Time trade-off study to establish utility decrements in individuals with a spinal cord injury who perform intermittent catheterization.

AIMS: To generate utility decrements for three attributes associated with catheterization for individuals with a spinal cord injury (SCI): the process of catheterization, the physical impact of urinary tract infections (UTIs) and worry associated with hospitalization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Health state vignettes comprising various levels of the three attributes were developed. Two cohorts of respondents, corresponding to people with SCIs and a sample broadly representative of the UK population, were presented with nine vignettes (three vignettes for the mild, moderate and severe health states in addition to a random set of six vignettes). It was assumed no or a nominal decrement was associated with the mild health state. Utility decrements were derived from analysing the data obtained from the online time trade-off (TTO). A proportion of the SCI cohort (n = 57) also completed the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. RESULTS: Utility decrements were generated using statistical models for the general population (n = 358), the SCI population (n = 48) and the two populations combined (merged model, n = 406). Results from the two cohorts showed minimal differences. For the merged model, SCI status was not statistically significant. All interaction terms, excluding SCI and the severe level of the physical attribute, were not statistically significant. Compared to the mild level, the greatest utility decrement calculated was the severe level of the emotional (worry) attribute (0.09, p < .001) for the SCI population. A significant decrement of 0.02 (p < .001) was calculated for the moderate level of the emotional attribute for all models. The mean utility score for those with SCI having completed the EQ-5D-5L was 0.371. LIMITATIONS: Modest sample size of respondents from the SCI population (n = 48). CONCLUSIONS: Worry associated with hospitalization had the greatest impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The catheterization process, such as the lubrication and repositioning of the catheter, also impacted on patients' HRQoL.

Systematic literature review assessing the overall costs and societal impacts of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in Europe.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory disease, driven by type 2 inflammation. The condition manifests as moderate-to-severe disease in approximately 20% of adults with AD across Europe and is associated with a substantial burden on patients, society and healthcare systems. However, systematic assessments capturing the totality of disease burden associated with moderate-to-severe AD are limited; therefore, the overall impacts of the disease may be underestimated. A systematic literature review (SLR) was carried out to assess the overall costs of moderate-to-severe AD across Europe, including the financial, societal and humanistic impacts. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched to identify relevant studies published between 1 January 2010 and 2 June 2020. Scientific conference proceedings, health technology assessment websites and patient association group websites were also searched for relevant information. Twenty-seven publications, corresponding to 22 unique studies, were included in the analysis. Total costs (direct and productivity losses) reached €20 695 per-person-per-year (PPPY) for adults with uncontrolled symptoms of moderate-to-severe AD. Direct medical costs ranged between €307 and €6993 PPPY; prescription medications and specialist dermatologist visits were the main contributors. Costs increased with disease severity or with uncontrolled disease. Patients with AD also incurred personal costs of €927 per year for healthcare items not reimbursed, which increased by 9% for those with moderate-to-severe forms. Annual work productivity losses comprised most of the total costs reported for adults with moderate-to-severe AD (up to 60.8% of the total burden) and were highest in those with uncontrolled disease (€13 702 PPPY). Patients with moderate-to-severe disease also experienced physical, emotional, and social impacts. The overall costs of moderate-to-severe AD greatly impact on healthcare systems, patients and society. Sustained control of moderate-to-severe AD, through effective treatment and care management, is essential to limit the burden caused by the disease.

