In Silico Clinical Trials: Is It Possible?

Modeling and simulation (M&S), including in silico (clinical) trials, helps accelerate drug research and development and reduce costs and have coined the term "model-informed drug development (MIDD)." Data-driven, inferential approaches are now becoming increasingly complemented by emerging complex physiologically and knowledge-based disease (and drug) models, but differ in setup, bottlenecks, data requirements, and applications (also reminiscent of the different scientific communities they arose from). At the same time, and within the MIDD landscape, regulators and drug developers start to embrace in silico trials as a potential tool to refine, reduce, and ultimately replace clinical trials. Effectively, silos between the historically distinct modeling approaches start to break down. Widespread adoption of in silico trials still needs more collaboration between different stakeholders and established precedence use cases in key applications, which is currently impeded by a shattered collection of tools and practices. In order to address these key challenges, efforts to establish best practice workflows need to be undertaken and new collaborative M&S tools devised, and an attempt to provide a coherent set of solutions is provided in this chapter. First, a dedicated workflow for in silico clinical trial (development) life cycle is provided, which takes up general ideas from the systems biology and quantitative systems pharmacology space and which implements specific steps toward regulatory qualification. Then, key characteristics of an in silico trial software platform implementation are given on the example of jinko.ai (nova's end-to-end in silico clinical trial platform). Considering these enabling scientific and technological advances, future applications of in silico trials to refine, reduce, and replace clinical research are indicated, ranging from synthetic control strategies and digital twins, which overall shows promise to begin a new era of more efficient drug development.

Análisis costo-efectividad del tratamiento con terapia compresiva en la cicatrización de úlceras venosas / Cost-effectiveness analysis of the treatment with compressive therapy in the healing of venous ulcers / Análise de custo-efetividade do tratamento com terapia compressiva na cicatrização de úlceras venosas

Objetivo: analizar el costo-efectividad y calcular la relación costoefectividad incremental del tratamiento multicapa compresivo con respecto al inelástico (bota de Unna y estiramiento corto) según la literatura actual. Método: estudio cuantitativo de costo-efectividad a través de un modelo con ayuda del software TreeAge® para la elaboración del árbol de decisión. Los supuestos anunciados se obtuvieron mediante el uso de datos secundarios de la literatura para estimar el costo y la efectividad de los parámetros asumidos. Para ello, se realizó una revisión sistemática de la literatura con metaanálisis. Resultados: el árbol de decisión, después del Roll Back, mostró que la terapia multicapa prevaleció sobre las alternativas en el caso base, presentó un costo intermedio por aplicación, pero obtuvo la mayor efectividad. El gráfico del análisis de costo-efectividad también demostró que había un dominio extendido de la bota de Unna sobre el vendaje de estiramiento corto. El análisis de sensibilidad reveló que el vendaje multicapa sigue siendo la alternativa con mayor costoefectividad, dentro del umbral de disposición a pagar. Conclusión: la alternativa con mayor costo-efectividad fue el vendaje multicapa, considerado estándar de oro en la literatura. La segunda alternativa con mayor costo-efectividad fue la bota de Unna, la terapia más utilizada en Brasil.

Objective: to analyze the cost-effectiveness and calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of multilayer compressive treatment in relation to inelastic (Unna boot and short stretch) therapy according to the current literature. Method: quantitative study about cost-effectiveness through modeling with the aid of TreeAge® software for construction of the decision tree. The anticipated assumptions were obtained by using secondary literature data to estimate the cost and effectiveness of the assumed parameters. A systematic literature review with meta-analysis was performed for this end. Results: the decision tree after Roll Back showed that the multilayer therapy dominated the alternatives in the base case, representing an intermediate cost per application, although with the highest effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness analysis graph also showed extended dominance of the Unna boot in relation to the short stretch bandage. The sensitivity analysis showed that multilayer bandage remains a more cost-effective alternative, within the threshold of willingness to pay. Conclusion: the most cost-effective alternative was multilayer bandage, considered the gold standard in the literature. The second most cost-effective alternative was the Unna boot, the most used therapy in Brazil.

