Methodological guidelines and publications of benefit-risk assessment for health technology assessment: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To map the available methodological guidelines and documents for conducting and reporting benefit-risk assessment (BRA) during health technologies' life cycle; and to identify methodological guidelines for BRA that could serve as the basis for the development of a BRA guideline for the context of health technology assessment (HTA) in Brazil. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: Searches were conducted in three main sources up to March 2023: (1) electronic databases; (2) grey literature (48 HTA and regulatory organisations) and (3) manual search and contacting experts. We included methodological guidelines or publications presenting methods for conducting or reporting BRA of any type of health technologies in any context of the technology's life cycle. Selection process and data charting were conducted by independent reviewers. We provided a structured narrative synthesis of the findings. RESULTS: From the 83 eligible documents, six were produced in the HTA context, 30 in the regulatory and 35 involved guidance for BRA throughout the technology's life cycle. We identified 129 methodological approaches for BRA in the documents. The most commonly referred to descriptive frameworks were the Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Trade-offs, Uncertainty, Risk and Linked decisions and the Benefit-Risk Action Team. Multicriteria decision analysis was the most commonly cited quantitative framework. We also identified the most cited metric indices, estimation and utility survey techniques that could be used for BRA. CONCLUSIONS: Methods for BRA in HTA are less established. The findings of this review, however, will support and inform the elaboration of the Brazilian methodological guideline on BRA for HTA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/69T3V.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Maintenance Pemetrexed Plus Best Supportive Care Compared With Best Supportive Care Alone in Treating Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in Jordan.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care (BSC) in non-small cell lung cancer patients from a Jordanian healthcare system perspective. METHODS: A Markov model with 4 health states was developed to estimate life years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), costs, and the incremental cost-utility ratio of pemetrexed plus BSC versus BSC. A lifelong time horizon was used in the base-case analysis. The transition probabilities were estimated from the PARAMOUNT trial, the utility weights were taken from published literature, and costs were based on data and unit costs at King Hussein Cancer Center and the Jordan Food and Drug Administration. Both costs and outcomes were discounted using a 3%. The parameter uncertainty was tested using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The base-case analysis showed that pemetrexed plus BSC increased QALYs and cost compared with BSC. Pemetrexed plus BSC leads to incremental 0.255 QALYs and incremental costs of US $30 826, resulting in an incremental cost-utility ratio of US $120 886/QALY. The results were sensitive to changes in the utility estimates during the progression-free health state, the progression health state, and the cost of postprogression medications The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of pemetrexed plus BSC being a cost-effective option compared with BSC is 0 at a threshold of $56 000. CONCLUSIONS: Maintenance pemetrexed for non-small cell lung cancer is not a cost-effective option compared with BSC from a healthcare system perspective based on the listed price at a threshold of $56 000/QALY.

Detection of Adverse Events With the Austrian Inpatient Quality Indicators.

OBJECTIVES: Indicators based on routine data are considered a readily available and cost-effective method for assessing health care quality and safety. The Austrian Inpatient Quality Indicators (A-IQI) have been introduced in all Austrian public hospitals as a mandatory quality measurement. The purpose of this study was to assess the value of conspicuous A-IQI in predicting the presence of adverse events (AEs). METHODS: We conducted an exploratory study comparing all indicator-positive patient cases contributing to 18 conspicuous A-IQI indicators to randomly selected indicator-negative control cases regarding the prevalence and severity of AEs. Structured medical record review using the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Global Trigger Tool was used as the gold standard. RESULTS: In 421 chart reviews, we identified 158 AEs. 70.9% (n = 112) of the AEs were found in cases with a positive indicator. The relative risk of an AE occurring was 3.47 (95% confidence interval: 2.30, 5.24) in indicator-positive cases compared to indicator-negatives. The proportion of severe events (National Coordination Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention Index categories H and I) was 54.5% (n = 61) in indicator-positive cases and only 15.3% (n = 7) in indicator-negative cases. Overall sensitivity of the A-IQI was 68.2%, specificity 69.4%, positive predictive value 36.0%, and negative predictive value 89.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that significantly more AEs and more severe AEs were found in cases with positive A-IQI than in indicator-negative control cases. However, studies with larger numbers of cases and with larger numbers of conspicuous indicators are needed for the validation of the entire A-IQI indicator set.

