Exploring health preference heterogeneity in the UK: Using the online elicitation of personal utility functions approach to construct EQ-5D-5L value functions on societal, group and individual level.

A new method has recently been developed for valuing health states, called 'Online elicitation of Personal Utility Functions' (OPUF). In contrast to established methods, such as time trade-off or discrete choice experiments, OPUF does not require hundreds of respondents, but allows estimating utility functions for small groups and even at the individual level. In this study, we used OPUF to elicit EQ-5D-5L health state preferences from a (not representative) sample of the UK general population, and then compared utility functions on the societal-, group-, and individual level. A demo version of the survey is available at: https://eq5d5l.me. Data from 874 respondents were included in the analysis. For each respondent, we constructed a personal EQ-5D-5L value set. These personal value sets predicted respondents' choices in three hold-out discrete choice tasks with an accuracy of 78%. Overall, preferences varied greatly between individuals. However, PERMANOVA analysis showed that demographic characteristics explained only a small proportion of the variability between subgroups. While OPUF is still under development, it has important strengths: it can be used to construct value sets for patient reported outcome instruments such as EQ-5D-5L, while also allowing examination of underlying preferences in an unprecedented level of detail. In the future, OPUF could be used to complement existing methods, allowing valuation studies in smaller samples, and providing more detailed insights into the heterogeneity of preferences across subgroups.

Cost-effectiveness of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition with evolocumab in patients with a history of myocardial infarction in Sweden.

AIMS: To assess the cost-effectiveness of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition with evolocumab added to standard-of-care lipid-lowering treatment [maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of statin and ezetimibe] in Swedish patients with a history of myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using a Markov model based on Swedish observational data on cardiovascular event rates and efficacy from the FOURIER trial. Three risk profiles were considered: recent MI in the previous year; history of MI with a risk factor; and history of MI with a second event within 2 years. For each population, three minimum baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were considered: 2.5 mmol/L (≈100 mg/dL), based on the current reimbursement recommendation in Sweden; 1.8 mmol/L (≈70 mg/dL), based on 2016 ESC/EAS guidelines; and 1.4 mmol/L (≈55 mg/dL), or 1.0 mmol/L (≈40 mg/dL) for MI with a second event, based on 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition with evolocumab was associated with increased quality-adjusted life-years and costs vs. standard-of-care therapy. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were below SEK700 000 (∼€66 500), the generally accepted willingness-to-pay threshold in Sweden, for minimum LDL-C levels of 2.3 (recent MI), 1.7 (MI with a risk factor), and 1.7 mmol/L (MI with a second event). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that base-case results were robust to changes in model parameters. CONCLUSION: Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition with evolocumab added to MTD of statin and ezetimibe may be considered cost-effective at its list price for minimum LDL-C levels of 1.7-2.3 mmol/L, depending on risk profile, with ICERs below the accepted willingness-to-pay threshold in Sweden.

An Innovative Approach to Modelling the Optimal Treatment Sequence for Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: Implementation, Validation, and Impact of the Decision-Making Approach.

INTRODUCTION: An innovative computational model was developed to address challenges regarding the evaluation of treatment sequences in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) through the concept of a 'virtual' physician who observes and assesses patients over time. We describe the implementation and validation of the model, then apply this framework as a case study to determine the impact of different decision-making approaches on the optimal sequence of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) and associated outcomes. METHODS: A patient-level discrete event simulation (DES) was used to model heterogeneity in disease trajectories and outcomes. The evaluation of DMT options was implemented through a Markov model representing the patient's disease; outcomes included lifetime costs and quality of life. The DES and Markov models underwent internal and external validation. Analyses of the optimal treatment sequence for each patient were based on several decision-making criteria. These treatment sequences were compared to current treatment guidelines. RESULTS: Internal validation indicated that model outcomes for natural history were consistent with the input parameters used to inform the model. Costs and quality of life outcomes were successfully validated against published reference models. Whereas each decision-making criterion generated a different optimal treatment sequence, cladribine tablets were the only DMT common to all treatment sequences. By choosing treatments on the basis of minimising disease progression or number of relapses, it was possible to improve on current treatment guidelines; however, these treatment sequences were more costly. Maximising cost-effectiveness resulted in the lowest costs but was also associated with the worst outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The model was robust in generating outcomes consistent with published models and studies. It was also able to identify optimal treatment sequences based on different decision criteria. This innovative modelling framework has the potential to simulate individual patient trajectories in the current treatment landscape and may be useful for treatment switching and treatment positioning decisions in RRMS.