Unveiling the true costs and societal impacts of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in Europe.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, auto-immune condition that imposes a high burden on individuals, society, and the healthcare system. Approximately 4.4% of adults and up to 18.6% of children/adolescents have AD in Europe, with 20% of all cases accounting for moderate-to-severe forms. This form of the condition in adults results in annual societal costs across Europe of an estimated €30 billion; €15.2 billion related to missed workdays or reduced work productivity, €10.1 billion related to direct medical costs and €4.7 billion related to personal expenditure of patients/families. AD can also substantially impact physical, emotional, and social quality-of-life. Several studies have shown the debilitating itch-scratch cycle is the main cause of the multifaceted burden, as it causes substantial sleep deprivation and stigmatisation due to the physical appearance of the skin, and confidence issues. These factors lead to psychosocial issues and can cumulate over time and prohibit patients reaching their 'full life potential'. Despite this, many patients with the condition are undertreated, resulting in uncontrolled symptoms and a further strain placed on patients, society, and the economy. The authors of this White Paper comprise the European Atopic Dermatitis Working Group, which is a network of international specialists with expertise in dermatology and healthcare policy decisions. Their programme of action is focused on harnessing their expertise to build consensus, advance research, share knowledge, and ultimately seek to improve AD care outcomes through achieving long-term symptom control. This White Paper presents a systematic evaluation of the overall financial and humanistic burden of moderate-to-severe AD and the current challenges that exist with AD care. It introduces recommendations for how, collaboratively, key stakeholders and policy makers can support improvements in AD management to achieve better disease control, thus reducing the costs and associated burden placed on individuals, society, and the economy.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of long-term intermittent catheterisation with hydrophilic and uncoated catheters.

STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysisObjective:To establish a model to investigate the cost effectiveness for people with spinal cord injury (SCI), from a lifetime perspective, for the usage of two different single-use catheter designs: hydrophilic-coated (HC) and uncoated (UC). The model includes the long-term sequelae of impaired renal function and urinary tract infection (UTI). SETTING: Analysis based on a UK perspective. METHODS: A probabilistic Markov decision model was constructed, to compare lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years, taking renal and UTI health states into consideration, as well as other catheter-related events. UTI event rates for the primary data set were based on data from hospital settings to ensure controlled and accurate reporting. A sensitivity analysis was applied to evaluate best- and worst-case scenarios. RESULTS: The model predicts that a 36-year-old SCI patient with chronic urinary retention will live an additional 1.4 years if using HC catheters compared with UC catheters, at an incremental cost of £2100. Moreover, the lifetime number of UTI events will be reduced by 16%. All best- and worst-case estimates were within the UK threshold of being cost effective. CONCLUSION: The use of HC catheters for intermittent catheterisation in SCI patients is highly cost effective. The outcome is consistent irrespective of whether UTI data are collected in hospital or community settings.

Individual patient data network meta-analysis of mortality effects of implantable cardiac devices.

OBJECTIVE: Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD), cardiac resynchronisation therapy pacemakers (CRT-P) and the combination therapy (CRT-D) have been shown to reduce all-cause mortality compared with medical therapy alone in patients with heart failure and reduced EF. Our aim was to synthesise data from major randomised controlled trials to estimate the comparative mortality effects of these devices and how these vary according to patients' characteristics. METHODS: Data from 13 randomised trials (12 638 patients) were provided by medical technology companies. Individual patient data were synthesised using network meta-analysis. RESULTS: Unadjusted analyses found CRT-D to be the most effective treatment (reduction in rate of death vs medical therapy: 42% (95% credible interval: 32-50%), followed by ICD (29% (20-37%)) and CRT-P (28% (15-40%)). CRT-D reduced mortality compared with CRT-P (19% (1-33%)) and ICD (18% (7-28%)). QRS duration, left bundle branch block (LBBB) morphology, age and gender were included as predictors of benefit in the final adjusted model. In this model, CRT-D reduced mortality in all subgroups (range: 53% (34-66%) to 28% (-1% to 49%)). Patients with QRS duration ≥150 ms, LBBB morphology and female gender benefited more from CRT-P and CRT-D. Men and those <60 years benefited more from ICD. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide estimates for the mortality benefits of device therapy conditional upon multiple patient characteristics. They can be used to estimate an individual patient's expected relative benefit and thus inform shared decision making. Clinical guidelines should discuss age and gender as predictors of device benefits.

