Cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease in China.

BACKGROUND: In several cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs), empagliflozin (SGLT-2 inhibitor), sitagliptin (DPP-4 inhibitor) and liraglutide (GLP-1 receptor agonist) + standard of care (SoC) were compared to SoC in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study assessed the cost-effectiveness (CE) of empagliflozin + SoC in comparison to sitagliptin + SoC and liraglutide + SoC based on the respective CVOT. METHODS: The IQVIA Core Diabetes Model (CDM) was calibrated to reproduce the CVOT outcomes. EMPA-REG OUTCOME baseline characteristics and CVOT specific treatment effects on risk factors for cardiovascular disease (HbA1c, BMI, blood pressure, lipids) were applied. Three-year observed cardiovascular events of empagliflozin + SoC versus sitagliptin + SoC and liraglutide + SoC were derived from EMPA-REG OUTCOME and an indirect treatment comparison. Relative risk adjustments to calibrate the CDM were obtained after a trial and error process to match as closely the observed and CDM-predicted outcomes. The drug-specific treatment effects were considered up until HbA1c reached 8.5% and treatment switch occurred. After this switch, the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study 82 risk equations predicted events based on co-existing risk factors and treatment intensification to basal bolus insulin were applied. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system applying 3% discounting. The time horizon was lifelong. RESULTS: Empagliflozin + SoC provides additional Quality Adjusted Life years (QALY + 0.564) for an incremental cost of 42,497RMB (US$6053) compared to sitagliptin + SoC, resulting in an Incremental Cost Utility Ratio of 75,349RMB (US$10,732), thus below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 212,676RMB, corresponding to three times the Gross Domestic Product in China (2019). Compared to liraglutide + SoC, empagliflozin + SoC use leads to 0.211QALY gained and cost savings of 71,427RMB (US$10,173) and is as such dominant. Scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of the results. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that empagliflozin + SoC is cost-effective compared to sitagliptin + SoC and liraglutide + SoC at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 212,676RMB ($30,292)/QALY.

Comparison of lixisenatide in combination with basal insulin vs other insulin regimens for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by basal insulin: Systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

AIMS: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of lixisenatide combined with basal insulin (BI) vs intensive premix insulin (premix), BI plus prandial insulin with the main meal (basal-plus) or progressively covering all meals (basal-bolus) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled by BI, and the long-term cost-effectiveness of lixisenatide from a Chinese healthcare system perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1998 and 2018 were systematically searched. The clinical efficacy and safety of each treatment were compared by network meta-analysis (NMA). The IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model was used to estimate the lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and direct medical costs of patients treated with different strategies. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were finally included. Lixisenatide plus BI showed a similar reduction in HbA1c from baseline compared with premix, basal-plus and basal-bolus. There were significant differences in the change of body weight in favour of lixisenatide plus BI compared with the three insulin regimens. The risk of symptomatic hypoglycaemia of lixisenatide plus BI was significantly lower compared with premix and basal-bolus. Lixisenatide plus BI was cost-effective compared with premix, basal-plus and basal-bolus with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of Chinese yuan (CNY) 87 219, 48 173 and 48 670 per QALY gained, respectively, under the threshold of three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in China. CONCLUSIONS: Lixisenatide plus BI shows a similar HbA1c reduction compared with insulin regimens, accompanied by lower risk of hypoglycaemia and greater body weight reduction. It is a cost-effective treatment alternative for patients with T2DM inadequately controlled by BI in China.

Thalidomide as a treatment for inflammatory bowel disease in children and adolescents: A systematic review.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Thalidomide is used off-label for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and not as a first-line treatment option. The instructions clearly state that thalidomide is contraindicated in children because its safety and effectiveness in children are unknown. In this article, we review the efficacy and safety of thalidomide as a treatment for IBD in children and adolescents. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data, CBM database [from the date of database establishment to June 2019] and clinical trials [systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, case-control studies and case series studies] for studies concerning the use of thalidomide as a treatment for IBD in children and adolescents. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Seven studies (two RCTs and five case series), which included 134 children and adolescents (32 with ulcerative colitis, 102 with Crohn's disease), met the inclusion criteria. The included studies showed that the clinical remission rate of thalidomide was 44%-100% and the steroid tapering rate was 50%-100% in children and adolescents with refractory IBD. Peripheral neuropathy was the most common major adverse reaction, and it appeared to be cumulative dose-dependent. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Thalidomide as a treatment for refractory IBD in children and adolescents can improve clinical remission and achieve longer-term maintenance of remission. Peripheral neuropathy is the main adverse drug reaction, and it can be monitored and prevented. It is necessary to fully communicate with parents and obtain informed consent before using this drug.