Objetivo: analisar a custo-efetividade e calcular a razão de custoefetividade incremental do tratamento compressivo multicamadas em relação ao inelástico (bota de Unna e curto estiramento) de acordo com a literatura atual. Método: estudo quantitativo sobre custo-efetividade por meio de modelagem com auxílio do software TreeAge® para a construção da árvore de decisão. Os pressupostos anunciados foram obtidos pelo uso de dados secundários de literatura para estimativa do custo e efetividade dos parâmetros assumidos. Para tal, foi realizada uma revisão sistemática de literatura com metanálise. Resultados: a árvore de decisão, após Roll Back mostrou que a terapia multicamadas dominou as alternativas no caso-base, representando custo intermediário por aplicação, porém, com a maior efetividade. O gráfico da análise de custo-efetividade também mostrou uma dominância estendida da bota de Unna em relação à bandagem de curto estiramento. A análise de sensibilidade mostrou que a bandagem multicamadas permanece como alternativa mais custo-efetiva, dentro do limiar de disposição para pagar. Conclusão: a alternativa com maior custo-efetividade foi a bandagem multicamadas, considerada padrão ouro na literatura. A segunda alternativa mais custo-efetiva foi a bota de Unna, terapia mais utilizada no Brasil.

Real-world evidence generation from patients, their caregivers and physicians supporting clinical, regulatory and guideline decisions: an update on Disease Specific Programmes.

OBJECTIVE: To update on and describe the role of Disease Specific Programmes (DSPs), a multi-perspective real-world data (RWD) source, in the context of the evolution of the value and acceptance of real-world evidence (RWE) in clinical, regulatory and guideline decision-making. METHODS: DSPs are multi-national, multi-subscriber, multi-therapy cross-sectional surveys incorporating retrospective data collection from patient, caregiver and physician perspectives. Information collected covers the patient journey, including treatment/prescribing patterns and rationale, patient-reported outcomes, impact on work and everyday activities, attitudes towards and perceptions of the condition, adherence to treatment and burden of illness. Published peer-reviewed DSP papers were aligned with current key RWE themes identified in the literature, alongside their contribution to RWE. RESULTS: RWE themes examined were: using RWE to inform clinical practice, patient and caregiver engagement, RWE role in supporting health technology assessments and regulatory submissions, informing value-driven healthcare decisions, real-world patient subgroup differences and therapeutic inertia/unmet needs; highlighting patients' and caregivers' experience of living with a disease, disconnect from their physicians, unmet needs and educational gaps. CONCLUSIONS: DSPs provide a wealth of RWD in addition to evidence generated by registries, clinical trials and observational research, with wide use for the pharmaceutical industry, government, funding/regulatory bodies, clinical practice guideline insights and, most importantly, informing improvements in people's lives. The depth, breadth and heritage of information collected via DSPs since 1995 is unparalleled, extending understanding of how diseases are managed by physicians in routine clinical practice and why treatment choices are made, patients' perceptions of their disease management, and caregiver burden.

Staff's Attitudes towards the Use of Mobile Telepresence Robots in Long-Term Care Homes in Canada.

This cross-sectional study investigated staff's attitudes towards the use of mobile telepresence robots in long-term care (LTC) homes in western Canada. We drew on a Health Technology Assessment Core Model 3.0 to design a survey examining attitudes towards nine domains of mobile telepresence robots. Staff, including nurses, care staff, and managers, from two LTC homes were invited to participate. Statistical analysis of survey data from 181 participants revealed that overall, participants showed positive attitudes towards features and characteristics, self-efficacy on technology use, organizational aspects, clinical effectiveness, and residents and social aspects; neutral attitudes towards residents' ability to use technology, and costs; and negative attitudes towards safety and privacy. Participants who disclosed their demographic backgrounds tended to exhibit more positive attitudes than participants who did not. Content analysis of textual data identified specific concerns and benefits of using the robots. We discuss options for implementing mobile telepresence robots in LTC.

