interviews were undertaken. Older adults' conceptualization of QoL centered on health, ability to perform usual activities, social contact, and emotional functioning. Possible response shift was observed, as older adults assessed their health relative to lower health expectations at their age or to people in worse states. Participants questioned the relevance of negatively phrased mental items and often preferred the functioning-focused EQ-5D-5L to more subjective ONS-4 and WEMWBS items. Domains suggested to improve comprehensiveness included social contact, coping, security, dignity, and control. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are useful to researchers developing new PROMs for older adults or for the developers of included PROMs considering permanently adapting or bolting-on domains to improve content validity in older adults.

10 Years of End-of-Life Criteria in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: In January 2009, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence introduced supplementary guidance for end-of-life (EoL) treatments, which allowed treatments with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over the regular threshold (£20 000-£30 000) to be recommended, if they satisfied the EoL criteria. The aims of this study were (1) to systematically review 10 years of EoL supplementary guidance implementation and explore how it could be improved, and (2) to create a framework for incorporating the uncertainty relating to EoL criteria satisfaction into model-based cost-effectiveness analyses for decision making. METHODS: All appraisals between January 2009 and 2019 were screened for EoL discussions. Data were extracted on the EoL criteria and cost-effectiveness assessment details. Additionally, a quantitative method was developed to include the EoL criteria satisfaction uncertainty into model-based cost-effectiveness analyses. A stylized example was created to provide a case study for the inclusion of EoL criteria satisfaction uncertainty. RESULTS: An EoL discussion was identified in 35% of appraisals, 57% of which led to a positive EoL decision. Only 5.7% of technologies with positive EoL decisions were not recommended, versus 43.8% of technologies with negative EoL decisions. EoL criteria assessment was often reported insufficiently and evaluated inconsistently and nontransparently. A total of 54.9% of EoL decisions were made while at least 1 criterion was surrounded by considerable uncertainty. By applying the proposed quantitative method, this EoL criteria satisfaction uncertainty was accounted for in decision making. The stylized example demonstrated that the impact of EoL criteria satisfaction uncertainty can be substantial enough to reverse the reimbursement decision. CONCLUSIONS: To improve consistency/transparency and correct reimbursement decisions' likelihood, new guidelines on the implementation of the EoL criteria are needed.

Evaluating prevalence and consequence of residual disease in individuals with psoriasis receiving apremilast treatment: results from a US patient survey.

Purpose: This noninterventional, cross-sectional survey estimated the prevalence and consequences of residual disease in apremilast-treated US adults with moderate to severe psoriasis. Materials and Methods: Residual disease was defined as experiencing moderate, severe, or very severe psoriasis over the past week or having ≥3% body surface area affected, despite treatment. Factors associated with residual disease and its effects on flare-ups, humanistic burden, and health care resource utilization (HCRU) were evaluated. Results: Of the 344 apremilast users (mean age, 44.9 years; female, 65.4%), 174 (50.6%) had residual disease. It was more prevalent in Black versus White participants (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.6-12.2), those receiving apremilast for ≥1 versus <1 year (OR, 16.5; 95% CI, 7.9-34.4), those reporting ≥2 versus 0 to 1 flare-ups during the past 3 months (OR, 10.0; 95% CI, 5.0-20.1), and those with ≥4 versus 1 to 3 body regions affected at time of survey (OR, 8.6; 95% CI, 3.8-19.8). Participants with versus without residual disease self-reported more psoriasis flare-ups over the past 3 months (mean, 4.7 vs 0.9; p < .001) and more anxiety (89.7% vs 50.0%; p < .001) and depression (69.0% vs 23.6%; p < .001) over the past 30 days. Conclusion: Generally, participants with versus without residual disease also had significantly more comorbidities and greater HCRU.

Assessing Response in Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Performance of Measures Used in HTAs and Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Assessing treatment response is key to determining treatment value in atopic dermatitis (AD). Currently, response is assessed using various clinician- or patient-reported measures and response criteria. This variation creates a mismatch of evidence across trials, hindering the ability of clinicians, regulators, and payers to compare the efficacy of treatments. This review identifies which measures and criteria are used to determine response in clinical trials and health technology assessments (HTAs). Moreover, it systematically reviews the psychometric performance of those measures and criteria to understand which perform best in capturing patient-relevant symptoms and treatment benefits. METHODS: A scoping review of clinical trials and HTAs in AD identified the following measures for inclusion: the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), the Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS). A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE and Embase to identify studies testing the psychometric performance of these measures in adults or adolescents with AD. RESULTS: A lack of consistency in the assessment of response was observed across clinical trials and HTAs. Important gaps in psychometric evidence were identified. No content validations of the EASI and IGA in AD were found, while some quantitative studies suggested that these measures fail to capture itch, a core symptom. The PP-NRS and DLQI performed well. No studies compared the performance of different response criteria. CONCLUSION: Content validation of the PP-NRS confirmed the importance of itch as a core symptom and treatment priority in AD; however, itch is not well covered in the EASI or IGA. Including the PP-NRS in clinical trials and HTAs will better capture patient-relevant benefit and response. Although various response criteria were used, no studies compared the performance of different criteria to inform which were most appropriate to compare treatments in clinical trials and HTAs.

