Tobacco Cessation Interventions in Non-Respiratory Cancers: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Considering the high rates of persistent tobacco use, effective cessation interventions are needed for cancer patients and caregivers. Despite the need, there is a significant lack of research on tobacco cessation, especially for non-respiratory cancers (breast, prostate, colorectal, cervical, and bladder cancer). PURPOSE: The objective was to evaluate tobacco use and tobacco cessation interventions among patients and caregivers for non-respiratory cancers. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions were identified. Five electronic databases were searched in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines through July 2023. Studies exclusive to lung, oral, thoracic, and head and neck cancers were excluded. Effect sizes were estimated; risk of bias was assessed. RESULTS: Of 3,304 studies, 17 were included. Interventions included behavioral (n = 6), pharmacotherapy (n = 2), and a combination (n = 9) treatment. Eight studies included a health behavior model; mean behavioral change techniques were 5.57. Pooled magnitude of the odds of cessation was positive and significant (odds ratio = 1.24, 95% confidence interval [Lower Limit 1.02, Upper Limit 1.51]) relative to usual care/placebo. Cumulative meta-analysis examined the accumulation of results over-time and demonstrated that studies have been significant since 2020. Two studies included caregivers' who were involved in the provision of social support. CONCLUSIONS: Current interventions have the potential to reduce tobacco use in non-respiratory cancers. Results may be beneficial for promoting tobacco cessation among non-respiratory cancers. There is a considerable lack of dyadic interventions for cancer survivors and caregivers; researchers are encouraged to explore dyadic approaches.

We aimed to understand effective ways for cancer patients and caregivers to quit using tobacco. We focused on non-respiratory cancers (cancers not related to breathing issues) like breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer. We reviewed 17 randomized controlled trials designed to help people quit tobacco, which included behavioral therapies (e.g., education and counseling), pharmacotherapy (i.e., medicine), and combinations of both. We found that people in these studies quit using tobacco, especially when more than one approach was used. The studies also showed that these approaches have been more successful since 2020. The research highlighted a need for more studies that include both patients and their caregivers together in the quitting process. This approach, called dyadic intervention, could be more effective in supporting patients and their caregivers. Overall, while the current approaches are promising, more research is needed to develop better ways to help cancer patients and caregivers quit smoking for longer.

The role of managed care professionals in the management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema.

Managed care professionals play a significant role in the management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and diabetic macular edema (DME) through formulary management and drug utilization strategies. These strategies are designed to improve access to affordable care and minimize medical costs to both patients and payers. Preserving vision in patients with nAMD and DME is key to improving clinical outcomes and reducing the risk of comorbid conditions, such as depression. With the approval of new intravitreal treatment options, managed care professionals must stay up to date with evidence-based guidelines as well as the addition of cost-effective treatments to drug formularies to better manage health care resources and improve patient outcomes.

Evaluation of a pharmacist-provider collaborative clinic for treatment of iron deficiency in patients with heart failure.

PURPOSE: Intravenous iron therapy is recommended to improve symptoms and exercise tolerance in patients with heart failure (HF) with -reduced ejection fraction and iron deficiency (ID), but there are limited published data on the implementation of intravenous iron therapy in practice. A pharmacist-provider collaborative ID treatment clinic was established within an advanced HF and pulmonary hypertension service to optimize IV iron therapy. The objective was to evaluate the clinical impacts of the pharmacist-provider collaborative ID treatment clinic. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed to compare clinical outcomes among patients of the collaborative ID treatment clinic (the postimplementation group) and a cohort of patients who received usual care (the preimplementation group). The study included patients 18 years of age or older with diagnosed HF or pulmonary hypertension who met prespecified criteria for ID. The primary outcome was adherence to institutional intravenous iron therapy guidance. A key secondary outcome was ID treatment goal achievement. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients in the preimplementation group and 81 in the postimplementation group were included in the study. The rate of adherence to the institutional guidance was significantly improved in the postimplementation group (93%) compared to the preimplementation group (40%). There was no significant difference in the ID therapeutic target achievement rate between the pre- and postimplementation groups (38% vs 48%). CONCLUSION: Implementing a pharmacist-provider collaborative ID treatment clinic significantly increased the number of patients who adhered to intravenous iron therapy guidance compared to usual care.