Barriers to Access to Cardiac Surgery: Canadian Situation and Global Context.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Cardiovascular care spans primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention and care, whereby tertiary care is particularly prone to disparities in care. Challenges in access to care especially affect low- and middle-income countries (LMICs); however, multiple barriers also exist and persist across high-income countries. Canada is lauded for its universal health coverage but is faced with health system challenges and substantial geographical barriers. Canada possesses 203 active cardiac surgeons or 5.02 per million population, ranging from 3.70 per million in Newfoundland and Labrador to 7.48 in Nova Scotia. As such, Canada possesses fewer cardiac surgeons per million population compared to the average among high-income countries (7.15 per million), albeit more than the global average (1.64 per million) and far higher than the low-income country average (0.04 per million). In Canada, adult cardiac surgeons are active across 32 cardiac centers, representing 0.79 cardiac centers per million population, which is just above the global average (0.73 per million). In addition to center and workforce variations, barriers to care exist in the form of waiting times, sociodemographic characteristics, insufficient virtual care infrastructure and electronic health record interoperability, and healthcare governance fragmentation. Meanwhile, Canada has highly favorable surgical outcomes, well-established post-acute cardiac care infrastructure, considerable spending on health, robust health administrative data, and effective health technology assessment agencies, which provide a foundation for continued improvements in care. In this narrative review, we describe successes and challenges surrounding access to cardiac surgery in Canada and globally.

Rates of medical or surgical treatment for women with heavy menstrual bleeding: the ECLIPSE trial 10-year observational follow-up study.

Background: Heavy menstrual bleeding is a common problem that can significantly affect women's lives until menopause. There is a lack of evidence on longer-term outcomes after seeking health care and treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding. Objectives: To assess the continuation rates of medical treatments and the rates of ablative and surgical interventions among women who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial (ISRCTN86566246) 10 years after initial management for heavy menstrual bleeding in primary care. To explore experiences of heavy menstrual bleeding and influences on treatment for women. Design: This was a prospective observational cohort study, with a parallel qualitative study. Setting: Primary care. Participants: A total of 206 women with heavy menstrual bleeding who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial consented to providing outcome data via a questionnaire approximately 10 years after original randomisation. Their mean age at follow-up was 54 years (standard deviation 5 years). A purposeful sample of 36 women also participated in semistructured qualitative interviews. Interventions: The ECLIPSE trial randomised participants to either the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (52 mg) or the usual medical treatment (oral tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen-progestogen or progesterone alone, chosen as clinically appropriate by general practitioners and women). Women could subsequently swap or cease their allocated treatment. Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were rates of ablative and surgical treatments; the rate of continuation of medical treatments; and quality of life using the Short Form questionnaire-36 items and EuroQol-5 Dimensions; women's experiences of heavy menstrual bleeding; and the influences on their decisions around treatment. Results: Over the 10-year follow-up period, 60 out of 206 (29%) women had received a surgical intervention [hysterectomy, n = 34 (17%); endometrial ablation, n = 26 (13%)]. Between 5 and 10 years post trial intervention, 89 women (43%) had ceased all medical treatments and 88 (43%) were using the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system alone or in combination with other oral treatments. More women in the usual medical treatment group had also used the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system than women in the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group. Fifty-six women (28%) used the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system at 10 years. There was no statistically significant difference in generic quality-of-life scores between the two original trial groups, although small improvements in the majority of domains were seen in both groups across time. Women reported wide-ranging impacts on their quality of life and normalisation of their heavy menstrual bleeding experience as a result of the taboo around menstruation. Women's treatment decisions and experiences were influenced by the perceived quality of health-care interactions with clinicians and their climacteric status. Limitations: Fewer than half of the original 571 participants participated; however, the cohort was clinically and demographically representative of the original trial population. Conclusions: Medical treatments for women with heavy menstrual bleeding can be initiated in primary care, with low rates of surgical intervention and improvement in quality of life observed 10 years later. Clinicians should be aware of the considerable challenges that women with heavy menstrual bleeding experience at presentation and subsequently over time, and the importance and value to women of patient-centred communication in this context. Future work: Any further evaluation of treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding should include long-term evaluation of outcomes and adherence. Trial registration: The original ECLIPSE trial was registered as ISRCTN86566246. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 17. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Heavy menstrual bleeding is a common problem that can significantly affect women's lives, yet many women do not seek medical help. Medical treatments, such as tablets and a hormonal coil inserted in the womb, were shown to help women with heavy menstrual bleeding in a previous clinical trial that we conducted, called ECLIPSE. In the ECLIPSE trial, women provided information for 5 years after their treatment started. We planned to continue to ask these women about their periods, their symptoms and quality of life, and the treatments that they chose about 10 years after they first joined the trial. We did this using questionnaires and by interviewing women. We received questionnaires from 206 out of the 490 women (42%) who had participated in the ECLIPSE trial 10 years earlier. Responders were, on average, 54 years old, and half reported that they had reached the menopause. About 3 in 10 women overall had either received a hysterectomy or undergone destruction of the womb lining. Just over one-quarter of women were using the hormonal coil. Quality of life remained improved and was generally higher than that before treatment. There was no big difference in quality of life or in the numbers of women having surgery between those who first used tablets and those who received the coil. Women described the wide-ranging impact of heavy bleeding on their lives and the taboo around periods. Women's experience of good or poor communication with their doctors, and thoughts about fertility and menopause, influenced the treatment choices that they made. Women's quality of life was improved by medical treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding, even as menopause approached, and this shows the importance of these treatments. This research can help doctors and women to make more informed decisions about medical and surgical treatments.