Acceptability of Using Real-World Data to Estimate Relative Treatment Effects in Health Technology Assessments: Barriers and Future Steps.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence about the comparative effects of new treatments is typically collected in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In some instances, RCTs are not possible, or their value is limited by an inability to capture treatment effects over the longer term or in all relevant population subgroups. In these cases, nonrandomized studies (NRS) using real-world data (RWD) are increasingly used to complement trial evidence on treatment effects for health technology assessment (HTA). However, there have been concerns over a lack of acceptability of this evidence by HTA agencies. This article aims to identify the barriers to the acceptance of NRS and steps that may facilitate increases in the acceptability of NRS in the future. METHODS: Opinions of the authorship team based on their experience in real-world evidence research in academic, HTA, and industry settings, supported by a critical assessment of existing studies. RESULTS: Barriers were identified that are applicable to key stakeholder groups, including HTA agencies (eg, the lack of comprehensive methodological guidelines for using RWD), evidence generators (eg, avoidable deviations from best practices), and external stakeholders (eg, data controllers providing timely access to high-quality RWD). Future steps that may facilitate future acceptability of NRS include improvements in the quality, integration, and accessibility of RWD, wider use of demonstration projects to highlight the value and applicability of nonrandomized designs, living, and more detailed HTA guidelines, and improvements in HTA infrastructure relating to RWD. CONCLUSION: NRS can represent a crucial source of evidence on treatment effects for use in HTA when RCT evidence is limited.

The assessment of quality of care of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a population-based cohort in the District of Landeck in Austria.

INTRODUCTION: Structured diabetes care based on evidence-based guidelines is one of the main strategies to improve glycemic control and to reduce long-term complications in diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This study is based on the "Diabetes-Landeck Cohort", a population-based cohort of patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 (T2DM). We assessed the quality of diabetes care and compared it between three groups of care units, that is, general practitioners (GP), diabetes specialists in private practice (DSPP), and hospitals (HOSP). RESULTS: The total study population comprised 1616 patients with T2DM, including 378 patients of GP, 281 of DSPP, and 957 from HOSP. We identified statistically significant differences: DSPP showed the highest percentage of structured training, sufficient training, eye examinations and foot examinations. The group HOSP showed the highest proportion for increased HbA1c≥ 7.5 and almost all long-term complications surveyed, that is, nephropathy (23.2%), neuropathy (14.4%), diabetic foot (5.1%), and cerebrovascular diseases (10.9%). CONCLUSION: This population-based cohort study on patients with T2DM in Austria showed significant differences in important quality-of-care process and outcome parameters across different groups of care units. Future research should also include prediction modeling for early warning and monitoring systems as well as adjustment for patient characteristics and duration and severity of disease.

Improving shared decision-making about cancer treatment through design-based data-driven decision-support tools and redesigning care paths: an overview of the 4D PICTURE project.

Background: Patients with cancer often have to make complex decisions about treatment, with the options varying in risk profiles and effects on survival and quality of life. Moreover, inefficient care paths make it hard for patients to participate in shared decision-making. Data-driven decision-support tools have the potential to empower patients, support personalized care, improve health outcomes and promote health equity. However, decision-support tools currently seldom consider quality of life or individual preferences, and their use in clinical practice remains limited, partly because they are not well integrated in patients' care paths. Aim and objectives: The central aim of the 4D PICTURE project is to redesign patients' care paths and develop and integrate evidence-based decision-support tools to improve decision-making processes in cancer care delivery. This article presents an overview of this international, interdisciplinary project. Design methods and analysis: In co-creation with patients and other stakeholders, we will develop data-driven decision-support tools for patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer and melanoma. We will support treatment decisions by using large, high-quality datasets with state-of-the-art prognostic algorithms. We will further develop a conversation tool, the Metaphor Menu, using text mining combined with citizen science techniques and linguistics, incorporating large datasets of patient experiences, values and preferences. We will further develop a promising methodology, MetroMapping, to redesign care paths. We will evaluate MetroMapping and these integrated decision-support tools, and ensure their sustainability using the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework. We will explore the generalizability of MetroMapping and the decision-support tools for other types of cancer and across other EU member states. Ethics: Through an embedded ethics approach, we will address social and ethical issues. Discussion: Improved care paths integrating comprehensive decision-support tools have the potential to empower patients, their significant others and healthcare providers in decision-making and improve outcomes. This project will strengthen health care at the system level by improving its resilience and efficiency.