Length of Stay, Cost, and Outcomes related to Traumatic Subdural Hematoma in inpatient setting in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: In the US, the prevalence of traumatic subdural hematoma (TSDH) continues to increase. Using a nationally representative sample of discharge records of patients with TSDH, the study objectives were to estimate trend in number of TSDH cases, surgical management, inpatient cost, length of stay (LOS), mortality rate, and complication rate; and to identify the association of sociodemographic, clinical and hospital characteristics with complications and mortality. METHOD: We identified patients with a primary diagnosis of TSDH from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2010 to 2017. Quarterly and monthly trends were estimated using interrupted time series design. Multivariate logistic regressions measured association between various factors and inpatient death and complications. RESULTS: Number of cases, mean LOS, rate of complication increased. Proportion of patients undergoing surgery, mean inpatient cost, inpatient mortality decreased. Mean inpatient cost was $23,182.40 and LOS was 6.41 days. Odds of inpatient death and complications increased with injury severity score and comorbid conditions requiring use of anticoagulants. Odds of inpatient death were highest among those ≥85 years old and in south and northeast region. CONCLUSION: Given the increase in prevalence of TSDH in USA, additional resources should be allocated toward improving patient outcomes and lowering healthcare costs.

Adherence to cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators: analysis of a national specialty pharmacy database.

BACKGROUND: There have been significant advances in Cystic Fibrosis (CF) treatment, with the introduction of Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator (CFTR) modulators. Adherence is an important goal for CF management, as nonadherence is linked to poor health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To calculate the medication adherence in patients taking CFTR modulators using a national specialty pharmacy database. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study utilized de-identified specialty pharmacy data from September 2017 to August 2018 to assess medication adherence for three CFTR modulators: ivacaftor, lumacaftor/ivacaftor, and tezacaftor/ivacaftor & ivacaftor. The primary outcome was proportion of days covered (PDC) for each medication, with mean PDC values compared across age groups and insurance characteristics. All analyses were performed using the SAS 9.4 University Edition (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). RESULTS: A total of 2,548 patients were analyzed, including 1,289 (50.59%) patients on lumacaftor/ivacaftor, 784 (30.77%) on ivacaftor, and 475 (18.64%) on tezacaftor/ivacaftor & ivacaftor. The mean PDC value for all CFTR modulators was above 0.80. Tezacaftor/ivacaftor & ivacaftor had the highest overall PDC of 0.92, while PDC values for both lumacaftor/ivacaftor and ivacaftor were 0.84. Children/adolescents on lumacaftor/ivacaftor (p = 0.0001) and tezacaftor/ivacaftor & ivacaftor (p = 0.001) had significantly higher mean PDC values compared to adults but not for ivacaftor (p = 0.3744). No statistical differences were seen in PDC across insurance characteristics. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the adherence of three CFTR modulators using a large nationwide specialty database. With high acquisition costs of CFTR modulator therapies, there is a need to improve rates of adherence in patients with CF.

Oral antidiabetic medication adherence and glycaemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional retrospective study in a tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to measure the adherence rates of oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and assess the relationship of glycaemic control and adherence to OADs after controlling for other associated factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional retrospective study. SETTING: Large tertiary hospital in the central region of Saudi Arabia. PARTICIPANTS: 5457patients aged 18 years and older diagnosed with T2DM during the period from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2016. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The modified medication possession ratio (mMPR) was calculated as a proxy measure for adherence of OADs. The factors associated with OADs non-adherence and medication oversupply were assessed using multinomial logistic regression models. The secondary outcomes were to measure the association between OADs adherence and glycaemic control. RESULTS: Majority of patients with T2DM were females (n=3400, 62.3%). The average glycated haemoglobin was 8.2±1.67. Among the study population, 48.6% had good adherence (mMPR >0.8) and 8.6% had a medication oversupply (mMPR >1.2). Good adherence was highest among those using repaglinide (71.0%) followed by pioglitazone (65.0%) and sitagliptin (59.0%). In the multivariate analysis, women with T2DM were more likely to have poor adherence (adjusted OR (AOR)=0.76, 95% CI=0.67, 0.86) compared with men. Also, medication oversupply was more likely among patients with hyperpolypharmacy (AOR=1.88, 95% CI=1.36, 2.63), comorbid osteoarthritis (AOR=1.72, 95% CI=1.20, 02.45) and non-Saudi patients (AOR=1.53, 95% CI=1.16, 2.01). However, no association was found between glycaemic control and adherence to OADs. CONCLUSION: The study findings support the growing concern of non-adherence to OADs among patients with T2DM in Saudi Arabia. Decision makers have to invest in behavioural interventions that will boost medication adherence rates. This is particularly important in patients with polypharmacy and high burden of comorbid conditions.

Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in oncology: a systematic review of the literature.

PURPOSE: Shared decision-making (SDM) is a strategy to facilitate patient-centered care and is increasingly important in oncology, where patients are faced with complicated treatment decisions that require them to weigh efficacy and safety, quality of life, and cost. Understanding the contributors to the use of SDM may provide insight to its further implementation. Therefore, the objective of the study was to examine the patient-related barriers/facilitators to SDM in oncology care. METHODS: A systematic literature review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was executed. A search strategy composed of cancer, decision-making, and patient-centered terms was conducted utilizing PubMed, EBSCO MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library databases between January 2007 and November 2017. Full-text, US-based, English language articles describing the patient perspective of SDM in oncology care were included. Relevant data from articles were reviewed in a qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: From 3435 potential citations, a total of 35 articles were included. The most common cancers studied were breast (n = 22; 62.9%) and prostate (n = 9; 25.7%). The identified themes for barriers to SDM were uncertainty in the treatment decision, concern regarding adverse effects, and poor physician communication. Themes for facilitators for SDM included physician consideration of patient preferences, positive physician actions and behaviors, and use or encouragement of support systems. CONCLUSION: As SDM gains use within oncology practice, understanding key influences will allow for more effective implementation of strategies to increase patient engagement and improve care and value in the treatment process.

Variation in prostate surgery costs and outcomes in the USA: robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy.

AIM: To compare perioperative complications, inpatient cost and length of stay between robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP) using National Inpatient Sample data from 2010 to 2015. PATIENTS & METHODS: A total of 69,009 records with RARP or ORP were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression and generalized linear models. RESULTS: The RARP had superior perioperative outcomes at a higher cost (adjusted mean difference = 2956; 95% CI: $2822-$3090) and shorter length of stay (mean difference = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.81-0.89) compared with ORP. Mean cost of RARP was lowest in urban teaching, private invest-own, high volume and northeast region hospitals and highest for black men. CONCLUSION: Compared with ORP, RARP had significantly better perioperative outcomes at a higher cost.

Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact of Lumacaftor/Ivacaftor in the Treatment of Cystic Fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a chronic, progressive, genetic disease affecting more than 30,000 people in the United States and 70,000 people globally. The goals of treatment are to slow disease progression, reduce pulmonary exacerbations, relieve chronic symptoms, and improve the patient's quality of life. Lumacaftor/ivacaftor is a new therapy for CF that has demonstrated good clinical outcomes, including improved absolute percentage predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1%). However, given the high cost of therapy, there is a need to evaluate the overall value of lumacaftor/ivacaftor in CF management. OBJECTIVES: To (a) conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of lumacaftor/ivacaftor to understand the overall effectiveness of the drug compared with its costs and (b) conduct a budget impact analysis (BIA) to understand the potential financial effect of introducing a new drug in a health plan. METHODS: Two static decision models were developed using Microsoft Excel to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of lumacaftor/ivacaftor over a 1-year time frame from a payer perspective. Model inputs included drug costs (wholesale acquisition costs), drug monitoring schedules (package inserts), drug monitoring costs (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid physician fee schedule and published literature), FEV1% predicted and pulmonary exacerbation values (clinical trials), and cost to treat pulmonary exacerbations (published literature). The outcomes in the CEA included total cost of therapy; average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER), defined as cost per FEV1% predicted; and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as the difference in the ratio of cost per FEV1% predicted of lumacaftor/ivacaftor and placebo. Outcomes in the BIA included total budget impact; cost per member per month (PMPM), defined as total budget impact per hypothetical plan population; and cost per treated member per month (PTMPM), defined as total budget impact per target CF population. All costs were adjusted to 2016 dollars, and one-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the model robustness given uncertainty in model inputs and study assumptions. RESULTS: The annual cost of therapy per patient for lumacaftor/ivacaftor was $379,780. The ACER for lumacaftor/ivacaftor was $151,912, while the ICER for lumacaftor/ivacaftor compared with placebo was $95,016 per FEV1% predicted. The annual total budget impact due to the inclusion of lumacaftor/ivacaftor on the health plan formulary was $266,046. The PMPM cost was $0.02 and the PTMPM cost was $6.21. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CF, lumacaftor/ivacaftor has demonstrated better clinical effectiveness compared with placebo alongside an increased drug acquisition cost. However, the therapy may be a viable alternative to existing standard therapy over a short time horizon. Health care payers, both private and public, need to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and the financial effect when considering expansion of new drug coverage in CF management. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. Covvey and Kamal have received research funding from Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Covvey, Giannetti, and Kamal have received research funding from the College of Psychiatric and Neurologic Pharmacists. Kamal serves as a consultant to the Lynx Group (Cranbury, NJ) and Manticore Consulting Group (Scottsdale, AZ). Mukherjee has nothing to disclose. A related poster abstract was presented at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting; March 27-30, 2017; Denver, CO.