Online remote behavioural intervention for tics in 9- to 17-year-olds: the ORBIT RCT with embedded process and economic evaluation.

Background: Behavioural therapy for tics is difficult to access, and little is known about its effectiveness when delivered online. Objective: To investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an online-delivered, therapist- and parent-supported therapy for young people with tic disorders. Design: Single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, with 3-month (primary end point) and 6-month post-randomisation follow-up. Participants were individually randomised (1 : 1), using on online system, with block randomisations, stratified by site. Naturalistic follow-up was conducted at 12 and 18 months post-randomisation when participants were free to access non-trial interventions. A subset of participants participated in a process evaluation. Setting: Two hospitals (London and Nottingham) in England also accepting referrals from patient identification centres and online self-referrals. Participants: Children aged 9-17 years (1) with Tourette syndrome or chronic tic disorder, (2) with a Yale Global Tic Severity Scale-total tic severity score of 15 or more (or > 10 with only motor or vocal tics) and (3) having not received behavioural therapy for tics in the past 12 months or started/stopped medication for tics within the past 2 months. Interventions: Either 10 weeks of online, remotely delivered, therapist-supported exposure and response prevention therapy (intervention group) or online psychoeducation (control). Outcome: Primary outcome: Yale Global Tic Severity Scale-total tic severity score 3 months post-randomisation; analysis done in all randomised patients for whom data were available. Secondary outcomes included low mood, anxiety, treatment satisfaction and health resource use. Quality-adjusted life-years are derived from parent-completed quality-of-life measures. All trial staff, statisticians and the chief investigator were masked to group allocation. Results: Two hundred and twenty-four participants were randomised to the intervention (n = 112) or control (n = 112) group. Participants were mostly male (n = 177; 79%), with a mean age of 12 years. At 3 months the estimated mean difference in Yale Global Tic Severity Scale-total tic severity score between the groups adjusted for baseline and site was -2.29 points (95% confidence interval -3.86 to -0.71) in favour of therapy (effect size -0.31, 95% confidence interval -0.52 to -0.10). This effect was sustained throughout to the final follow-up at 18 months (-2.01 points, 95% confidence interval -3.86 to -0.15; effect size -0.27, 95% confidence interval -0.52 to -0.02). At 18 months the mean incremental cost per participant of the intervention compared to the control was £662 (95% confidence interval -£59 to £1384), with a mean incremental quality-adjusted life-year of 0.040 (95% confidence interval -0.004 to 0.083) per participant. The mean incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained was £16,708. The intervention was acceptable and delivered with high fidelity. Parental engagement predicted child engagement and more positive clinical outcomes. Harms: Two serious, unrelated adverse events occurred in the control group. Limitations: We cannot separate the effects of digital online delivery and the therapy itself. The sample was predominately white and British, limiting generalisability. The design did not compare to face-to-face services. Conclusion: Online, therapist-supported behavioural therapy for young people with tic disorders is clinically and cost-effective in reducing tics, with durable benefits extending up to 18 months. Future work: Future work should compare online to face-to-face therapy and explore how to embed the intervention in clinical practice. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN70758207; ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03483493). The trial is now complete. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Technology Assessment programme (project number 16/19/02) and will be published in full in Health and Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