Effect of dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors on C-reactive protein in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) are emerging glucose-lowering agents through interacting with DPP-4 substrate, impact of which on systemic inflammation in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of DPP-4i on modulating serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) in T2DM. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with comparators were selected. A random-effects model was used for quantitative data analysis. Heterogeneity was evaluated with I2 index. Sensitivity analysis was performed using the one-study remove approach. RESULTS: Sixteen trials with 1607 patients with T2DM were included. Pooled analysis of DPP-4i demonstrated a significant decrease in serum CRP concentrations (- 0.86 mg/L, 95% CI, - 1.36 to - 0.36). No significant difference was found between DPP-4i and active comparators on serum CRP concentrations (0.64 mg/L, 95% CI, - 0.10 to 1.37). Pooled analysis proved to be stable and credible by sensitivity analysis. In subgroup analysis, changes in serum concentrations of CRP were significantly associated with short diabetes duration (- 0.23 mg/L, 95% CI, - 0.41 to - 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: DDP-4i effectively reduced serum CRP levels and showed no stronger effect than traditional oral antidiabetic agents. International Prospective Register for Systematic Review (PROSPERO) number: CRD42017076838.

Comparative efficacy and safety between amisulpride and olanzapine in schizophrenia treatment and a cost analysis in China: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and cost-minimization analysis.

BACKGROUND: Amisulpride was introduced into China in 2010 as a second-generation atypical antipsychotic, while olanzapine has been on the market since 1999 as one of the leading treatments for schizophrenia in China. Since more Chinese patients are gaining access to amisulpride, the study aims to compare the efficacy, safety, and costs between amisulpride and olanzapine for schizophrenia treatment in China. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and WanFang database were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to July 2018. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was utilized to assess the quality of included studies. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of amisulpride and olanzapine, followed by a cost-minimization analysis using local drug and medical costs reported in China. RESULTS: Twenty RCTs with 2000 patients were included in the systematic review. There were no significant differences between amisulpride and olanzapine on efficacy measures based on scores from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity or Improvement. For safety outcomes, amisulpride was associated with lower fasting blood glucose and less abnormal liver functions as well as significantly lower risks of weight gain, constipation, and somnolence; olanzapine was associated with significantly lower risks of insomnia and lactation/amenorrhea/sexual hormone disorder. No significant differences were found in risks of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), tremor, akathisia, abnormal corrected QT interval. Cost-minimization analysis showed that amisulpride was likely to be a cost-saving alternative in China, with potential savings of 1358 Chinese Yuan (CNY) per patient for a three-month schizophrenia treatment compared with olanzapine. CONCLUSION: As the first meta-analysis and cost-minimization analysis comparing the efficacy, safety and cost of amisulpride and olanzapine within a Chinese setting, the study suggests that amisulpride may be an effective, well-tolerated, and cost-saving antipsychotic drug alternative in China.

Impact of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors on serum adiponectin: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adiponectin, an adipose-specific protein, is negatively correlated with pro-atherogenic low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and other cardiovascular risk factors such as insulin resistance. Therefore, low levels of adiponectin are associated with a higher risk for diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) have been used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) as reversible inhibitors through interacting with DPP4 substrate and increase serum incretins such as glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1). The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of DPP4i on serum adiponectin in T2DM patients. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched from inception to February 2016. Randomized controlled trials, evaluating the DPP4i (sitagliptin and vildagliptin) versus comparator (placebo or active-comparison), in T2DM patients with duration of ≥ 12 weeks, were identified. Weighted differences in means of adiponectin levels were calculated by using a fixed or random-effects model. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials, including 1,495 subjects, were identified. Compared with placebo, DPP4i (sitagliptin and vildagliptin) treatment significantly elevated adiponectin levels by 0.74 µg/mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 1.03) relative to that using an active-comparison by 0.00 µg/mL (95% CI, -0.57 to 0.56). Compared with active-comparison, vildagliptin treatment increased adiponectin levels by 0.32 µg/mL (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.65), whereas sitagliptin treatment decreased adiponectin levels by -0.24 µg/mL (95% CI, -1.07 to 0.58). Trials examining effects of other DPP4i were not found. CONCLUSIONS: Sitagliptin and vildagliptin increased serum adiponectin levels and had no stronger effect than traditional oral antidiabetic drugs. Further trials with larger sample size are needed to confirm the results and investigate the association between serum adiponectin levels and treatment of other DPP-4 inhibitors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration No in PROSPERO: CRD42016037399 .