Comparative efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatments in the third-line setting, for chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia after failure of second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

We compared the efficacy of ponatinib and second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (2G-TKIs: bosutinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib) in chronic phase CML resistant/intolerant to ≥1 prior 2G-TKI. Estimated probabilities of CCyR with 2G-TKI ranged from 22% to 26%, compared with 60% (95% CrI 52-68%) with ponatinib. The estimated probability of ponatinib providing higher response rate than all other included treatments was 99% (CCyR) and 97% (MCyR). Use of further 2G-TKI may provide limited benefit in CP-CML patients resistant/intolerant to prior 2G-TKI treatment. Compared with 2G-TKIs, ponatinib is estimated to provide substantially higher probability of achieving CCyR and MCyR; safety was not compared.

Systematic reviews of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multi-channel unilateral cochlear implants for adults.

OBJECTIVE: In the UK approximately 3% of over 50 years olds and 8% of over 70 year olds have severe (794-94 dBHL) to deafness. As deafness increased, hearing aids become increasingly ineffective. Cochelear implants can provide an alternative treatment. OBJECTIVE OF REVIEW: To bring together the research evidence through the robustness of a systematic review of the effectiveness of unilateral cochlear implants for adults. We also sought to systematically review the published literature on cost-effectiveness. TYPES OF REVIEW: Systematic review. SEARCH STRATEGY: This examined 16 electronic databases, plus bibliographies and references for published and unpublished studies from inception to june 2009. EVALUATION METHOD: Abstracts were independently assessed against inclusion criteria by two researchers were compared and disagreements resolved. Included papers were then retrieved and further independently assessed in a similar way. Remaining studies had their data independently extracted by one of five reviewers and checked by another reviewer. RESULTS: From 1,580 titles and abstracts nine studies were included. These were of variable quality; some study's results should be viewed with caution. The studies were too hetrogeneous to pool the data. However, overall the results firmly supported the use of unilateral cochler implants for severe to profoundly deaf adults. Additionally, four UK based economic evaluations found unilateral cochlear implants to be cost-effectivene in adults at UK implants centres. CONCLUSION: The methodologically weak but universally positive body of effectiveness evidence supports the use of unilateral cochlear implants in adults. Previous economic evaluations indicate that such implants are likely to be cost-effective.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cochlear implants for severe to profound deafness in children and adults: a systematic review and economic model.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether it is clinically effective and cost-effective to provide (i) a unilateral cochlear implant for severely to profoundly deaf people (using or not using hearing aids), and (ii) a bilateral cochlear implant for severely to profoundly deaf people with a single cochlear implant (unilateral or unilateral plus hearing aid). DATA SOURCES: Main electronic databases [MEDLINE; EMBASE; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; CENTRAL; NHS EED; DARE; HTA (NHS-CRD); EconLit; National Research Register; and ClinicalTrials.gov] searched in October 2006, updated July 2007. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken according to standard methods. A state-transition (Markov) model of the main care pathways deaf people might follow and the main complications and device failures was developed. RESULTS: The clinical effectiveness review included 33 papers, of which only two were RCTs. They used 62 different outcome measures and overall were of moderate to poor quality. All studies in children comparing one cochlear implant with non-technological support or an acoustic hearing aid reported gains on all outcome measures, some demonstrating greater gain from earlier implantation. The strongest evidence for an advantage from bilateral over unilateral implantation was for understanding speech in noisy conditions (mean improvement 13.2%, p < 0.0001); those receiving their second implant earlier made greater gains. Comparison of bilateral with unilateral cochlear implants plus an acoustic hearing aid was compromised by small sample sizes and poor reporting, but benefits were seen with bilateral implants. Cochlear implants improved children's quality of life, and those who were implanted before attending school were more likely to do well academically and attend mainstream education than those implanted later. In adults, there was a greater benefit from cochlear implants than from non-technological