Hospitalization costs of cystic fibrosis in the United States: a retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine patient, hospital, and clinical characteristics associated with the length of stay (LOS), total hospital charges, and total hospital costs in cystic fibrosis (CF). METHODS: Hospital discharge records with primary and secondary diagnoses of CF were identified from the 2012 Kids' Inpatient Database (KID) consisting of inpatient records of ages 0-20 years; and 2012 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) consisting of inpatient records of ages 21 and above. Both the databases are part of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). Patient demographics, hospital characteristics, clinical characteristics, and outcome measures from KID and NIS were utilized in the analyses. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 24.0. RESULTS: A total of 3142 and 10,258 CF-related hospital discharges were identified from 2012 KID and 2012 NIS databases, respectively. Among children, the mean (SD) LOS was 9.79 (10.51) days with a mean hospital costs of $26,249.23 (40,592.81). Adults had a mean LOS of 8.54 (8.42) days with a mean hospital costs of $21,600.91 (31,997.52). Number of procedures and total comorbidities were identified as the most important predictors of LOS, total hospital charges, and total hospital costs in both datasets. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalizations contribute significantly to the economic burden of CF. As inpatient costs in CF vary by patient, clinical, and hospital characteristics, healthcare decision makers need to utilize a targeted approach in different age groups to reduce hospital admission rates and the overall economic burden of CF.