Discovery, synthesis and biological evaluation of 2-(4-(N-phenethylsulfamoyl)phenoxy)acetamides (SAPAs) as novel sphingomyelin synthase 1 inhibitors.

Sphingomyelin synthase (SMS) has been proved to be a potential drug target for the treatment of atherosclerosis. However, few SMS inhibitors have been reported. In this paper, structure-based virtual screening was performed on hSMS1. SAPA 1a was discovered as a novel SMS1 inhibitor with an IC50 value of 5.2 µM in enzymatic assay. A series of 2-(4-(N-phenethylsulfamoyl)phenoxy)acetamides (SAPAs) were synthesized and their biological activities toward SMS1 were evaluated. Among them, SAPA 1j was found to be the most potent SMS1 inhibitor with an IC50 value of 2.1 µM in in vitro assay. The molecular docking studies suggested the interaction modes of SMS1 inhibitors and PC with the active site of SMS1. Site-directed mutagenesis validated the involvement of residues Arg342 and Tyr338 in enzymatic sphingomyelin production. The discovery of SAPA derivatives as a novel class of SMS1 inhibitors would advance the development of more effective SMS1 inhibitors.

[Risk factors and prognosis of acute cerebrovascular events at 1 year after hip fracture in elderly patients].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate risk factors of acute cerebrovascular events and effects on the prognosis within 1 year after hip fracture surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on 320 elderly patients with hip fracture treated from July 2017 to December 2020, including 111 males and 209 females, aged from 60 to 101 years old with an average of (79.05±8.48) years old. According to whether acute cerebrovascular events occurred within 1 year after surgery, patients were divided into cerebrovascular events and non-cerebrovascular events group. Clinical data of patients were collected, including age, sex, comorbidities, fracture type, white blood cell count, hemoglobin, albumin, activities of daily living (ADL) score, walking ability, type of anesthesia, type of surgery, and length of hospital stay, Univariate analysis and multivariate Logistic regression were used to analyze the independent risk factors of acute cerebrovascular events within 1 year after hip fracture in elderly patients. ADL, walking ability and mortality were compared between the two groups 1 year after surgery. RESULTS: Acute cerebrovascular events occurred in 38 patients (11.9%) within 1 year after surgery. In the cerebrovascular events group, there were 20 males and 18 females, aged (82.53±7.91) years. In the non-cerebrovascular event group, there were 91 males and 191 females, aged with an average of (78.59±8.46) years old . Univariate analysis showed that acute cerebrovascular events were associated with age (t=2.712, P=0.007), male (χ2=6.129, P=0.013), hypertension (χ2=8.449, P=0.004), arrhythmia (χ2=6.360, P=0.012), stroke history (χ2=34.887, P=0.000), diabetes mellitus (χ2=4.574, P=0.032) and length of hospital stay (t=2.249, P=0.025) were closely related. Multivariate Logistic regression analysis showed age (OR=1.068, P=0.018), male (OR=2.875, P=0.008), arrhythmia (OR=2.722, P=0.017) and stroke history (OR=7.382, P=0.000) was an independent risk factor for acute cerebrovascular events 1 year after surgery. The patients with cerebrovascular events died at 1 year after surgery (11 cases) compared with those without cerebrovascular events (41 cases), and the difference was statistically significant(χ2=5.108, P=0.024). ADL scores of patients with cerebrovascular events at 1 year after operation were (58.70±14.45) points compared with those without cerebrovascular events (67.83±10.45) points, and the difference was statistically significant(t=4.122, P=0.000). Independent walking, assisted walking and bed rest were 3, 17 and 7 cases in cerebrovascular event group, and 54, 174 and 13 cases in non-cerebrovascular event group, respectively;and the difference was statistically significant(χ2=11.030, P=0.003). CONCLUSION: Acute cerebrovascular events were common in elderly patients 1 year after hip fracture. Age, male, arrhythmia and stroke history were independent risk factors for acute stroke. The patients in the cerebrovascular event group had higher mortality and worse self-care ability and walking ability one year after operation.