Updated Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Evolocumab in Patients With Very High-risk Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.

Importance: In October 2018, evolocumab was made available at a reduced annual list price of $5850 in the United States. This 60% reduction was aimed at improving patient access by lowering patient copays. Shortly thereafter, the 2018 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol management guideline was released. An updated cost-effectiveness analysis of evolocumab in the United States may be therefore of interest to payers and prescribers. Objective: To present an updated cost-effectiveness analysis of evolocumab added to standard background therapy compared with standard background therapy alone in patients with very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, reflecting the 2018 ACC/AHA guideline definition and using the new evolocumab list price. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used the Markov model originally used in a previous study by Fonarow et al in 2017. A US societal perspective was considered, and a range of baseline cardiovascular event rates were modeled to reflect varying risk profiles in clinical practice within patients with very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Exposures: Addition of evolocumab to standard background therapy, including maximally tolerated statin therapy (ie, the maximum intensity of statin therapy a patient can safely receive), with or without ezetimibe. Main Outcomes and Measures: Major cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and cardiovascular death), costs, quality-adjusted life-years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results: Evolocumab was associated with both increased costs and improved outcomes when added to standard background therapy. Incremental costs ranged from $22 228 to $3411, depending on the varying level of risk within the defined population. Incremental quality-adjusted life years ranged from 0.39 to 0.44. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from $56 655 to $7667 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. For a range of baseline cardiovascular event rates in patients with very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were below the generally accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds. Moreover, the ratios were below the threshold of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-years gained for any baseline rate of 6.9 or more events per 100 patient-years. Conclusions and Relevance: At its current list price, the addition of evolocumab to standard background therapy meets accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds across a range of baseline cardiovascular event rates in patients with very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease as defined by the 2018 ACC/AHA guideline.

Health-related quality of life and mortality in patients with pulmonary embolism: a prospective cohort study in seven European countries.

PURPOSE: Little is known about the quality of life following pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim of the study was to assess the 12-month illness burden in terms of health-related quality of life (HrQoL) and mortality, in relation to differences in patient characteristics. METHODS: The PREFER in VTE registry, a prospective, observational study conducted in seven European countries, was used. Within 2 weeks following an acute symptomatic PE, patients were recruited and followed up for 12 months. Associations between patient characteristics and HrQoL (EQ-5D-5L) and mortality were examined using a regression approach. RESULTS: Among 1399 PE patients, the EQ-5D-5L index score at baseline was 0.712 (SD 0.265), which among survivors gradually improved to 0.835 (0.212) at 12 months. For those patients with and without active cancer, the average index score at baseline was 0.658 (0.275) and 0.717 (0.264), respectively. Age and previous stroke were significant factors for predicting index scores in those with/without active cancer. Bleeding events but not recurrences had a noticeable impact on the HrQoL of patients without active cancer. The 12-month mortality rate post-acute period was 8.1%, ranging from 1.4% in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria to 16.8% in Italy. Mortality differed between patients with active cancer and those without (42.7% vs. 4.7%). CONCLUSION: PE is associated with a substantial decrease in HrQoL at baseline which normalizes following treatment. PE is associated with a high mortality rate especially in patients with cancer, with significant country variation. Bleeding events, in particular, impact the burden of PE.

Overview, Update, and Lessons Learned From the International EQ-5D-5L Valuation Work: Version 2 of the EQ-5D-5L Valuation Protocol.

A standardized 5-level EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) valuation protocol was first used in national studies in the period 2012 to 2013. A set of problems encountered in this initial wave of valuation studies led to the subsequent refinement of the valuation protocol. To clarify lessons learned and how the protocol was updated when moving from version 1.0 to the current version 2.1 and 2.0, this article will (1) present the challenges faced in EQ-5D-5L valuation since 2012 and how these were resolved and (2) describe in depth a set of new challenges that have become central in currently ongoing research on how EQ-5D-5L health states should be valued and modeled.

A new method for valuing health: directly eliciting personal utility functions.