A Systematic Review of the Effect of Cancer Treatment on Work Productivity of Patients and Caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is a leading cause of death with substantial financial costs. While significant data exist on the economic burden of care, less is known about the indirect costs of treatment and, specifically, the effect on work productivity of patients and their caregivers. To examine the full effect of cancer and the potential value of new therapies, all aspects of care, including indirect costs and patient-reported outcomes, should be evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of the literature examining the effect of cancer treatment on work productivity in patients and their caregivers. METHODS: Articles, abstracts, and bibliographies were searched in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Scopus, CINAHL, and conference lists from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, and Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy up to January 2016. The PRISMA guidelines were used. Controlled search terminology included individual pharmacologic therapies for cancer and terms related to patient and caregiver work productivity. Citations were included if they evaluated the effect of cancer treatment on work productivity, used and described productivity assessments and instruments, and were written in English. Studies that reported only clinical outcomes or assessed only nonpharmacological treatments were excluded. Identified studies were screened and extracted for study inclusion by 2 independent reviewers, with adjudication by 2 secondary reviewers during the final eligibility phase. RESULTS: Of 978 potential citations, 62 articles or abstracts were included. Forty-six studies (74.2%) evaluated patient-related productivity; 10 studies (16.1%) focused on caregivers, and 6 studies (9.7%) were a combination. Sixteen countries contributed literature, including 26 studies (41.2%) conducted in the United States. The most commonly studied cancer was breast cancer (53.2%). Nearly 22% of the studies were conducted on multiple types of cancer. The significant diversity of study methodologies and measurements rendered a single unifying conclusion difficult. A variety of metrics were used to quantify productivity (hours lost, return to work, change of status, and activity impairment). The Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire was the most commonly used standardized tool (n = 9; 14.5%). Factors found to be associated with impairment in productivity included disease- and treatment-related effects, such as disease progression and severity, cognitive and neurological impairments, poor physical and psychological status, receipt of chemotherapy, and time and expenses required to receive therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the considerable variety of studies that have assessed work productivity for cancer treatment and the multifaceted reasons affecting patients and caregivers. With increasing emphasis being given to understanding the value that patients assign to various aspects of cancer treatment, more streamlined information on productivity may be important to patients as they play a greater role in selecting treatment goals through shared decision making with their providers. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals, which provided the concept, general oversight, and research collaboration on the project. Covvey and Kamal received research funding from Novartis Pharmaceuticals and the College of Psychiatric and Neurologic Pharmacists. Zacker is employed by, and owns stock in, Novartis Pharmaceuticals. A related poster abstract was presented at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy April 2016 Annual Meeting and published as Kamal KM, Covvey JR, Dashputre A, Ghosh S, Zacker C. A conceptual framework for valuebased oncology treatment: a societal perspective. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2016;22(4 Suppl A):S28. A publication-only abstract was presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2016 Annual Meeting and published as Covvey JR, Kamal KM, Dashputre A, Ghosh S, Zacker C. The impact of cancer treatment on work productivity of patients and caregivers: a systematic review of the evidence. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(Suppl):e18249. Study concept and design were contributed by Zacker, Kamal, and Covvey. Dashputre and Ghosh took the lead in data collection, along with Kamal and Covvey, and data interpretation was performed primarily by Shah and Bhosle, along with Ghosh, Dashputre, Covvey, and Kamal. The manuscript was written by Kamal, Covvey, Shah, and Bhosle and revised primarily by Zacker, along with Shah, Bhosle, Kamal, and Covvey.

Variations in blood pressure and lipid goal attainment in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension and dyslipidemia are the most prevalent cardiovascular risk factors. Blood pressure (BP) and lipid levels are modifiable and yet most patients fail to achieve their recommended target goals. The objective of this review was to examine the variations in achievement of optimal BP and lipid levels in individuals with cardiovascular risk factors or cardiovascular disease at a primary care level. SCOPE: A comprehensive literature review and evaluation was conducted from January 2000 to June 2012 using electronic databases. The search was limited to studies reported in English language, published between January 2000 to June 2012 and those conducted in the US adult population (≥18 years). The inclusion of articles was limited to populations with cardiovascular risk factors or any cardiovascular disease. FINDINGS: The review identified a total of 32 studies that assessed variations in attainment of BP or lipid goals. The demographic factors (age, sex, and race) and clinical factors (obesity, presence of diabetes, and history of cardiovascular conditions) were most commonly evaluated by the studies. However, modifiable factors such as diet, physical exercise, adherence to medication, or smoking habit were least commonly evaluated by the studies documented in this review. CONCLUSION: The studies, conducted in a range of settings, reflect disparities in attainment of recommended BP or lipid goals. Given such disparities, future research is required to better understand the complexity of different factors underlying the failure of patients to achieve BP and lipid goals. This can help to identify appropriate treatment strategies or interventions that can address patient-specific needs at a primary care level.

A systematic review of quality of life instruments in long-term breast cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women, representing 16% of all female cancers. According to the American Cancer Society, long-term cancer survival is defined as more than five years of survivorship since diagnosis, with approximately 2.5 million breast cancer survivors (BCS) in 2006. The long-term effects from breast cancer and its treatment have been shown to have positive and negative effects on both recovery and survivors' quality of life (QoL). The purpose of the study was to identify QoL instruments that have been validated in long-term BCS and to review the studies that have used the QoL instruments in this population. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted from January 1990 to October 2010 using electronic databases. Instruments validated and used in BCS were included in the review. In addition, QoL studies in long-term BCS using the validated instruments were reviewed. The search was limited to studies in English language. Studies of BCS of less than five years after initial diagnosis, any clinical or review studies were excluded. RESULTS: The review identified a total of 12 instruments (10 disease-specific, 2 condition-specific) validated in long-term BCS. According to the QoL framework proposed by Ferrell and colleagues, three instruments (Quality of Life-Cancer Survivors, Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors Scale, and Quality of Life Index-Cancer Version) evaluated all four domains (physical, psychological, social, and spiritual) of QoL. A review of the psychometric evaluation showed that Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors Scale has acceptable reliability, validity, and responsiveness in long-term BCS compared to other disease-specific instruments. The review also yielded 19 studies that used these QoL instruments. The study results indicated that age-group, ethnicity, and type of treatment influenced different aspects of QoL. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant impact of breast cancer on QoL in long-term BCS. The review can help researchers and clinicians select the most appropriate instruments to assess the changes in QoL in BCS.