The assessment of treatment response is important in determining treatment value in atopic dermatitis (AD). This study aimed to identify which outcome measures and criteria are used to determine treatment response in clinical trials and health technology assessments (HTAs). The psychometric performance of identified outcome measures and criteria was then systematically reviewed to understand which perform best in capturing patient-relevant symptoms and treatment benefits in AD. The review identified and included the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) as response measures. Lack of consistency in how response is assessed across clinical trials and HTAs makes it difficult for clinicians and payers to compare the efficacies and cost-effectivenesses of different treatments and to make optimal treatment decisions. The review found that content validity (the extent to which a measure covers those symptoms and treatment benefits which are important to patients) was not assessed for EASI and IGA. EASI and IGA are often used to assess response in clinical trials and HTAs, but they miss key elements of the patient-relevant disease impact and treatment benefit, including itch. Treatments leading to improvements in missed symptoms (e.g. itch) will be undervalued using EASI and IGA, decreasing the chances of regulatory approval and reimbursement. Moreover, response criteria used in clinical trials and HTAs are sometimes adopted in prescriber settings. Here, if response assessment does not capture patient-relevant benefit, patients' access to tailored treatment may be restricted due to the perceived non-response.

Health-related quality of life and productivity costs in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen in the Netherlands.

The aim of this study was to describe health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and productivity in Dutch breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen in an adjuvant setting. Patients who started treatment with a standard dose of tamoxifen and who gave written informed consent, were eligible for participation in this trial. A total of 145 patients were asked to complete a survey at 3 months (T1) and 6 months (T2) after initiation of tamoxifen. HRQoL was measured by the EQ-5D-5L and the FACT-B questionnaire, and productivity by using the iMTA Productivity Costs Questionnaire. At 3 months 137 (95%) and at 6 months 133 (92%) patients responded to the surveys. EQ-5D-5 L utility values for T1 and T2 were 0.81 ± 0.17 and 0.81 ± 0.18, respectively. FACT-B scores for T1 and T2 were 109 ± 17.9 and 108 ± 20.0, respectively. No differences in both EQ-5D-5 L utility and FACT-B scores were found between T1 and T2 (p > 0.05). Age and employment status were statistically significantly associated with FACT-B scores (p = 0.04 and p = 0.03, respectively), indicating that younger and unemployed respondents had lower FACT-B scores. Importantly, both short-term and long-term productivity improved during the first six months of tamoxifen treatment (p < 0.05). Here, short-term productivity losses (consisting of absenteeism, presenteeism and unpaid work) for T1 and T2 were estimated at € 855,- and € 396,-, respectively. Long-term productivity losses (consisting of absenteeism) for T1 and T2 were estimated at € 2876,- and € 1104,-, respectively. In conclusion, this study presents HRQoL scores using different instruments and detailed loss of productivity estimates for breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy. The results presented here can be used to inform input parameters in health economic evaluations of interventions for patients with breast cancer in the Netherlands and other Western countries and ultimately support decision making.

Regulatory and HTA early dialogues in medical devices.

INTRODUCTION: Specific guidance and examples for health technology assessment (HTA) of medical devices are scarce in medical device development. A more intense dialogue of competent authorities, HTA agencies, and manufactures may improve evidence base on clinical and cost-effectiveness. Especially as the new Medical Device Regulation requires more clinical evidence. METHODS: We explore the perceptions of manufacturers, competent authorities, and HTA agencies towards such dialogues and investigate how they should be designed to accelerate the translational process from development to patient access using semi-structured interviews. We synthesized the evidence from manufacturers, competent authorities, and HTA agencies from 14 different jurisdictions across Europe. RESULTS: Eleven HTA agencies, four competent authorities, and eight manufacturers of high-risk devices expressed perceptions on the current situation and the expected development of three types of early dialogues. DISCUSSION: The MDR has to be taken into account when designing the early dialogue processes. Transferring insights from medicinal product regulation is limited as the regulatory pathways differ substantially. CONCLUSION: Early dialogues promise to accelerate the translational process and to provide faster access to innovative medical devices. However, health policy-makers should promote and fully establish regulatory and HTA early dialogues before introducing parallel early dialogues of regulatory, HTA agencies, and manufacturers. For initiating change, the legislator must create the legal basis and set the appropriate incentives for manufacturers.