BACKGROUND: Standard methods for eliciting the preference data upon which 'value sets' are based generally have in common an aim to 'uncover' people's preferences by asking them to evaluate a subset of health states, then using their responses to infer their preferences over all dimensions and levels. An alternative approach is to ask people directly about the relative importance to them of the dimensions, levels and interactions between them. This paper describes a new stated preference approach for directly eliciting personal utility functions (PUFs), and reports a pilot study to test its feasibility for valuing the EQ-5D. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed, designed to directly elicit PUFs from general public respondents via computer-assisted personal interviews, with a focus on helping respondents to reflect and deliberate on their preferences. The questionnaire was piloted in England. RESULTS: Seventy-six interviews were conducted in December 2015. Overall, pain/discomfort and mobility were found to be the most important of the EQ-5D dimensions. The ratings for intermediate improvements in each dimension show heterogeneity, both within and between respondents. Almost a quarter of respondents indicated that no EQ-5D health states are worse than dead. DISCUSSION: The PUF approach appears to be feasible, and has the potential to yield meaningful, well-informed preference data from respondents that can be aggregated to yield a value set for the EQ-5D. A deliberative approach to health state valuation also has the potential to complement and develop existing valuation methods. Further refinement of some elements of the approach is required.

Pulmonary embolism in Europe - Burden of illness in relationship to healthcare resource utilization and return to work.

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary embolism (PE) is associated with a substantial economic burden. However evidence from patients in Europe is scarce. The aim of this study was to report the impacts of PE on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and return to work using the PREFER in VTE registry. METHODS: The PREFER in VTE registry was a prospective, observational, multicenter study in seven European countries, aiming to provide data concerning treatment patterns, HCRU, mortality, quality of life and work-loss. Patients with a first-time or recurrent PE were included and followed up at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Treatment patterns, re-hospitalization rates, length of hospital stays (LOS), and ambulatory/office visits, as well as proportion of patients returning to work, were assessed. Subgroups by country and with/without active cancer were examined separately. Zero-inflated negative binomial and Cox regression were applied to investigate the relationship between baseline characteristics and LOS and return to work, respectively. RESULTS: Amongst 1399 patients with PE, 53.2% were male and the average age was 62.3 ±â€¯17.1 years old. Overall, patients were treated with combinations of heparin, vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and the non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (50.0% treated with the combination of heparin with VKA). Patients with active cancer were primarily treated with heparin (84.9%). NOACs were used more frequently in DACH (Germany, Austria and Switzerland) and France (55.2% and 32.6%) compared to Italy and Spain (4.5% and 6.1%). The VTE-related re-hospitalization rate within 12 months and the average LOS varied substantially between countries, from 26.2% in UK to 12.3% in France, and from 12.9 days in Italy to 3.9 days in France. PE patients were often co-managed by general practitioners in France and DACH (>84%), and less frequently in other countries (<47%). The regression results confirmed the country variation of HCRU. Of the employed patients (n = 385), 60% returned to work at 1 month but 27.8% had not after one year. PE patients with DVT were more likely to return to work. Active cancer was a significant predictor for not returning to work, as well as smoking history. CONCLUSIONS: Medical treatment of PE differed between patients with active cancer and patients without active cancer. VTE-related resource utilization differed markedly between countries. While the reported 'not return to work' was high for patients with PE, this may at least in part reflect the presence of co-morbidities such as cancer.

Cost-effectiveness of edoxaban compared to warfarin for the treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism in the UK.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT), is the third most common acute cardiovascular disease and represents an important burden for patients and payers. Objective: The aim was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of edoxaban, a non-VKA oral anticoagulant vs. warfarin, the currently most prescribed treatment for VTE in the UK. Study design: A Markov model was built using data from the Hokusai-VTE randomised controlled trial to estimate the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in patients with VTE treated with edoxaban or warfarin over a lifetime horizon, from the UK National Health Services perspective. The model included VTE recurrences, VTE-related complications (post-thrombotic syndrome and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension), and several types of bleeds associated with anticoagulation treatment. Patients were treated during a period of 6 months after the first VTE event, followed by flexible treatment duration (from 6 months to lifetime) after recurrence, i.e., tertiary prevention. Results: Edoxaban was found dominant vs. warfarin with 0.033 additional QALY and £55 less costs. The reduction of patient management costs, specifically monitoring costs, outweighed the higher drug costs. Edoxaban was dominant in all subgroups (index DVT only, all PE cases (PE with or without DVT), PE without DVT and PE with DVT). Cost-savings ranged from £54 to £81 while additional QALYs ranged from 0.031 to 0.046. Edoxaban was found dominant in 88.6% of cases and cost-effective in additional 10.9% of cases considering a £20,000 threshold in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Conclusion: Edoxaban may improve patients' quality of life in a lifetime horizon without additional costs for the healthcare system due to lower bleeding risk and no monitoring cost compared to warfarin.