It can be difficult for children and young people with tics to access therapy. This is because there are not enough trained tic therapists. Online remote behavioural intervention for tics was a clinical trial to see whether an online platform that delivered two different types of interventions could help tics. One intervention focused on techniques to control tics; this type of therapy is called exposure and response prevention. The other intervention was psychoeducation, where participants learned about the nature of tics but not how to control them. The online remote behavioural intervention for tics interventions also involved help from a therapist and support from a parent. Participants were aged 9­17 years with Tourette syndrome/chronic tic disorder and were recruited from 16 clinics, two study sites (Nottingham and London) or via online self-referral. All individuals who were eligible for the online remote behavioural intervention for tics trial were randomised in a 50/50 split by researchers who were unaware of which treatment was being given. Participants received either 10 weeks of online exposure and response prevention or 10 weeks of online psychoeducation. A total of 224 children and young people participated: 112 allocated to exposure and response prevention and 112 to psychoeducation. Tics decreased more in the exposure and response prevention group (16% reduction) than in the psychoeducation group (6% reduction) 3 months after treatment. This difference is considered a clinically important difference in tic reduction. The treatment continued to have a positive effect on tic symptoms at 6, 12 and 18 months, showing that the effects are durable. This was achieved with minimal therapist involvement. The cost of online exposure and response prevention to treat young people with tics within this study was less when compared to the cost of face-to-face therapy. The results show that exposure and response prevention is an effective behavioural therapy for tics in this specific patient group. Delivering exposure and response prevention online with minimal therapist contact can be a successful and cost-effective treatment to improve access to behavioural therapy.

Adjunctive Medication Management and Contingency Management to enhance adherence to acamprosate for alcohol dependence: the ADAM trial RCT.

Background: Acamprosate is an effective and cost-effective medication for alcohol relapse prevention but poor adherence can limit its full benefit. Effective interventions to support adherence to acamprosate are therefore needed. Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of Medication Management, with and without Contingency Management, compared to Standard Support alone in enhancing adherence to acamprosate and the impact of adherence to acamprosate on abstinence and reduced alcohol consumption. Design: Multicentre, three-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled clinical trial. Setting: Specialist alcohol treatment services in five regions of England (South East London, Central and North West London, Wessex, Yorkshire and Humber and West Midlands). Participants: Adults (aged 18 years or more), an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, diagnosis of alcohol dependence, abstinent from alcohol at baseline assessment, in receipt of a prescription for acamprosate. Interventions: (1) Standard Support, (2) Standard Support with adjunctive Medication Management provided by pharmacists via a clinical contact centre (12 sessions over 6 months), (3) Standard Support with adjunctive Medication Management plus Contingency Management that consisted of vouchers (up to £120) to reinforce participation in Medication Management. Consenting participants were randomised in a 2 : 1 : 1 ratio to one of the three groups using a stratified random permuted block method using a remote system. Participants and researchers were not blind to treatment allocation. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome: self-reported percentage of medication taken in the previous 28 days at 6 months post randomisation. Economic outcome: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, a five-level version, used to calculate quality-adjusted life-years, with costs estimated using the Adult Service Use Schedule. Results: Of the 1459 potential participants approached, 1019 (70%) were assessed and 739 (73 consented to participate in the study, 372 (50%) were allocated to Standard Support, 182 (25%) to Standard Support with Medication Management and 185 (25%) to Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management. Data were available for 518 (70%) of participants at 6-month follow-up, 255 (68.5%) allocated to Standard Support, 122 (67.0%) to Standard Support and Medication Management and 141 (76.2%) to Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management. The mean difference of per cent adherence to acamprosate was higher for those who received Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management (10.6%, 95% confidence interval 19.6% to 1.6%) compared to Standard Support alone, at the primary end point (6-month follow-up). There was no significant difference in per cent days adherent when comparing Standard Support and Medication Management with Standard Support alone 3.1% (95% confidence interval 12.8% to -6.5%) or comparing Standard Support and Medication Management with Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management 7.9% (95% confidence interval 18.7% to -2.8%). The primary economic analysis at 6 months found that Standard Support and Medication Management with Contingency Management was cost-effective compared to Standard Support alone, achieving small gains in quality-adjusted life-years at a lower cost per participant. Cost-effectiveness was not observed for adjunctive Medication Management compared to Standard Support alone. There were no serious adverse events related to the trial interventions reported. Limitations: The trial's primary outcome measure changed substantially due to data collection difficulties and therefore relied on a measure of self-reported adherence. A lower than anticipated follow-up rate at 12 months may have lowered the statistical power to detect differences in the secondary analyses, although the primary analysis was not impacted. Conclusions: Medication Management enhanced with Contingency Management is beneficial to patients for supporting them to take acamprosate. Future work: Given our findings in relation to Contingency Management enhancing Medication Management adherence, future trials should be developed to explore its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness with other alcohol interventions where there is evidence of poor adherence. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN17083622 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN17083622. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 22. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Many people who are trying to stop drinking alcohol can find it difficult to remain alcohol free. There is a medication called acamprosate (Campral) that can reduce cravings thereby increasing the likelihood of abstinence. However, some people have trouble taking the right amount of acamprosate tablets needed every day at the right time, preferably at mealtimes. This means the medication is not as effective. We have tested some new ways to help support people taking acamprosate. We tested three different strategies to find the best way to support people taking acamprosate. We recruited 739 people aged 18 and over who were receiving alcohol treatment to stop drinking and were taking acamprosate. We randomly allocated these people to three groups. The first was Standard Support, the usual support people receive when taking acamprosate. The second group received Standard Support plus Medication Management. This consisted of 12 telephone calls over 6 months with a trained pharmacist to discuss the importance of taking the right amount of the medication, how the medication works and strategies to help people take the medication correctly. The third group received Standard Support, Medication Management and Contingency Management. This involved giving people shopping vouchers for participating with Medication Management calls. The maximum value of vouchers per person was £120. People who were in the group receiving Medication Management and Contingency Management took a greater number of acamprosate tablets. We also found that Medication Management plus Contingency Management was more cost-effective; there were greater gains in health with a smaller cost per person compared to Standard Support alone. This shows that there is likely to be a benefit to patients of Medication Management plus Contingency Management for supporting people taking acamprosate.