support in terms of speech perception. Increased age at implantation may reduce effectiveness and there is a negative correlation between duration of deafness and effectiveness. Speech perception measures all showed benefits for cochlear implants over acoustic hearing aids [e.g. mean increase in score of 37 points in noisy conditions (p < 0.001) with BKB sentences]; however, prelingually deafened adults benefited less than those postlingually deafened (mean change scores 20% versus 62%). For unilateral versus bilateral implantation, benefits in speech perception were significant in noisy conditions on all measures [e.g. 76% for HINT sentences (p < 0.0001)]. Quality of life measured with generic and disease-specific instruments or by interview mostly showed significant gains or positive trends from using cochlear implants. The Markov model base-case analysis estimated that, for prelingually profoundly deaf children, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for unilateral implantation compared with no implantation was 13,413 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Assuming the utility gain for bilateral implantation is the same for adults and children, the ICERs for simultaneous and sequential bilateral implantation versus unilateral implantation were 40,410 pounds and 54,098 pounds per QALY respectively. For postlingually sensorineurally profoundly deaf adults, the corresponding ICERs were 14,163 pounds, 49,559 pounds and 60,301 pounds per QALY respectively. Probabilistic threshold analyses suggest that unilateral implants are highly likely to be cost-effective for adults and children at willingness to pay thresholds of 20,000 pounds or 30,000 pounds per QALY. There are likely to be overall additional benefits from bilateral implantation, enabling children and adults to hold conversations more easily in social situations. CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral cochlear implantation is safe and effective for adults and children and likely to be cost-effective in profoundly deaf adults and profoundly and prelingually deaf children. However, decisions on the cost-effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implants should take into account the high degree of uncertainty within the model regarding the probable utility gain.

Effectiveness of multi-channel unilateral cochlear implants for profoundly deaf children: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Annually an estimated 223 children in the UK are born with or acquire permanent profound bilateral deafness (PBHL >or= 95 dB). These children may gain little or no benefit from acoustic hearing aids. However, cochlear implants might enable them to hear. OBJECTIVES OF THE REVIEW: To bring together the diverse research in this area under the rigor of a systematic review to discover the strength of evidence when comparing the effectiveness of unilateral cochlear implants with non-technological support or acoustic hearing aids in children with PBHL. TYPE OF REVIEW: Systematic review. SEARCH STRATEGY: This examined 16 electronic data bases, plus bibliographies and references for published and unpublished studies. EVALUATION METHOD: Abstracts were independently assessed against inclusion criteria by two researchers, results were compared and disagreements resolved. Included papers were then retrieved and further independently assessed in a similar way. Remaining studies had their data independently extracted by one of five reviewers and checked by another reviewer. RESULTS: From 1,580 abstracts and titles 15 studies were included. These were of moderate to poor quality. The large amount of heterogeneity in design and outcomes precluded meta-analysis. However, all studies reported that unilateral cochlear implants improved scores on all outcome measures. Additionally five economic evaluations found unilateral cochlear implants to be cost-effective for profoundly deaf children at UK implant centres. CONCLUSIONS: The robustness of systematic review methods gives weight to the positive findings of 15 papers reporting on this subject that they individually lack; while an RCT to show this would be unethical.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of carmustine implants and temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed high-grade glioma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of adjuvant carmustine wafers (BCNU-W) and also of adjuvant and concomitant temozolomide (TMZ), compared with surgery with radiotherapy. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases were searched up to August 2005. REVIEW METHODS: Included trials were critically appraised for key elements of internal and external validity. Relevant data were extracted and a narrative synthesis of the evidence produced. Where possible, data on absolute survival at a fixed time point were meta-analysed using a random effects model. A Markov (state transition) model was developed to assess the cost-utility of the two interventions. The model compared BCNU-W or TMZ separately with current standard treatment with surgery and radiotherapy. The simulated cohort had a mean age of 55 years and was modelled over 5 years. RESULTS: Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 32, n = 240) and two observational studies of BCNU-W compared with placebo wafers as adjuvant therapy to surgery and radiotherapy for newly diagnosed high-grade glioma were identified. All the studies were in adults and provided data on 193 patients who had received BCNU-W. The RCT findings excluded under 65-year-olds and those with a Karnofsky Performance Status of less than 60. The largest multi-centre RCT suggested a possible survival advantage with BCNU-W among a cohort of patients with grade III and IV tumours, adding a median of 2.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.5 to 5.1]. However, analysis using per-protocol, unstratified methods shows this difference to be not statistically significant (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.03, p = 0.08). Long-term follow-up suggests a significant survival advantage using unstratified analysis. No difference in progression-free survival (PFS) was demonstrated. Subgroup analysis of those with grade IV tumours also showed no significant survival advantage with BCNU-W [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.11, p = 0.20, unstratified analysis]. It is estimated that the cost of surgery and radiotherapy, with follow-up, treatment of adverse effects and end of life care is around 17,000 pounds per patient. Treatment with BCNU-W adds an additional 6600 pounds. Across the modelled cohort of 1000 patients, use of BCNU-W costs an additional 6.6 million pounds and confers an additional 122 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). On average, that is 6600 pounds per patient for 0.122 QALYs (6.3 quality-adjusted life-weeks). The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is 54,500 pounds/QALY. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, BCNU-W was not cost-effective in 89% of the simulations assuming a willingness to pay threshold of 30,000 pounds/QALY. In 15% of simulations, BCNU-W was dominated (i.e. did more harm than good, conferring fewer QALYs at greater cost). The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) suggests that it is very unlikely to be the most cost-effective option at normal levels of willingness to pay (11% probability at 30,000 pounds/QALY), only becoming likely to be the most cost-effective option at much higher levels of willingness to pay (50% probability at 55,000 pounds/QALY). Two RCTs (n = 130, n = 573) and two observational studies were included, giving evidence for 429 adult patients receiving TMZ. Currently, TMZ is licensed for use in those with newly diagnosed grade IV gliomas only. The RCTs excluded those with lower performance status and, in the larger RCT, those older than 70 years. TMZ provides a small but statistically significant median survival benefit of 2.5 months (95% CI 2.0 to 3.8), giving an HR of 0.63 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.75, p < 0.001). At 2 years, 26.5% of patients treated with TMZ were alive compared with 10.4% of those in the control arm. Median PFS is also enhanced with TMZ, giving a median 1.9 months' advantage (95% CI 1.4 to 2.7, p < 0.001). No analysis of the subgroup of patients with confirmed grade IV tumours was undertaken. Subgroup analysis of patients by O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) activity showed a significant treatment advantage for those with reduced MGMT activity but not for those with normal activity, although this analysis was based on a selected sample of patients and the test used has proved difficult to replicate. A median gain of 6.4 (95% CI 4.4 to 9.5) more life-months is seen with TMZ among those with reduced MGMT, giving an HR of 0.51 (p < 0.007). PFS is increased by a median of 4.4 months (95% CI 1.2 to 6.3), giving an HR of 0.48 (p = 0.001). The model shows a cost per patient for being treated with surgery, radiotherapy and including adverse effects of treatment and end of life care of around 17,000 pounds per patient. TMZ in the adjuvant and concomitant phase adds an additional cost of around 7800 pounds. Across the modelled cohort of 1000 patients, use of TMZ costs an additional 7.8 million pounds and confers an additional 217 QALYs. For the average patient this is 7800 pounds for an additional 0.217 QALYs (11 quality-adjusted life-weeks). The base-case ICER is 36,000 pounds/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses shows that TMZ was not cost-effective in 77% of the simulations. The CEAC suggests that there is a 23% chance that TMZ is the most cost-effective option at a willingness to pay level of 30,000 pounds/QALY, rising to be more cost-effective than no TMZ at slightly higher levels (50% probability at 35,000 pounds/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: BCNU-W has not been proven to confer a significant advantage in survival for patients with grade