An exploration of the non-iterative time trade-off method to value health states.

Time Trade-Off (TTO) usually relies on "iteration," which is susceptible to bias. Discrete Choice Experiment with duration (or DCETTO ) is free of such bias, but respondents find this cognitively more challenging. This paper explores non-iterative TTO with or without lead time: NI(LT)TTO. In NI(LT)TTO, respondents see a series of independent pairwise choices without iteration (similar to DCETTO ), but one of the two scenarios always involves full health for a shorter duration (similar to TTO). We compare three different "types" of NI(LT)TTO relative to DCETTO . Each type is presented in two "modes": (a) verbally tabulated (as in a DCE) and (b) with visual aids (as in a TTO). The study has 8 survey variants, each with 12 experimental choice tasks and a 13th task with a logically determined answer. Data on the 12 experimental choices from an online survey of 6,618 respondents are modelled, by variant, using conditional logistic regressions. The results indicate that NI(LT)TTO is feasible, but some relatively mild states appear to have implausibly low predicted values, and the range of predicted values is much narrower than in DCETTO . The presentation of NI(LT)TTO tasks needs further improvement.

Valuing health-related quality of life: An EQ-5D-5L value set for England.

A new version of the EQ-5D, the EQ-5D-5L, is available. The aim of this study is to produce a value set to support use of EQ-5D-5L data in decision-making. The study design followed an international research protocol. Randomly selected members of the English general public completed 10 time trade-off and 7 discrete choice experiment tasks in face-to-face interviews. A 20-parameter hybrid model was used to combine time trade-off and discrete choice experiment data to generate values for the 3,125 EQ-5D-5L health states. Valuation data are available for 996 respondents. Face validity of the data has been demonstrated, with more severe health states generally given lower values. Problems with pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression received the greatest weight. Compared to the existing EQ-5D-3L value set, there are considerably fewer "worse than dead" states (5.1%, compared with over one third), and the minimum value is higher. Values range from -0.285 (extreme problems on all dimensions) to 0.950 (for health states 11211 and 21111). Results have important implications for users of the EQ-5D-5L both in England and internationally. Quality-adjusted life year gains from interventions seeking to improve very poor health may be smaller using this value set and may previously have been overestimated.

International Regulations and Recommendations for Utility Data for Health Technology Assessment.

Recommendations and guidelines for the collection, generation, source and usage of utility data for health technology assessment (HTA) vary across different countries, with no international consensus. Many international agencies generate their own guidelines providing details on their preferred methods for HTA submissions, and there is variability in both what they recommend and the clarity and amount of detail provided in their guidelines. This article provides an overview of international regulations and recommendations for utility data in HTA for a selection of key HTA countries: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain (Catalonia), Sweden and the UK (England/Wales and Scotland). International guidelines are typically clear and detailed for the selection of countries assessed regarding the source description of health states (e.g. generic preference-based measure) and who should provide preference weights for these health states (e.g. general population for own country). Many guidelines specify the use of off-the-shelf generic preference-based measures, and some further specify a measure, such as EQ-5D. However, international guidelines are either unclear or lack detailed guidance regarding the collection (e.g. patients report own health), source (e.g. clinical trial) and usage (e.g. adjusting for comorbidities) of utility values. It is argued that there is a need for transparent and detailed international guidelines on utility data recommendations to provide decision makers with the best possible evidence. Where this is not possible it is recommended that best practice should be used to inform the collection, source and usage of utility values in HTA.

Cost-effectiveness of Evolocumab Therapy for Reducing Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.