The guideline for therapeutic drug monitoring guidelines development.

AIM: The guideline is meant to standardize the principles, procedures, and methods for developing therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) guidelines and promoting open, transparent, scientific, and credible TDM guidelines. METHODS: Division of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, Chinese Pharmacological Society established guideline working groups, declared and managed conflicts of interest. The guideline working groups used the Delphi method to formulate the purpose and scope of the guidelines and questions in the PICO format, searched and synthesized evidence, and integrated with the current situation in China and TDM characteristics to preliminarily develop recommendations for the guideline for TDM guideline development in China. Through internal discussions of the guideline working groups and external peer review, the content was improved, and we eventually formulated a guideline suitable for guiding TDM-related guidelines. RESULTS: The guideline provides suggestions for problems to be identified and solved in the planning, development, publishing, and updating stages of TDM guidelines, including forming guideline working groups, planning guidelines, declaration and management of interests, formulating questions and selecting outcomes, preparing the planning proposal, evidence retrieval and synthesis, evidence assessment, developing recommendations, drafting guidelines, external review guidelines, publishing and disseminating guidelines, postevaluation of guidelines, and updating guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline can provide methodological guidance and reference for the development of TDM guidelines.

A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis (2020).

Background: For anaphylaxis, a life-threatening allergic reaction, the incidence rate was presented to have increased from the beginning of the 21st century. Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of anaphylaxis are public health concerns. Objective: This guideline aimed to provide high-quality and evidence-based recommendations for the emergency management of anaphylaxis. Method: The panel of health professionals from fifteen medical areas selected twenty-five clinical questions and formulated the recommendations with the supervision of four methodologists. We collected evidence by conducting systematic literature retrieval and using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: This guideline made twenty-five recommendations that covered the diagnosis, preparation, emergency treatment, and post-emergency management of anaphylaxis. We recommended the use of a set of adapted diagnostic criteria from the American National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN), and developed a severity grading system that classified anaphylaxis into four grades. We recommended epinephrine as the first-line treatment, with specific doses and routes of administration for different severity of anaphylaxis or different conditions. Proper dosage is critical in the administration of epinephrine, and the monitor is important in the IV administration. Though there was only very low or low-quality evidence supported the use of glucocorticoids and H1 antagonists, we still weakly recommended them as second-line medications. We could not make a well-directed recommendation regarding premedication for preventing anaphylaxis since it is difficult to weigh the concerns and potential effects. Conclusion: For the emergency management of anaphylaxis we conclude that: • NIAID/FAAN diagnostic criteria and the four-tier grading system should be used for the diagnosis • Prompt and proper administration of epinephrine is critical.

Cost-Effectiveness of Aprepitant in Preventing Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: A Systematic Review of Published Articles.

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to assess the published cost-effectiveness analyses of aprepitant for patients with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, WANFANG DATA, and CBM database. The date of publication is up to January 2019. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts, and articles sequentially to select studies for data abstraction based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved and reviewers reached a consensus. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to the 24-item checklist of the consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS). The costs reported by the included studies were converted to US dollars via purchasing power parities (PPP) in the year 2019 using the CCEMG-EPPI-Certer Cost Converter. Results: Thirteen articles were included based on the inclusion criteria for cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis. Twelve studies were rated as good quality and one as a moderate quality based on the CHEERS checklist. Eight studies compared aprepitant plus 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist (5-HT3RA) and dexamethasone with the standard regimen (5-HT3RA and dexamethasone). It was concluded that aprepitant plus standard regimen was a cost-effective strategy for preventing CINV. Only one study that compared aprepitant plus 5-HT3RA with 5-HT3RA, concluded that the addition of aprepitant reduced the incidence of severe nausea, and it might also provide an economic benefit in the overall management. Four studies that compared aprepitant with other antiemetic drugs concluded that aprepitant is a cost-effective strategy for preventing CINV compared with metoclopramide. However, netupitan + palonosetron and olanzapine are cost-effective compared with aprepitant. Conclusion: This study is the first systematic evaluation of adding aprepitant to standard regimens for patients with CINV. Most economic evaluations of antiemetic medications are reported to be of good quality. Adding aprepitant to standard regimens is found to be a cost-effective strategy for preventing CINV.