Improving the cancer patient journey and respecting personal preferences: an overview of the 4D PICTURE project The 4D PICTURE project aims to help cancer patients, their families and healthcare providers better undertstand their options. It supports their treatment and care choices, at each stage of disease, by drawing on large amounts of evidence from different types of European data. The project involves experts from many different specialist areas who are based in nine European countries. The overall aim is to improve the cancer patient journey and ensure personal preferences are respected.

Implementation of a comprehensive clinical risk management system in a university hospital.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events during hospital treatment are common and can lead to serious harm. This study reports the implementation of a comprehensive clinical risk management system in a university hospital and assesses the impact of clinical risk management on patient harms. METHODS: The clinical risk management system was rolled out over a period of eight years and consisted of a training of interdisciplinary risk management teams, external and internal risk audits, and the implementation of a critical incident reporting system (CIRS). The risks identified during the audits were analyzed according to the type, severity, and implementation of preventive measures. Other key figures of the risk management system were obtained from the annual risk reports. The number of liability cases was used as primary outcome measurement. RESULTS: Of the 1,104 risks identified during the risk audits, 56.2% were related to organization, 21.3% to documentation, 15.3% to treatment, and 7.2% to patient information and consent. The highest proportion of serious risks was found in the category organization (22.7%), the lowest in the category documentation (13.6%). Critical incident reporting identified between 241 and 370 critical incidents per year, for which in 79.5% to 83% preventive measures were implemented within twelve months. The frequency of incident reports per department correlated with the number of active risk managers and risk team meetings. Compared with the years prior to the introduction of the clinical risk management system, an average annual reduction of harms by 60.1% (95% CI: 57.1; 63.1) was observed two years after the implementation was completed. On average, the rate of harms dropped by 5% per year for each 10% increase in roll-out of the clinical risk management system (incidence rate ratio: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.93; 0.97) . CONCLUSION: The results of this project demonstrate the effectiveness of clinical risk management in detecting treatment-related risks and in reducing harm to patients.

Nature-based social interventions to address loneliness among vulnerable populations: a common study protocol for three related randomized controlled trials in Barcelona, Helsinki, and Prague within the RECETAS European project.

BACKGROUND: The negative effects of loneliness on population health and wellbeing requires interventions that transcend the medical system and leverage social, cultural, and public health system resources. Group-based social interventions are a potential method to alleviate loneliness. Moreover, nature, as part of our social and health infrastructure, may be an important part of the solutions that are needed to address loneliness. The RECETAS European project H2020 (Re-imagining Environments for Connection and Engagement: Testing Actions for Social Prescribing in Natural Spaces) is an international research project aiming to develop and test the effectiveness of nature-based social interventions to reduce loneliness and increase health-related quality of life. METHODS: This article describes the three related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that will be implemented: the RECETAS-BCN Trial in Barcelona (Spain) is targeting people 18+ from low socio-economic urban areas; the RECETAS-PRG Trial in Prague (Czech Republic) is addressing community-dwelling older adults over 60 years of age, and the RECETAS-HLSNK trial is reaching older people in assisted living facilities. Each trial will recruit 316 adults suffering from loneliness at least sometimes and randomize them to nature-based social interventions called "Friends in Nature" or to the control group. "Friends in Nature" uses modifications of the "Circle of Friends" methodology based on group processes of peer support and empowerment but including activities in nature. Participants will be assessed at baseline, at post-intervention (3 months), and at 6- and 12-month follow-up after baseline. Primary outcomes are the health-related quality-of-life according to 15D measure and The De Jong Gierveld 11-item loneliness scale. Secondary outcomes are health and psychosocial variables tailored to the specific target population. Nature exposure will be collected throughout the intervention period. Process evaluation will explore context, implementation, and mechanism of impact. Additionally, health economic evaluations will be performed. DISCUSSION: The three RECETAS trials will explore the effectiveness of nature-based social interventions among lonely people from various ages, social, economic, and cultural backgrounds. RECETAS meets the growing need of solid evidence for programs addressing loneliness by harnessing the beneficial impact of nature on enhancing wellbeing and social connections. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Barcelona (Spain) trial: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT05488496. Registered 29 July 2022. Prague (Czech Republic) trial: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT05522140. Registered August 25, 2022. Helsinki (Finland) trial: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT05507684. Registered August 12, 2022.