Importance: The proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor evolocumab has been demonstrated to reduce the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. To our knowledge, long-term cost-effectiveness of this therapy has not been evaluated using clinical trial efficacy data. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of evolocumab in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease when added to standard background therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: A Markov cohort state-transition model was used, integrating US population-specific demographics, risk factors, background therapy, and event rates along with trial-based event risk reduction. Costs, including price of drug, utilities, and transitional probabilities, were included from published sources. Exposures: Addition of evolocumab to standard background therapy including statins. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cardiovascular events including myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and cardiovascular death, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and net value-based price. Results: In the base case, using US clinical practice patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels of at least 70 mg/dL (to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0259) and an annual events rate of 6.4 per 100 patient-years, evolocumab was associated with increased cost and improved QALY: incremental cost, $105 398; incremental QALY, 0.39, with an ICER of $268 637 per QALY gained ($165 689 with discounted price of $10 311 based on mean rebate of 29% for branded pharmaceuticals). Sensitivity and scenario analyses demonstrated ICERs ranging from $100 193 to $488 642 per QALY, with ICER of $413 579 per QALY for trial patient characteristics and event rate of 4.2 per 100 patient-years ($270 192 with discounted price of $10 311) and $483 800 if no cardiovascular mortality reduction emerges. Evolocumab treatment exceeded $150 000 per QALY in most scenarios but would meet this threshold at an annual net price of $9669 ($6780 for the trial participants) or with the discounted net price of $10 311 in patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels of at least 80 mg/dL. Conclusions and Relevance: At its current list price of $14 523, the addition of evolocumab to standard background therapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease exceeds generally accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds. To achieve an ICER of $150 000 per QALY, the annual net price would need to be substantially lower ($9669 for US clinical practice and $6780 for trial participants), or a higher-risk population would need to be treated.

The Importance of Economic Perspective and Quantitative Approaches in Oncology Value Frameworks of Drug Selection and Shared Decision Making.

The debate around value in oncology drug selection has been prominent in recent years, and several professional bodies have furthered this debate by advocating for so-called value frameworks. Herein, we provide a viewpoint on these value frameworks, emphasizing the need to consider 4 key aspects: (1) the economic underpinnings of value; (2) the importance of the perspective adopted in the valuation; (3) the importance of the difference between absolute and relative measures of risk and measuring patient preferences; and (4) the recognition of multiple quality-of-life (QoL) domains, and the aggregation and valuation of those domains, through utilities within a multicriteria decision analysis, may allow prioritization of QoL above the tallying of safety events, particularly in a value framework focusing on the individual patient. While several frameworks exist, they incorporate different attributes and-importantly-assess value from alternative perspectives, including those of patients, regulators, payers, and society. The various perspectives necessarily lead to potentially different, if not sometimes divergent, conclusions about the valuation. We show that the perspective of the valuation affects the framing of the risk/benefit question and the methodology to measure the individual patient choice, or preference, as opposed to the collective, or population, choice. We focus specifically on the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Value Framework. We argue that its laudable intent to assist in shared clinician-patient decision making can be augmented by more formally adopting methodology underpinned by micro- and health economic concepts, as well as application of formal quantitative approaches. Our recommendations for value frameworks focusing on the individual patient, such as the ASCO Value Framework, are 3-fold: (1) ensure that stakeholders understand the importance of the adopted (economic) perspective; (2) consider using exclusively absolute measures of risk and formal patient-preference methodology; and (3) consider foregoing safety parameters for higher-order utility considerations. DISCLOSURES: No funding was received for conceptualizing, writing, and/or editing this manuscript. Waldeck and White are employees of, and received stock option grants from, Celldex Therapeutics. Van Hout and Botteman are employees and shareholders of Pharmerit International. Pharmerit International is a research contractor for Celldex. All authors have retained editorial control of the content of the manuscript. Conceptualization of this viewpoint article was contributed primarily by Waldeck, along with Botteman, White, and van Hout. Data analysis and revision of the manuscript was contributed equally by all the authors. The manuscript was written by Waldeck, Botteman, van Hout, and White.

Cost-effectiveness of ocriplasmin for the treatment of vitreomacular traction and macular hole.