Avatrombopag and lusutrombopag for thrombocytopenia in people with chronic liver disease needing an elective procedure: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: There have been no licensed treatment options in the UK for treating thrombocytopenia in people with chronic liver disease requiring surgery. Established management largely involves platelet transfusion prior to the procedure or as rescue therapy for bleeding due to the procedure. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two thrombopoietin receptor agonists, avatrombopag (Doptelet®; Dova Pharmaceuticals, Durham, NC, USA) and lusutrombopag (Mulpleta®; Shionogi Inc., London, UK), in addition to established clinical management compared with established clinical management (no thrombopoietin receptor agonist) in the licensed populations. DESIGN: Systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: Secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: Severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count of < 50,000/µl) in people with chronic liver disease requiring surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Lusutrombopag 3 mg and avatrombopag (60 mg if the baseline platelet count is < 40,000/µl and 40 mg if it is 40,000-< 50,000/µl). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk of platelet transfusion and rescue therapy or risk of rescue therapy only. REVIEW METHODS: Systematic review including meta-analysis. English-language and non-English-language articles were obtained from several databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, all searched from inception to 29 May 2019. ECONOMIC EVALUATION: Model-based cost-effectiveness analysis. RESULTS: From a comprehensive search retrieving 11,305 records, six studies were included. Analysis showed that avatrombopag and lusutrombopag were superior to no thrombopoietin receptor agonist in avoiding both platelet transfusion and rescue therapy or rescue therapy only, and mostly with a statistically significant difference (i.e. 95% confidence intervals not overlapping the point of no difference). However, only avatrombopag seemed to be superior to no thrombopoietin receptor agonist in reducing the risk of rescue therapy, although far fewer patients in the lusutrombopag trials than in the avatrombopag trials received rescue therapy. When assessing the cost-effectiveness of lusutrombopag and avatrombopag, it was found that, despite the success of these in avoiding platelet transfusions prior to surgery, the additional long-term gain in quality-adjusted life-years was very small. No thrombopoietin receptor agonist was clearly cheaper than both lusutrombopag and avatrombopag, as the cost savings from avoiding platelet transfusions were more than offset by the drug cost. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that, for all thresholds below £100,000, no thrombopoietin receptor agonist had 100% probability of being cost-effective. LIMITATIONS: Some of the rescue therapy data for lusutrombopag were not available. There were inconsistencies in the avatrombopag data. From the cost-effectiveness point of view, there were several additional important gaps in the evidence required, including the lack of a price for avatrombopag. CONCLUSIONS: Avatrombopag and lusutrombopag were superior to no thrombopoietin receptor agonist in avoiding both platelet transfusion and rescue therapy, but they were not cost-effective given the lack of benefit and increase in cost. FUTURE WORK: A head-to-head trial is warranted. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019125311. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 51. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Thrombocytopenia, which is a reduction in platelet numbers in the blood, is a common complication of chronic liver disease. It increases the risk of bleeding during procedures including liver biopsy and transplantation. It can delay or prevent procedures, leading to illness and death. Established treatment largely involves platelet transfusion before the procedure or as rescue therapy for bleeding. This report aims to systematically review the clinical effectiveness and estimate the cost-effectiveness of the first two recently licensed treatments, thrombopoietin receptor agonists avatrombopag (Doptelet^®; Dova Pharmaceuticals, Durham, NC, USA) (60 mg if platelet count is < 40,000/µl and 40 mg if platelet count is 40,000­< 50,000/µl) and lusutrombopag (Mulpleta^®; Shionogi Inc., London, UK) (3 mg if platelet count is < 50,000/µl), compared with established treatment. From a comprehensive search, six studies were included. Clinical effectiveness analysis showed that avatrombopag and lusutrombopag were superior to no thrombopoietin receptor agonist in avoiding both platelet transfusion and rescue therapy. Only avatrombopag seemed superior to no thrombopoietin receptor agonist in reducing rescue therapy alone. Cost-effectiveness analysis found that lusutrombopag and avatrombopag were more expensive than no thrombopoietin receptor agonist over a lifetime, as the savings from avoiding platelet transfusions were exceeded by the drug cost, and without long-term health benefits. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis, which examined the effect of uncertainty, showed that no thrombopoietin receptor agonist had 100% probability of being cost-effective. Uncertainty about the price of avatrombopag and the content and costs of platelet transfusions and the potential under-reporting of use to estimate platelet transfusion-specific mortality had the greatest impact on results. If the price of avatrombopag was (confidential information has been removed) below the price of lusutrombopag, avatrombopag would become cost saving in the 40,000­< 50,000/µl subgroup. However, although in some scenarios avatrombopag costs could decrease in the 40,000­< 50,000/µl subgroup to around 10% more than the cost of no thrombopoietin receptor agonist, there would be negligible health benefits and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios would remain very high, meaning that lusutrombopag and avatrombopag would still not be considered cost-effective.