Conbercept for Treatment of Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration and Visual Impairment due to Diabetic Macular Edema or Pathologic Myopia Choroidal Neovascularization: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Conbercept is a new anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drug. Here, we systematically conducted the efficacy, safety, compliance, and pharmacoeconomic evaluation of intravitreal conbercept (IVC) compared with other treatments in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), diabetic macular edema (DME), or pathologic myopia choroidal neovascularization (pmCNV). Methods: Databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and WanFang Data were systematically searched from the inception to July 27, 2021. Randomized clinical trials and pharmacoeconomic studies comparing IVC with control groups in adults with nAMD, DME, or pmCNV were reviewed and selected. Meta-analyses were performed using the fixed-effects model when pooled data were homogeneous. Heterogeneous data were analyzed using the random-effects model. Primary outcomes included visual improvement rate, mean change in visual acuity or best corrected visual acuity, and pharmacoeconomic outcomes. Additional outcomes were the mean change in fundus examination values, adverse events (AEs), quality-of-life measures, and number of injections. Results: Among 3,591 screened articles, 22 original studies with 1,910 eyes of patients were finally included. For nAMD and DME, IVC was significantly associated with better visual acuity or best corrected visual acuity improvement and fundus quantitative measures than placebo, laser photocoagulation (LP), or intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide (IVT). However, IVC showed non-inferior efficacy to intravitreal ranibizumab (IVR) according to low quality of evidence, and there was lack of trials comparing the priority of IVC to other anti-VEGF regimens. No definitive increased risk of ocular or non-ocular AEs were observed in the study groups. All patients with AEs recovered after symptomatic treatments, and no severe AEs occurred. Patients treated with IVC might have higher quality-of-life scores than those in IVR in nAMD or LP in DME. Additionally, IVC showed cost-utility advantages in nAMD and cost-effectiveness advantages than IVR in pmCNV in China. Conclusion: IVC is well-tolerated and effective for improving vision acuity and quantitative measures in fundus condition in patients with nAMD and DME compared with LP, IVT, and placebo, but gains comparable efficacy to IVR. However, well-designed, large-sample, and long-term evaluation of IVC shall be conducted in additional studies worldwide.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of empagliflozin compared with glimepiride in patients with Type 2 diabetes in China.

Aim: The study assesses the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin versus glimepiride in patients with Type 2 diabetes and uncontrolled by metformin alone in China, based on the EMPA-REG H2H-SU trial. Materials & methods: A calibrated version of the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model was used. Cost of complications and utility were taken from literature. The Chinese healthcare system perspective and 5% discounting rates were applied. Results: Empagliflozin+metformin provides additional quality-adjusted life-years (0.317) driven by a reduction in the number of cardiovascular and renal events, for an additional cost of $1382 (CNY9703) compared with glimepiride+metformin. Conclusion: Empagliflozin is cost-effective treatment versus glimepiride applying a threshold of $30,290 (CNY212,676).

A systematic review and meta-analysis of anticoagulation therapy for portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis: to treat or not to treat?

PURPOSE: To date, the optimal treatment for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhotic patients has not been established in guidelines or consensus. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of anticoagulation therapy in patients with cirrhosis and PVT. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (until 31st October 2020) for studies evaluating the effect of anticoagulation therapy on treating PVT in patients with cirrhosis. Odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were included in the analysis, comprising 6005 patients. Of these, three were prospective cohort studies, nine were retrospective cohort studies and one was case-control study. Compared to no treatment, anticoagulation therapy was associated with higher rates of PVT recanalization (OR 4.29; 95% CI 3.01-6.13). Anticoagulation therapy demonstrated a significant 74% reduction in PVT extension compared to no treatment (OR 0.26; 95% CI 0.14-0.49). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of death (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.20-1.40). However, anticoagulation therapy was associated with slightly higher risk of bleeding compared to no treatment (OR 1.16; 95% CI 1.02-1.32). CONCLUSIONS: In cirrhotic patients with PVT, anticoagulation therapy helps increase rate of PVT recanalization and improve survival, but may also carry higher risks of bleeding compared to no treatment. Our findings support the use of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with PVT.