BACKGROUND: If left untreated, vitreomacular traction (VMT) will infrequently improve through spontaneous resolution of vitreomacular adhesion (VMA), and patients remain at risk of further deterioration in vision. The mainstay of treatment for VMT is vitrectomy, an invasive procedure that carries the risk of rare but serious complications and further vision loss. As such, a 'watch and wait' approach is often adopted before this surgical intervention is performed. Ocriplasmin (microplasmin) is a potential alternative treatment for patients with symptomatic VMT that may remove the requirement for vitrectomy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ocriplasmin for the treatment of VMT in comparison to standard of care. STUDY DESIGN: A cohort-based computer simulation model was developed, capturing three mutually exclusive subgroups: 1) VMT without epiretinal membrane (ERM) or full thickness macular hole (FTMH), 2) VMT with ERM but no FTMH, and 3) VMT with FTMH. Transition probabilities between health states, utilities, and resource utilisation were estimated based on clinical trial results, the literature, and expert opinion. The cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was estimated over a lifetime, using UK unit costs and utilities associated with visual acuity, adverse events, metamorphopsia, and surgical interventions. SETTING: Analyses were conducted from a UK payer perspective. POPULATION: Transition probabilities for the model were primarily estimated from patient-level data from the combined Phase 3 MIVI-TRUST trials in patients with symptomatic VMA/VMT, including when associated with a FTMH ≤400 µm. INTERVENTION: Ocriplasmin (microplasmin) is a one-time intravitreal injection designed specifically to release the abnormal traction between the macula and the vitreous and thereby treat VMT, as well as macular hole with persistent vitreous attachment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome measure of the economic evaluation was cost per QALY. RESULTS: In all subgroups, ocriplasmin management generated more QALYs: 1) VMT without ERM or FTMH (0.105, (0.036, 0.191)); 2) VMT with ERM but no FTMH (0.041, (0.011, 0.131)); and 3) VMT with FTMH (0.053, (-0.002, 0.113)). The initial treatment costs were partially offset by later savings and net costs were estimated at £1,901 (£1,325, £2,474), £2,491 (£1,067, £2,511), and £1,912 (£1,233, £2,506), respectively. Costs per QALY were estimated at £18,056 (£8,241, £64,874), £61,059 (£8,269, £168,664), and £36,250 (-£144,788, £290,338), respectively. Short-term efficacy parameters were found to be key drivers of results. CONCLUSION: Ocriplasmin is most cost-effective in VMT patients without either ERM or FTMH.

Cost-Effectiveness of LDL-C Lowering With Evolocumab in Patients With High Cardiovascular Risk in the United States.

Randomized trials have shown marked reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), when evolocumab is administered. We hypothesized that evolocumab added to standard of care (SOC) vs SOC alone is cost-effective in the treatment of patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) or atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) with or without statin intolerance and LDL-C >100 mg/dL. Using a Markov cohort state transition model, primary and recurrent CVD event rates were predicted considering population-specific trial-based mean risk factors and calibrated against observed rates in the real world. The LDL-C-lowering effect from population-specific phase 3 randomized studies for evolocumab was used together with estimated LDL-C-lowering effect on CVD event rates per 38.67-mg/dL LDL-C lowering from a statin-trial meta-analysis. Costs and utilities were included from published sources. Evolocumab treatment was associated with both increased cost and improved quality-adjusted life-years (QALY): HeFH (incremental cost: US$153 289, incremental QALY: 2.02, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: US$75 863/QALY); ASCVD (US$158 307, 1.12, US$141 699/QALY); and ASCVD with statin intolerance (US$136 903, 1.36, US$100 309/QALY). Evolocumab met both the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and World Health Organization (WHO) thresholds in each population evaluated. Sensitivity and scenario analyses confirmed that model results were robust to changes in model parameters. Among patients with HeFH and ASCVD with or without statin intolerance, evolocumab added to SOC may provide a cost-effective treatment option for lowering LDL-C using ACC/AHA intermediate/high value and WHO cost-effectiveness thresholds. More definitive information on the clinical and economic value of evolocumab will be available from the forthcoming CVD outcomes study.

The Continuing Story of the Cost-Effectiveness of Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate versus Transuretheral Resection of the Prostate for the Treatment of Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Obstruction.