Comparative Analysis of Instrumental Variables on the Assignment of Buprenorphine/Naloxone or Methadone for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Instrumental variable (IV) analysis provides an alternative set of identification assumptions in the presence of uncontrolled confounding when attempting to estimate causal effects. Our objective was to evaluate the suitability of measures of prescriber preference and calendar time as potential IVs to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone versus methadone for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: Using linked population-level health administrative data, we constructed five IVs: prescribing preference at the individual, facility, and region levels (continuous and categorical variables), calendar time, and a binary prescriber's preference IV in analyzing the treatment assignment-treatment discontinuation association using both incident-user and prevalent-new-user designs. Using published guidelines, we assessed and compared each IV according to the four assumptions for IVs, employing both empirical assessment and content expertise. We evaluated the robustness of results using sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The study sample included 35,904 incident users (43.3% on buprenorphine/naloxone) initiated on opioid agonist treatment by 1585 prescribers during the study period. While all candidate IVs were strong (A1) according to conventional criteria, by expert opinion, we found no evidence against assumptions of exclusion (A2), independence (A3), monotonicity (A4a), and homogeneity (A4b) for prescribing preference-based IV. Some criteria were violated for the calendar time-based IV. We determined that preference in provider-level prescribing, measured on a continuous scale, was the most suitable IV for comparative effectiveness of buprenorphine/naloxone and methadone for the treatment of OUD. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that prescriber's preference measures are suitable IVs in comparative effectiveness studies of treatment for OUD.

Intracranial arteriosclerosis and the risk of dementia: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of intracranial arteriosclerosis on dementia remains largely unclear. METHODS: In 2339 stroke-free and dementia-free participants (52.2% women, mean age 69.5 years) from the general population, we assessed intracranial carotid artery calcification (ICAC) and vertebrobasilar artery calcification (VBAC) as proxy for arteriosclerosis. Associations with dementia were assessed using Cox models. In addition, indirect effects through cerebral small vessel disease (cSVD) and subcortical brain structure volumes were assessed using causal mediation analyses. RESULTS: During a median of 13.4 years (25th-75th percentiles 9.9-14.5) of follow-up, 282 participants developed dementia. Both ICAC presence (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00-2.32]) and volume (HR per standard deviation: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.01-1.40) increased dementia risk. For VBAC, severe calcifications increased dementia risk (HR for third vs first volume tertile: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.00-3.59). These effects were mediated partly through increased cSVD (percentage mediated for ICAC: 13% and VBAC: 24%). DISCUSSION: Intracranial arteriosclerosis increases the risk of dementia.

Aetiology, ejection fraction and mortality in chronic heart failure: a mediation analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical decision making in chronic heart failure (CHF) is based primarily on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and only secondarily on aetiology of the underlying disease. Our aim was to investigate the mediating role of LVEF in the relationship between aetiology and mortality. METHODS: Using data of 2056 Austrian patients with CHF (mean age 57.2 years; mean follow-up 8.8 years), effects of aetiology on LVEF and overall mortality were estimated using multivariable-adjusted linear and Cox regression models. In causal mediation analyses, we decomposed the total effect of aetiology on mortality into direct and indirect (mediated through LVEF) effects. RESULTS: For the analysed aetiologies (dilated (DCM, n=1009) and hypertrophic (HCM, n=89) cardiomyopathy; ischaemic (IHD, n=529) and hypertensive (HHD, n=320) heart disease; cardiac amyloidosis (CA, n=109)), the effect of LVEF on mortality was similar (HR5%-points lower LVEF=1.07, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.10; pinteraction=0.718). HCM and CA were associated with significantly higher, and IHD and DCM with significantly lower LVEF compared with other aetiologies. Compared with respective other aetiologies, the corresponding total effect HRs for mortality were 0.77 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.89), 0.47 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.88), 1.40 (95% CI 1.21 to 1.62), 0.79 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.95) and 2.36 (95% CI 1.81 to 3.08) for DCM, HCM, IHD, HHD and CA, respectively. CA had the highest mortality despite a HRindirect effect of 0.74 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.83). For all other aetiologies, <20% of the total mortality effects were mediated through LVEF. CONCLUSIONS: The direct effect of aetiology on mortality dominates the indirect effect through LVEF. Therefore, clarification of aetiology is as important as measurement of LVEF.

