Meta-analysis of the prevalence of renal cancer detected by abdominal ultrasonography.

BACKGROUND: The potential for an ultrasound-based screening programme for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) to improve survival through early detection has been the subject of much debate. The prevalence of ultrasound-detected asymptomatic RCC is an important first step to establishing whether a screening programme may be feasible. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE and Embase was performed up to March 2016 to identify studies reporting the prevalence of renal masses and RCC. Two populations of patients were chosen: asymptomatic individuals undergoing screening ultrasonography and patients undergoing ultrasonography for abdominal symptoms not related to RCC. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Study quality was evaluated using a validated eight-point checklist. RESULTS: Sixteen studies (413 551 patients) were included in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence of renal mass was 0·36 (95 per cent c.i. 0·23 to 0·52) per cent and the prevalence of histologically proven RCC was 0·10 (0·06 to 0·15) per cent. The prevalence of RCC was more than double in studies from Europe and North America than in those from Asia: 0·17 (0·09 to 0·27) versus 0·06 (0·03 to 0·09) per cent respectively. Data on 205 screen-detected RCCs showed that 84·4 per cent of tumours were stage T1-T2 N0, 13·7 per cent were T3-T4 N0, and only 2·0 per cent had positive nodes or metastases at diagnosis. CONCLUSION: At least one RCC would be detected per 1000 individuals screened. The majority of tumours identified are early stage (T1-T2).

Cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial treatment compared with routine care for individuals with screen-detected Type 2 diabetes: analysis of the ADDITION-UK cluster-randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: To examine the short- and long-term cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial treatment compared with routine care among people with screen-detected Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Cost-utility analysis in ADDITION-UK, a cluster-randomized controlled trial of early intensive treatment in people with screen-detected diabetes in 69 UK general practices. Unit treatment costs and utility decrement data were taken from published literature. Accumulated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated using ADDITION-UK data from 1 to 5 years (short-term analysis, n = 1024); trial data were extrapolated to 30 years using the UKPDS outcomes model (version 1.3) (long-term analysis; n = 999). All costs were transformed to the UK 2009/10 price level. RESULTS: Adjusted incremental costs to the NHS were £285, £935, £1190 and £1745 over a 1-, 5-, 10- and 30-year time horizon, respectively (discounted at 3.5%). Adjusted incremental QALYs were 0.0000, - 0.0040, 0.0140 and 0.0465 over the same time horizons. Point estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) suggested that the intervention was not cost-effective although the ratio improved over time: the ICER over 10 years was £82,250, falling to £37,500 over 30 years. The ICER fell below £30 000 only when the intervention cost was below £631 per patient: we estimated the cost at £981. CONCLUSION: Given conventional thresholds of cost-effectiveness, the intensive treatment delivered in ADDITION was not cost-effective compared with routine care for individuals with screen-detected diabetes in the UK. The intervention may be cost-effective if it can be delivered at reduced cost.

Determining in-patient diabetes treatment satisfaction in the UK--the DIPSat study.

AIMS: To measure in-patient diabetes treatment satisfaction and its relationship to in-patient diabetes care. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, diabetes in-patient specialist nurses at 58 UK hospitals asked insulin-treated in-patients with diabetes to complete the recently updated Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for In-patients and a general questionnaire; 1319 in-patients completed these questionnaires. RESULTS: Satisfaction with the general diabetes treatment items in the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for In-patients was high, but there were high levels of extreme dissatisfaction with meal choices, meal quality and lack of similarity of hospital meals to normal domestic choices--23% would never or rarely have made similar meal choices at home. Hyperglycaemia or hypoglycaemia was reported for much of the in-patient stay (20% and 7%, respectively) and 26% reported at least one severe hypoglycaemic episode; these groups had lower satisfaction with the timing of medication in relation to meals (P < 0.003). More frequent in-patient hyperglycaemia or hypoglycaemia were associated with significantly poorer overall satisfaction scores and negative well-being scores (both P < 0.0001). Previous experience of a multiple daily insulin injection regimen was associated with more dissatisfaction than other regimens (P < 0.01). Multiple regression models explained 36% of variability in overall treatment satisfaction, with most (22.4%) accounted for by satisfaction with time spent with a diabetes in-patient specialist nurse (P < 0.0001). Self-administration of insulin was independently associated with higher treatment satisfaction (P < 0.006) in this model. CONCLUSIONS: The DIPSat programme describes the complex relationships between diabetes in-patient treatment satisfaction and in-patient diabetes care.

The cost-effectiveness of mycophenolate mofetil as firstline therapy in active lupus nephritis.

OBJECTIVES: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune disorder that can affect any system of the body. Involvement of the kidneys, lupus nephritis (LN), affects up to 50% of SLE patients during the course of their disease, and is characterized by periods of active disease (flares) and remission. For more severe nephritis, an induction course of immunosuppressive therapy is recommended. Options include intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), followed by a maintenance course, typically of azathioprine. The objective of this study is to determine which therapy results in better quality of life (QoL) for patients and which represents best value for money for finite health service resources. METHODS: A patient-level simulation model is developed to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of a patient treated with IVC or MMF for an induction period of six months. Efficacy, QoL, resource use and cost data are extracted from the literature and standard databases and supplemented with expert opinion where necessary. RESULTS: On average, the model predicts MMF to result in improved QoL compared with IVC. MMF is also less expensive than IVC, costing pound 1600 (euro 2400; US$ 3100) less over the period, based on 2005 NHS prices. The major determinant and cost driver of this result is the requirement for a day-case procedure to administer IVC. Sensitivity analysis shows an 81% probability that MMF will be cost-effective compared with IVC at a willingness to pay of pound 30,000 (euro 44,700; US$ 58,500) per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: MMF is likely to result in better QoL and be less expensive than IVC as induction therapy for LN.