BACKGROUND: In 2008, a UK assessment of technologies for benign prostatic obstruction concluded negatively about photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP), and the 2010 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance caused several UK institutions to abandon PVP. OBJECTIVE: To reassess the costs and effects of PVP versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) on the basis of most recent data. METHODS: The same model was used as in 2008. Transition probabilities were estimated using a Bayesian approach updating the 2008 estimates with data from two meta-analyses and data from GOLIATH, the latest and largest trial comparing PVP with TURP. Utility estimates were from the 2008 assessment, and estimates of resource utilization and costs were updated. Effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life-years gained, and costs are in UK pounds. The balance between costs and effects was addressed by multivariate sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: If the 2010 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence analysis would have updated the cost-effectiveness analysis with figures from its own meta-analysis, it would have estimated the change in quality-adjusted life-years at -0.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.05 to 0.01) instead of at -0.11 (95% CI -0.31 to -0.01) as in the 2008 analysis. The GOLIATH estimate of -0.01 (95% CI -0.07 to 0.02) strengthens the conclusion of near equivalence. Estimates of additional costs vary from £491 (£21-£1286) in 2008 to £111 (-£315 to £595) for 2010 and to £109 (-£204 to £504) for GOLIATH. PVP becomes cost saving if more than 32% can be carried out as a day case in the United Kingdom. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence indicates that PVP can be a cost-effective alternative for TURP in a potentially broad group of patients.

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of combination therapy for early, rapidly progressing rheumatoid arthritis by simulating the reversible and irreversible effects of the disease.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy in early, aggressive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) when explicitly modelling short-term (reversible) and long-term (irreversible, ie, joint damage) disease activity and physical function. METHODS: A microsimulation model was developed to unify, in a single cost-effectiveness model, measures of reversible and irreversible disease activity and physical function based on data from the PREMIER trial. Short term, reversible disease activity was modelled using DAS28 variables, including swollen joint counts, tender joint counts, C reactive protein concentration and pain. The DAS28 variables were then used in a logistic regression to predict short-term American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses, which informed treatment continuation and switches. Long term, irreversible, radiographically documented joint damage was modelled using modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS). The model then linked both short-term disease activity and mTSS to the Health Assessment Questionnaire score, which was used to calculate direct and indirect costs, and quality adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: When both reversible and irreversible effects of therapy were included, combination therapy was estimated to produce 6-month 50% ACR responses in 75% of patients versus 54% in MTX monotherapy. Compared to MTX monotherapy, combination therapy resulted in 2.68 and 3.04 discounted life years and QALYs gained, respectively. Combination therapy also resulted in a net increase in direct costs of £106,207 for a resulting incremental cost/QALY gain of £32,425. When indirect costs were included in the analysis, the ICER (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) decreased to £27,238. Disregarding irreversible effects increased the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to £78,809 (when only direct costs were included). CONCLUSIONS: Starting with adalimumab plus MTX combination therapy in early, aggressive RA is cost-effective when irreversible damage is adequately considered.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Rivaroxaban in the Secondary Prevention of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, coronary heart disease accounts for 7 million deaths each year. In Sweden, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a leading cause of hospitalization and is responsible for 1 in 4 deaths. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (BID) in combination with standard antiplatelet therapy (ST-APT) versus ST-APT alone, for the secondary prevention of ACS in adult patients with elevated cardiac biomarkers without a prior history of stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), from a Swedish societal perspective, based on clinical data from the global ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 trial, literature-based quality of life data and costs sourced from Swedish national databases. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to capture rates of single and multiple myocardial infarction (MI), ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major, minor, and "requiring medical attention" bleeds, revascularization events, and associated costs and utilities in patients who were stabilized after an initial ACS event. Efficacy and safety data for the first 2 years came from the ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 trial. Long-term probabilities were extrapolated using safety and effectiveness of acetylsalicylic acid data, which was estimated from published literature, assuming constant rates in time. Future cost and effects were discounted at 3.0%. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In the base case, the use of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID was associated with improvements in survival and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), yielding an incremental cost per QALY of 71,246 Swedish Krona (SEK) (€8045). The outcomes were robust to changes in inputs. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID to be cost-effective in >99.9% of cases, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of SEK 500,000 (€56,458). CONCLUSION: Compared with ST-APT alone, the use of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID in combination with ST-APT can be considered a cost-effective treatment option for ACS patients with elevated cardiac biomarkers without a prior history of stroke/TIA in Sweden. FUNDING: Bayer Pharma AG.