Long-term benefits and harms of early colorectal cancer screening in German individuals with familial cancer risk.

Individuals with a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) may benefit from early screening with colonoscopy or immunologic fecal occult blood testing (iFOBT). We systematically evaluated the benefit-harm trade-offs of various screening strategies differing by screening test (colonoscopy or iFOBT), interval (iFOBT: annual/biennial; colonoscopy: 10-yearly) and age at start (30, 35, 40, 45, 50 and 55 years) and end of screening (65, 70 and 75 years) offered to individuals identified with familial CRC risk in Germany. A Markov-state-transition model was developed and used to estimate health benefits (CRC-related deaths avoided, life-years gained [LYG]), potential harms (eg, associated with additional colonoscopies) and incremental harm-benefit ratios (IHBR) for each strategy. Both benefits and harms increased with earlier start and shorter intervals of screening. When screening started before age 50, 32-36 CRC-related deaths per 1000 persons were avoided with colonoscopy and 29-34 with iFOBT screening, compared to 29-31 (colonoscopy) and 28-30 (iFOBT) CRC-related deaths per 1000 persons when starting age 50 or older, respectively. For iFOBT screening, the IHBRs expressed as additional colonoscopies per LYG were one (biennial, age 45-65 vs no screening), four (biennial, age 35-65), six (biennial, age 30-70) and 34 (annual, age 30-54; biennial, age 55-75). Corresponding IHBRs for 10-yearly colonoscopy were four (age 55-65), 10 (age 45-65), 15 (age 35-65) and 29 (age 30-70). Offering screening with colonoscopy or iFOBT to individuals with familial CRC risk before age 50 is expected to be beneficial. Depending on the accepted IHBR threshold, 10-yearly colonoscopy or alternatively biennial iFOBT from age 30 to 70 should be recommended for this target group.

Methodological guidelines and publications of benefit-risk assessment for health technology assessment: a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Benefit-risk assessment (BRA) is used in multiple phases along the health technology's life-cycle to evaluate the balance between the benefits and risks, as it is fundamental to all stakeholders. BRA and its methodological approaches have been applied primarily in the context of regulatory agencies. However, BRA's application and extent in the context of health technology assessment (HTA) bodies remain less clear. Our goal is to perform a scoping review to identify and map methodological guidelines and publications on methods of BRA. This will be done considering the different phases of the life-cycle of health technologies to underline both the depth and extent of research concerning BRA, especially in the context of HTA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review protocol was developed following the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley, and the updated guidelines by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We will include methodological publications that provide recommendations or guidelines on methods for BRA. We will conduct electronic searches on Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE (Ovid) databases; manual searches on the main websites of HTA bodies and drug regulatory organisations; and contact experts in the field. Systematic extraction forms will be used to screen and assess the identified publications by independent assessors. We will provide a qualitative synthesis using descriptive statistics and visual tools. Results will be summarised in systematic evidence tables and comparative evidence scoping charts. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will use data publicly available and does not require ethics approval. The results of this scoping review will contribute to scientific knowledge and act as a basis for methodologists, guideline developers and researchers for the development of BRA to inform regulatory decisions, reimbursement and coverage decision making. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles, conferences, policy briefs and workshops. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/69T3V).

Colorectal Cancer Screening for Persons With a Positive Family History­Evaluation of the FARKOR Program for the Secondary Prevention of Colorectal Cancer in Persons Aged 25 to 50.

BACKGROUND: Persons with a positive family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) are more likely than others to develop CRC and are also younger at the onset of the disease. Nonetheless, the German Federal Joint Committee (G-BA, Gemeinsamer Bundes - ausschuss) recommends screening all persons aged 50 and above regardless of their family history. FARKOR was a project supported by the Innovation Fund of the G-BA to study the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of a risk-adapted early detection program for CRC among persons aged 25 to 50 without any specific past medical history. METHODS: Physicians in private practice in Bavaria documented their activities relating to FARKOR online. The FARKOR process comprised a declaration of consent, a simplified family history for CRC, an optional, more comprehensive family history, a counseling session for participatory decision-making on further measures, and various modalities of screening (an immunological fecal occult blood test [iFOBT], colonoscopy, or no screening). Related physician activities outside the FARKOR process were assessed by record linkage between study data and data of the patients' health insurance carriers. RESULTS: The simplified family history was documented in 25 847 persons and positive for CRC in 5769 (22.3%). 3232 persons had a more comprehensive family history, among whom 2054 (63.6%) participated in screening measures. 1595 underwent colonoscopy; 278 persons who had already undergone colonoscopy in the preceding five years were excluded from the analysis. Colonoscopy revealed adenoma in 232 persons (17,6 %), advanced adenoma in 78 (5.9%) and carcinoma in 4 (0.3%). There were no serious complications. CONCLUSION: The detection rates in this study corresponded to those of persons aged 55 to 59 in the current early detection program. Despite numerous problems in the performance of the study (inconsistencies in documentation, external performance of screening measures on program participants), the results support the feasibility of a risk-adapted early detection program in the young target population with a family history of CRC.

Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer: systematic review using the HTA Core Model® for Rapid Relative Effectiveness Assessment.

Background: Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a non-invasive technology with the potential to supplement established CRC screening tests. The aim of this health technology assessment was to evaluate effectiveness and safety of currently CE-marked stool DNA tests, compared to other CRC tests in CRC screening strategies in an asymptomatic screening population. Methods: The assessment was carried out following the guidelines of the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA). This included a systematic literature search in MED-LINE, Cochrane and EMBASE in 2018. Manufacturers were asked to provide additional data. Five patient interviews helped assessing potential ethical or social aspects and patients' experiences and preferences. We assessed the risk of bias using QUADAS-2, and the quality of the body of evidence using GRADE. Results: We identified three test accuracy studies, two of which investigated a multitarget stool DNA test (Cologuard®, compared fecal immunochemical test (FIT)) and one a combined DNA stool assay (ColoAlert®, compared to guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT), Pyruvate Kinase Isoenzyme Type M2 (M2-PK) and combined gFOBT/M2-PK). We found five published surveys on patient satisfaction. No primary study investigating screening effects on CRC incidence or on overall mortality was found. Both stool DNA tests showed in direct comparison higher sensitivity for the detection of CRC and (advanced) adenoma compared to FIT, or gFOBT, respectively, but had lower specificity. However, these comparative results may depend on the exact type of FIT used. The reported test failure rates were higher for stool DNA testing than for FIT. The certainty of evidence was moderate to high for Cologuard® studies, and low to very low for the ColoAlert® study which refers to a former version of the product and yielded no direct evidence on the test accuracy for ad-vanced versus non-advanced adenoma. Conclusions: ColoAlert® is the only stool DNA test currently sold in Europe and is available at a lower price than Cologuard®, but reliable evidence is lacking. A screening study including the current product version of ColoAlert® and suitable comparators would, therefore, help evaluate the effectiveness of this screening option in a European context.

Patient' and social aspects related to complementary mistletoe therapy in patients with breast cancer: A systematic review commissioned by the German agency for Health Technology Assessment.

PURPOSE: To mitigate side effects of conventional cancer care and improve quality of life, many patients with breast cancer in German-speaking countries opt for mistletoe therapy in addition to standard treatment. To understand the value for users, we evaluated the domain "Patient and Social aspects" in a health technology assessment on complementary mistletoe therapy in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Fifteen electronic databases and the internet were searched. Qualitative studies were analyzed using qualitative content analysis; quantitative studies were systematically summarized in evidence tables. RESULTS: Seventeen studies out of 1203 screened publications with 4765 patients and 869 healthcare professionals were included in the review. The median proportion of patients using mistletoe therapy was 26.7% (range: 7.3-46.3%). Predictors for use were younger age and higher educational level. Main reasons for patients' use of mistletoe therapy were to leave nothing untried and to be actively involved in the treatment process. Reasons against use were related to a lack of knowledge or uncertainty regarding effectiveness and safety. Physicians mainly aimed to support the patient's physical condition as main reason for use and a lack of resources and knowledge as main reason against use. CONCLUSION: Mistletoe therapy was commonly used in the treatment of breast cancer despite a lack of scientific knowledge among patients and physicians. Transparent communication on motivation for use and its potential effect enables realistic expectations. Relatively small samples of mistletoe therapy users limit the representativeness and validity of our results.

Occupational therapy for persons with cognitive impairments.