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus salmeterol in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of 3 treatments (tiotropium, salmeterol, and no treatment) in patients with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: A Markov model with a time horizon of 1 year was developed. A hypothetical cohort of 100,000 subjects with moderate COPD with mean age of 65 years, smoking history of 50 pack-years, and disease duration of 9.5 years were included in the model. The efficacy and withdrawal data were taken from published randomized clinical trials. The effectiveness measure was exacerbations avoided per patient per year. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as additional cost per patient to prevent 1 exacerbation, compared with the next most expensive option. A payer's perspective was used and only direct costs were included in the study. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the baseline estimates and study assumptions. RESULTS: The mean annual costs for the no treatment, salmeterol, and tiotropium groups were $392.1, $1268.7, and $1408.6, respectively. The ICER of tiotropium compared with no treatment was $1817.36 per exacerbation avoided, while the ICER of salmeterol compared with no treatment was $2454.48 per exacerbation avoided. Thus, in patients with moderate COPD, tiotropium is more cost-effective than salmeterol and no treatment.

Use of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: a national survey of practicing United States rheumatologists.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prescribing practices, laboratory monitoring protocols, and perceived barriers of United States rheumatologists in prescribing tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A survey questionnaire was mailed to 1970 rheumatologists who were randomly selected from a national sample of 3008 rheumatologists. A one-page non-response questionnaire was mailed to approximately 200 randomly selected non-responding rheumatologists to assess non-response bias. RESULTS: Two mailings yielded a response rate of 22.3% (428 completed, usable surveys out of 1922 deliverable surveys). Rheumatologists reported using all three agents in patients with moderate RA (82-87%), severe RA (94-96%), and in newly diagnosed and mild RA patients (10-18%). In patients with severe RA who inadequately responded to methotrexate, 91% of rheumatologists reported using a TNF inhibitor with one other disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug. Over 94% of rheumatologists reported switching patients from one TNF inhibitor to a different TNF inhibitor due to inadequate response or side effects. Most rheumatologists (96%) ordered the purified protein derivative test for tuberculosis, with almost 82% conducting this test at baseline. Costs to patients and insurance coverage were perceived as major barriers to prescribing these agents although the perception was slightly lower with infliximab than with adalimumab or etanercept. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TNF inhibitors is not restricted to patients with moderate and severe RA. Rheumatologists are fairly similar in their utilization of the three TNF inhibitors although some variation exists in terms of laboratory practices and perceived barriers regarding the use of these agents.

Alternative decision analysis modeling in the economic evaluation of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To provide a review of the studies that use decision models in the economic evaluation of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to address some important issues surrounding the choice of such modeling techniques in these economic evaluations. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted by 1 author from the literature published from January 1996 to March 2005 through Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases. RESULTS: The review yielded 29 studies that used decision models. Only 10 studies used a decision model in the economic analysis of the TNF inhibitors and were included in the final review. Decision model types included the following in the review articles: decision tree (2), Markov model (7), and discrete event simulation (1). These models vary in complexity and their choice depends on the course of disease, the impact of treatment, and the available data. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results derived from alternative modeling techniques, it is safe to say that all methods can provide useful information with regard to economic evaluations of TNF inhibitors. Even though different modeling techniques provide an appropriate representation of available data, their results should be interpreted contingent on the input data, assumptions, sensitivity analyses, and other alternative scenario analyses. RELEVANCE: The transparency in the models will encourage end users such as policymakers and prescribers to make informed judgments regarding the appropriateness of the methods and the validity of the results.