III tumours when treated with the drug, compared with placebo. There does not appear to be a survival advantage for patients with grade IV tumours. No increase in PFS has been shown. Limited evidence suggests a small but significant advantage in both overall survival and PFS with TMZ among a mixed population with grade IV and grade III (7-8%) tumours. However, it remains unclear whether this is true in grade IV tumours alone. On the basis of best available evidence, the authors consider that neither BCNU-W nor TMZ is likely to be considered cost-effective by NHS decision-makers. However, data for the model were drawn from limited evidence of variable quality. Tumour type is clearly important in assessing patient prognosis with different treatments. Grade IV tumours are commonest and appear to have least chance of response. There were too few grade III tumours included to carry out a formal assessment, but they appear to respond better and drive results for both drugs. Future use of genetic and biomarkers may help identify subtypes which will respond, but current licensing indications do not specify these. Further research is suggested into the effectiveness of these drugs, and also into areas such as genetic markers, chemotherapy regimens, patient and carer quality of life, and patient views on survival advantages vs treatment disadvantages.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronisation (biventricular pacing) for heart failure: systematic review and economic model.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) for people with heart failure and evidence of dyssynchrony by comparing cardiac resynchronisation therapy devices, CRT-P and CRT with defibrillation (CRT-D), each with optimal pharmaceutical therapy (OPT), and with each other. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases were searched up to June 2006. Manufacturer submissions to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) were also searched for additional evidence. REVIEW METHODS: Relevant data from selected studies were extracted, narrative reviews were undertaken and meta-analyses of the clinical trial data were conducted. A Markov model was developed. Incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated. Extensive one-way sensitivity analyses, threshold analyses, probabilistic sensitivity analyses and value of information analyses were carried out. RESULTS: Five randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria, recruiting 3434 participants. Quality was good to moderate. Meta-analyses showed that both CRT-P and CRT-D devices significantly reduced the mortality and level of heart failure hospitalisations and they improved health-related quality of life in people with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III and IV heart failure and evidence of dyssynchrony (QRS interval >120 ms) who were also receiving OPT. A single direct comparison indicated that the effects of CRT-P and CRT-D were similar, with the exception of an additional reduction in sudden cardiac death (SCD) associated with CRT-D. On average, implanting a CRT device in 13 people would result in the saving of one additional life over a 3-year period compared with OPT. The NHS device and procedure cost of implanting a new CRT-P system (pulse generator unit and required leads) was estimated to be 5074 British pounds and that of a CRT-D system 17,266 British pounds. The discounted lifetime costs of OPT, CRT-P and CRT-D were estimated as 9375 British pounds, 20,804 British pounds and 32,689 British pounds, respectively. The industry submissions to NICE contained four cost-effectiveness analyses, of which two were more appropriate as reference cases. One used a discrete event simulation model that gave estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of CRT-P vs OPT of 15,645 British pounds per QALY. The other analysis was based on the results of the COMPANION trial and estimated an ICER of 2818 British pounds per QALY gained by CRT-P vs OPT and a cost per QALY gained of 22,384 British pounds for CRT-D vs OPT. Compared with OPT, the Markov model base case analysis estimated that CRT-P conferred an additional 0.70 QALYs for an additional 11,630 British pounds per person, giving an estimated ICER of 16,735 British pounds per QALY gained for a mixed age cohort (range 14,630-20,333 British pounds). CRT-D vs CRT-P conferred an additional 0.29 QALYs for an additional 11,689 British pounds per person, giving an ICER of 40,160 British pounds per QALY for a mixed age cohort (range 26,645-59,391 British pounds). The authors' ICERs are higher than those from the industry-submitted analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis based on 1000 simulated trials showed that, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 30,000 British pounds per QALY, in CRT-P versus OPT, CRT-P was likely to be cost-effective in 91.3% of simulations and that CRT-P was negatively dominated in 0.4% of simulations. It also showed that in CRT-P versus CRT-D, CRT-D was likely