Background: Damage to the central nervous system can occur in adulthood, for example, due to stroke, trauma, tumours, or chronic diseases. After damage to the central nervous system, cognitive impairments occur in addition to physical limitations. Occupational therapy is most often prescribed for neurological diagnoses, including stroke and traumatic brain injury. Methods: The health technology assessment (HTA) report this HTA article is based on investigates the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and patient-related, social and ethical aspects of occupational therapy for patients with cognitive impairments compared to no occupational therapy. In addition, the effects of different occupational therapy interventions with and without cognitive components were compared in an explorative overview. Patients with moderate or severe dementia are excluded from the assessment. Systematic overviews, that is, systematic reviews of systematic reviews, were conducted. Results: For the evaluation of clinical effectiveness, a total of nine systematic reviews were included. No systematic review was identified for the assessment of costs or cost-effectiveness. Five systematic reviews were included for the assessment of patient and social aspects. For the assessment of clinical effectiveness compared with no occupational therapy, five systematic reviews comprising 20 randomised controlled trials with a total of 1,316 subjects reported small positive effects for the outcomes "global cognitive function" and "activities of daily living" as well as a non-quantified positive effect on the outcomes "health-related quality of life" and "behavioural control". No effect was found for individual components of cognition and measures of perception. The quality of the evidence for all outcomes is low due to a high risk of bias. In the supplementary presentations, no positive effects could be demonstrated on the basis of the available evidence. The quality of this evidence was not assessed. For the assessment of patient and social aspects, five systematic reviews on patients with a stroke or a traumatic brain injury - without specification regarding cognitive deficits or studies with their relatives - were included. It was reported that patients and family caregivers go through different phases of rehabilitation in which the discharge home is a decisive turning point. The discharge home represents a crucial breaking point. Regaining an active, self-determining role is a process that requires therapists to find the right level of support for patients and relatives. For the assessment of ethical aspects, nine documents were included. We identified ethical problem-solving models for occupational therapy and 16 ethical aspects in occupational therapy for cognitive deficits. The central theme of the analysis is the limited autonomy due to the consequences of the disease as well as the resulting tensions with those treating the patient. Conclusions: Based on this systematic overview, it can neither be proven nor excluded with certainty that occupational therapy for cognitive impairment is an effective therapy for adult patients with central nervous system injuries compared to no occupational therapy. There is a lack of randomised trials with sufficient sample size, well-defined interventions, and comparable concomitant therapies in the control groups, but there is also a lack of well-designed observational studies in routine care and health economic studies. The identified systematic reviews on patient and social aspects provide information on the needs of patients after stroke or traumatic brain injury and their relatives, but there is a lack of studies on this aspect in German-speaking countries. For the ethical assessment, in addition to the identified theoretical models for solving ethical conflicts in occupational therapy, more empirical studies on ethical aspects with patients with cognitive deficits and their relatives as well as occupational therapists are needed.

Decision-analytic evaluation of the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of strategies to prevent breast and ovarian cancer in German women with BRCA-1/2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: Women with inherited mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have increased lifetime risks for developing breast and/or ovarian cancer and may develop these cancers around the age of 30 years. Therefore, prevention of breast and ovarian cancer in these women may need to start relatively early in life. In this study we systematically evaluate the long-term effectiveness and cost effectiveness of different prevention strategies for breast and ovarian cancer in women with BRCA-1/2 mutation in Germany. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model simulating lifetime breast and ovarian cancer development in BRCA-1/2 carriers was developed. Different strategies including intensified surveillance (IS), prophylactic bilateral mastectomy (PBM), and prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (PBSO) alone or in combination at different ages were evaluated. German clinical, epidemiological, and economic (in 2022 Euro) data were used. Outcomes included cancer incidences, mortality, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). We adopted the German health-care system perspective and discounted costs and health effects with 3% annually. RESULTS: All intervention strategies are more effective and less costly than IS alone. Prevention with PBM plus PBSO at age 30 maximizes life expectancy with 6.3 LYs gained, whereas PBM at age 30 with delayed PBSO at age 35 improves quality of life with 11.1 QALYs gained, when compared to IS alone. A further delay of PBSO was associated with lower effectiveness. Both strategies are cost effective with ICERs significantly below 10,000 EUR/LYG or QALY. CONCLUSION: Based on our results, PBM at age 30 plus PBSO between age 30 and 40 prolongs life and is cost effective in women with BRCA-1/2 mutations in Germany. Serial preventive surgeries with delayed PBSO potentially improve quality of life for women. However, delaying PBM and/or PBSO further may lead to increased mortality and reduced QALYs.