Measuring the impact of monoclonal antibody therapies.

Objective: Monoclonal antibody (Mab) treatments have significantly improved the quality and quantity of life, but they are some of the most expensive treatments, resulting in a degree of hesitancy to introduce new Mab agents. A system for estimating the effect of Mab drugs, in general, would optimally inform health strategy and fully realize how a single scientific discovery can deliver health benefits. We evaluated such a method with several well-established Mab regimens. Methods: We selected five different Mab regimens in oncology and rheumatology in England. We carried out two systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses to assess health outcomes (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index for rheumatoid arthritis; overall mortality for melanoma) from real-world data and compared them to the outcomes from randomized control trials (RCTs). We applied economic modeling to estimate the net monetary benefits for health outcomes for the estimated patient population size for each Mab regimen. Results: Meta-analyses of 27 eligible real-world data (RWD) sets and 26 randomized controlled trial (RCT) sets found close agreement between the observed and expected health outcomes. A Markov model showed the net positive monetary benefit in three Mab regimens and the negative benefit in two regimens. However, because of limited access to NHS data, the economic model made several assumptions about the number of treated patients and the cost of treatment to the NHS, the accuracy of which may affect the estimation of the net monetary benefit. Conclusion: RCT results reliably inform the real-world experience of Mab treatments. Calculation of the net monetary benefit by the algorithm described provides a valuable overall measure of the health impact, subject to the accuracy of data inputs. This study provides a compelling case for building a comprehensive, systematized, and accessible database and related analytics, on all Mab treatments within health services.

[Concepts and application of cost-benefit evaluation in an international overview]. / Grundkonzepte und Einsatz von Kosten-Nutzen-Bewertungen im internationalen Überblick.

Due to market access of high-priced new drugs, the financial burden on the health care system and the appropriateness of drug prices are often doubted. Is it time for a broader perspective of health technology assessment in Germany, which has so far focused on clinical value? Should cost and benefit aspects of new technologies be given equal weight in future assessments of market access for new technologies? The experiences of European neighbors and the Standing Committee on Vaccination with cost-benefit analyses are encouraging. Introducing cost-benefit analyses as a further decision criterion in the pricing of new technologies naturally creates additional work for the players involved but also offers the opportunity to provide transparent and understandable answers to the question of what a health improvement is worth. In view of the increasing funding challenges facing the statutory health insurance system in Germany, this question will continue to gain importance.

An Integrated Care Platform System (C3-Cloud) for Care Planning, Decision Support, and Empowerment of Patients With Multimorbidity: Protocol for a Technology Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing need to organize the care around the patient and not the disease, while considering the complex realities of multiple physical and psychosocial conditions, and polypharmacy. Integrated patient-centered care delivery platforms have been developed for both patients and clinicians. These platforms could provide a promising way to achieve a collaborative environment that improves the provision of integrated care for patients via enhanced information and communication technology solutions for semiautomated clinical decision support. OBJECTIVE: The Collaborative Care and Cure Cloud project (C3-Cloud) has developed 2 collaborative computer platforms for patients and members of the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and deployed these in 3 different European settings. The objective of this study is to pilot test the platforms and evaluate their impact on patients with 2 or more chronic conditions (diabetes mellitus type 2, heart failure, kidney failure, depression), their informal caregivers, health care professionals, and, to some extent, health care systems. METHODS: This paper describes the protocol for conducting an evaluation of user experience, acceptability, and usefulness of the platforms. For this, 2 "testing and evaluation" phases have been defined, involving multiple qualitative methods (focus groups and surveys) and advanced impact modeling (predictive modeling and cost-benefit analysis). Patients and health care professionals were identified and recruited from 3 partnering regions in Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom via electronic health record screening. RESULTS: The technology trial in this 4-year funded project (2016-2020) concluded in April 2020. The pilot technology trial for evaluation phases 3 and 4 was launched in November 2019 and carried out until April 2020. Data collection for these phases is completed with promising results on platform acceptance and socioeconomic impact. We believe that the phased, iterative approach taken is useful as it involves relevant stakeholders at crucial stages in the platform development and allows for a sound user acceptance assessment of the final product. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with multiple chronic conditions often experience shortcomings in the care they receive. It is hoped that personalized care plan platforms for patients and collaboration platforms for members of MDTs can help tackle the specific challenges of clinical guideline reconciliation for patients with multimorbidity and improve the management of polypharmacy. The initial evaluative phases have indicated promising results of platform usability. Results of phases 3 and 4 were methodologically useful, yet limited due to the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03834207; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03834207. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/21994.

Comprehensive evaluation on energy-water saving effects in iron and steel industry.

The production of iron and steel is energy-intensive that motivated the emergence of various energy-saving technologies to reduce energy consumption. However, the effects of water-saving brought by these energy-saving technologies are rarely examined which can lead to misevaluation of their economic feasibility. In this regard, material flow analysis (MFA) was used in this study to establish the water-energy nexus and examine the potential of water-saving and energy-saving effects in the condition of applying various mixes of the 16 technologies (Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, 2015-2016) in iron and steel industry. Meanwhile, this study classified the selected 16 energy-saving technologies into three groups: direct water-saving technology, indirect water-saving technology, and water consumption technology. The low-temperature steel rolling technology is the only water-consuming energy-saving technology in this study; its indirect specific water computation reaches 0.06 m3/t. The remaining 15 energy-saving technologies have the potential of saving water indirectly, with averaged indirect specific water-saving amounting to 0.28 m3/t. This study also built an evaluation scheme of cost-benefit analysis for energy-saving technologies. With consideration of benefits brought by water saving, eleven technologies have the potential to achieve economic feasibility compared to nine in which mere energy-saving effects being considered. The results show that if the studied 16 technologies are implemented simultaneously, the comprehensive specific energy consumption will be reduced by 4.28 MJ, and the specific fresh water consumption will be reduced by 0.68 m3. Meanwhile, this research found that the cost of most energy-saving technologies will be decreased by an average of 5.52 CNY/GJ, despite the cost of low-temperature steel rolling technology increased by 0.68 CNY/GJ. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of energy-saving technologies taking the benefits of water conservation into consideration. It could provide references for decision-makers to develop commercialization strategies on energy saving technologies in the steel industry.