to be cost-effective in 26.3% of simulations and that CRT-P dominated CRT-D in 7.8% of simulations. The relative risk for SCD when CRT-D is compared with OPT is 0.44 in the base case. This treatment becomes cost-ineffective at a WTP threshold of 30,000 British pounds when this value is greater than 0.65. When both CRT-P and CRT-D were considered as competing technologies with each other and OPT (three-way probabilistic analysis), and at the same WTP, there was a 68% probability that CRT-P provided the highest expected net benefit. The WTP threshold would need to be above 40,000 British pounds before CRT-D provided the highest expected net benefit. CONCLUSIONS: The study found that CRT-P and CRT-D devices reduce mortality and hospitalisations due to heart failure, improve quality of life and reduce SCD in people with heart failure NYHA classes III and IV, and evidence of dyssynchrony. When measured using a lifetime time horizon and compared with optimal medical therapy, the devices are estimated to be cost-effective at a WTP threshold of 30,000 British pounds per QALY; CRT-P is cost-effective at a WTP threshold of 20,000 British pounds per QALY. When the cost and effectiveness of all three treatment strategies are compared, the estimated net benefit from CRT-D is less than with the other two strategies, until the WTP threshold exceeds 40,160 British pounds/QALY. Further research is needed into the identification of those patients unlikely to benefit from this therapy, the appropriate use of CRT-D devices, the differences in mortality and heart failure hospitalisation for NYHA classes I and II, as well as the long-term implications of using this therapy.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cinacalcet for secondary hyperparathyroidism in end-stage renal disease patients on dialysis: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: To establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cinacalcet for the treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) for people on dialysis due to end-stage renal disease (ESRD). DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases were searched up to February 2006. REVIEW METHODS: Included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the clinical effectiveness of cinacalcet for SHPT in ESRD were critically appraised, had relevant data extracted and were summarised narratively. A Markov (state transition) model was developed that compared cinacalcet in addition to current standard treatment with phosphate binders and vitamin D to standard treatment alone. A simulated cohort of 1000 people aged 55 with SHPT was modelled until the whole cohort was dead. Incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated. Extensive one-way sensitivity analysis was undertaken as well as probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Seven trials comparing cinacalcet plus standard treatment with placebo plus standard treatment were included in the systematic review. A total of 846 people were randomised to receive cinacalcet. Cinacalcet was more effective at meeting parathyroid hormone (PTH) target levels (40% vs 5% in placebo, p < 0.001). In those patients meeting PTH targets, 90% also experienced a reduction in calcium-phosphate product levels, compared with 1% in placebo. Significantly fewer people treated with cinacalcet were hospitalised for cardiovascular events, although no difference was seen in all-cause hospitalisation or mortality. Significantly fewer fractures and parathyroidectomies were also seen with cinacalcet. Findings on all patient-based clinical outcomes were based on small numbers. The authors' economic model estimated that, compared to standard treatment alone, cinacalcet in addition to standard care costs an additional 21,167 pounds and confers 0.34 QALYs (or 18 quality-adjusted weeks) per person. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 61,890 pounds/QALY. In most cases, even extreme adjustments to individual parameters did not result in an ICER below a willingness-to-pay threshold of 30,000 pounds/QALY with probabilistic analysis showing only 0.5% of simulations to be cost-effective at this threshold. Altering the assumptions in the model through using different data sources for the inputs produced a range of ICERs from 39,000 pounds to 92,000 pounds/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Cinacalcet in addition to standard care is more effective than placebo plus standard care at reducing PTH levels without compromising calcium levels. However, there is limited information about the impact of this reduction on patient-relevant clinical outcomes. Given the short follow-up in the trials, it is unclear how data should be extrapolated to the long term. Together with the high drug cost, this leads to cinacalcet being unlikely to be considered cost-effective. Recommendations for future research include obtaining accurate estimates of the multivariate relationship between biochemical disruption in SHPT and long-term clinical outcomes.