Empagliflozin in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients with High Cardiovascular Risk: A Model-Based Cost-Utility Analysis in China.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-utility of empagliflozin, in addition to best available standard care (BASC), for the treatment of adult patients with T2DM at high cardiovascular risk from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. METHODS: A Microsoft Excel-based patient-level simulation model, based on the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial data, was adapted and used to project individual's clinical and economic outcomes over a lifetime horizon. The cost and utility values were derived from databases and published studies. Numbers and rates of diabetes-related events, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (¥ 2019) as well as incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) were calculated. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the model results. RESULTS: Compared with BASC, empagliflozin plus BASC was predicted to result in an additional 1.01 QALYs (8.05 QALYs vs 7.04 QALYs) at an incremental cost of ¥4002 per patient. The modeled ICUR was ¥3988 per QALY gained, which was considered highly cost-effective in China compared to both one and three times the GDP per capita in 2019 (¥70,892 and ¥212,676). The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of base-case results. CONCLUSION: This is the first cost-utility analysis regarding the use of empagliflozin in patients with T2DM in China, the world's most affected country by the T2DM pandemic. The economic evaluation suggests that empagliflozin added to BASC was estimated to be a highly value-for-money option for the treatment of adult patients with T2DM at high cardiovascular risk in the Chinese healthcare setting.

Lixisenatide versus insulin glulisine on top of insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cost-per-responder analysis in China.

Objective: To compare the cost per responder of lixisenatide versus insulin glulisine once daily (basal-plus) and three times daily (basal-bolus) on top of basal insulin for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled by basal insulin in China.Methods: The cost per responder was estimated based on clinical data obtained from the GetGoal Duo-2 clinical trial and direct medical costs from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system over a 52-week time horizon. The response was assessed at week 26 in the clinical trial, which was extrapolated to 52 weeks to estimate the annual cost per responder. Responders were primarily defined using a composite endpoint that based on an HbA1c ≤ 7.0% threshold AND no weight gain With or Without no documented symptomatic hypoglycemia. Composite endpoints with varied HbA1c thresholds were defined in secondary analyses.Results: For the composite endpoint of HbA1c threshold ≤7.0% AND no weight gain, the annual cost per responder results were 96,722 CNY, 122,552 CNY and 135,926 CNY (14,616, 18,520 and 20,541 US dollars) for lixisenatide combined with basal insulin, basal-plus, and basal-bolus, respectively. For the composite endpoint of HbA1c threshold ≤7.0% AND no weight gain AND no documented symptomatic hypoglycemia, the annual cost per responder results were 136,290 CNY, 231,487 CNY and 222,424 CNY (20,596, 34,982 and 33,612 US dollars) for lixisenatide combined with basal insulin, basal-plus, and basal-bolus, respectively. The secondary analyses proved similar results.Conclusion: Lixisenatide combined with basal insulin is associated with a lower cost per responder compared with basal-plus and basal-bolus for T2DM patients inadequately controlled by basal insulin in China.

Antiemetic regimen with aprepitant in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of antiemetic regimen with aprepitant in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) and provide updated information for clinical practice. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and 3 Chinese literature databases were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials comparing standard regimen (5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and glucocorticoid) with aprepitant triple regimen (aprepitant plus the standard regimen) for preventing CINV were screened. Literature selection, data extraction, and quality evaluation were performed by 2 reviewers independently. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in the meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: A total of 51 randomized controlled trials were finally included in the systematic review. Compared with the standard regimen, the aprepitant triple regimen significantly improved the complete response in the overall (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.71-2.07), acute (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.65-2.32) and delayed (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.70-2.27) phases, regardless of emetogenic risk of chemotherapy. Aprepitant could also significantly enhance the proportions of patients who have no emesis, nausea, or use of rescue medication respectively in the overall, acute and/or delayed phases. Aprepitant was found to be associated with decreased risk of constipation (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.97), but increased the incidence of hiccup (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05, 1.51). There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups on other safety outcomes. CONCLUSION: The aprepitant triple regimen is effective for the prevention of CINV in patients being treated with moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy, and has a significant tendency to reduce the risk of constipation and increase the incidence of hiccup.

Risk of Gastrointestinal Adverse Events in Cancer Patients Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Plus Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: The combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and chemotherapy can improve clinical outcomes in the treatment of various tumors, but may also be associated with more adverse events (AEs). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to characterize the risk of gastrointestinal AEs in cancer patients treated with ICI plus chemotherapy. Methods: This review was based on comprehensive search through PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported gastrointestinal AEs following the use of ICI plus chemotherapy. Literature screening, data extraction, and quality evaluation were performed by two individual reviewers. Revman (version 5.3) was used for meta-analysis. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Meta-analysis was conducted according to different types of ICIs [programmed death 1 (PD-1), programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors]. Results: After a full-text review, 10 trials involving 5,142 patients were included in the study. Compared with chemotherapy alone, PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy significantly increased the risk of diarrhea (RR = 1.38, 95% CI, 1.13-1.68, P = 0.001; I 2 = 0%) and colitis (RR = 2.90, 95% CI, 1.02-8.21, P = 0.050; I 2 = 0%), PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy significantly increased the risk of nausea (RR = 1.17, 95% CI, 1.02-1.35, P = 0.020; I 2 = 0%), while CTLA-4 inhibitor plus chemotherapy significantly increased the risk of decreased appetite (RR = 1.49, 95% CI, 1.17-1.90, P = 0.001; I 2 = 0%), diarrhea (RR = 2.23, 95% CI, 1.90-2.63, P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%), and colitis (RR = 28.39, 95% CI, 5.59-144.24, P < 0.001; I 2 = 0%). Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrated that ICI plus chemotherapy is associated with a higher risk of gastrointestinal AEs. However, combining different ICIs may lead to diverse gastrointestinal toxicities. Clinicians should be aware of these AEs in the application of ICI plus chemotherapy.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of amisulpride and olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia in China.

BACKGROUND: Both amisulpride and olanzapine are leading treatments for schizophrenia in China. This study aimed to investigate the long-term cost-effectiveness of amisulpride and olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia in China. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime clinical and economic outcomes of schizophrenia treatment from the healthcare payer perspective. The long-term costs and QALYs were estimated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the impact of variance of parameters on the results. RESULTS: Treatment with amisulpride provided an effectiveness gain of 16.59 QALYs at an average cost of USD 25,884 whereas olanzapine resulted in 16.38 QALYs at a cost of USD 34,839 over a lifetime horizon. One-way sensitivity analysis suggested that the most sensitive variable was the unit cost of olanzapine. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis based on a Monte Carlo simulation with a lifetime horizon, the probability of amisulpride being cost-effective was 99.8% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of USD 9,322, the GDP per capita in China 2018. A scenario analysis with updated olanzapine unit cost suggested an ICER of 7,857 USD/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Amisulpride is likely to be a cost-effective option with increased effectiveness compared with olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia patients in China.

Lixisenatide for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients Inadequately Controlled on Oral Antidiabetic Drugs: A Mixed-Treatment Comparison Meta-analysis and Cost-Utility Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety and cost-utility (from the Chinese health insurance perspective) of lixisenatide and insulin regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of English (PubMed and Cochrane Library) and Chinese (CNKI and WanFang) language databases was performed, and head-to-head relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved and analyzed by performing a mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analysis for efficacy and safety endpoints. A cost-utility analysis was then conducted using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model to compare the lifetime pharmacoeconomic profiles among the treatment groups. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs were included in this MTC meta-analysis. Regarding glycated hemoglobin targets, lixisenatide was similar to both basal insulin (mean difference [MD] 0.27%; 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.02%, 0.57%) and premixed insulin (MD 0.32%; 95% CrI - 0.01%, 0.66%), respectively. Statistically significant differences were found for changes in body weight in favor of lixisenatide compared with basal insulin (MD - 3.22 kg; 95% CrI - 5.51 kg, - 0.94 kg) and premixed insulin (MD - 2.68 kg; 95% CrI - 5.16 kg, - 0.20 kg). The relative risk (RR) of symptomatic hypoglycemia associated with lixisenatide was also significantly lower than that associated with basal insulin (RR 0.22; 95% CrI 0.09, 0.52) and premixed insulin (RR 0.17; 95% CrI 0.07, 0.41). The cost-utility analysis yielded results of ¥61,072 ($8565, vs. basal insulin) and ¥127,169 ($17,836, vs. premixed insulin) per quality-adjusted life year gained, with both values falling within the willingness-to-pay threshold in China. CONCLUSIONS: For T2DM patients inadequately controlled on OADs, lixisenatide was shown to be comparable to basal insulin and premixed insulin in terms of HbA1c and better than both of the latter in terms of both body weight loss and hypoglycemia. Lixisenatide was also a cost-effective treatment option from the perspective of Chinese health insurance.