Posterior cervical foraminotomy versus anterior cervical discectomy for Cervical Brachialgia: the FORVAD RCT.

Background: Posterior cervical foraminotomy and anterior cervical discectomy are routinely used operations to treat cervical brachialgia, although definitive evidence supporting superiority of either is lacking. Objective: The primary objective was to investigate whether or not posterior cervical foraminotomy is superior to anterior cervical discectomy in improving clinical outcome. Design: This was a Phase III, unblinded, prospective, United Kingdom multicentre, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled superiority trial comparing posterior cervical foraminotomy with anterior cervical discectomy. A rapid qualitative study was conducted during the close-down phase, involving remote semistructured interviews with trial participants and health-care professionals. Setting: National Health Service trusts. Participants: Patients with symptomatic unilateral cervical brachialgia for at least 6 weeks. Interventions: Participants were randomised to receive posterior cervical foraminotomy or anterior cervical discectomy. Allocation was not blinded to participants, medical staff or trial staff. Health-care use from providing the initial surgical intervention to hospital discharge was measured and valued using national cost data. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was clinical outcome, as measured by patient-reported Neck Disability Index score 52 weeks post operation. Secondary outcome measures included complications, reoperations and restricted American Spinal Injury Association score over 6 weeks post operation, and patient-reported Eating Assessment Tool-10 items, Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale, Voice Handicap Index-10 items, PainDETECT and Numerical Rating Scales for neck and upper-limb pain over 52 weeks post operation. Results: The target recruitment was 252 participants. Owing to slow accrual, the trial closed after randomising 23 participants from 11 hospitals. The qualitative substudy found that there was support and enthusiasm for the posterior cervical FORaminotomy Versus Anterior cervical Discectomy in the treatment of cervical brachialgia trial and randomised clinical trials in this area. However, clinical equipoise appears to have been an issue for sites and individual surgeons. Randomisation on the day of surgery and processes for screening and approaching participants were also crucial factors in some centres. The median Neck Disability Index scores at baseline (pre surgery) and at 52 weeks was 44.0 (interquartile range 36.0-62.0 weeks) and 25.3 weeks (interquartile range 20.0-42.0 weeks), respectively, in the posterior cervical foraminotomy group (n = 14), and 35.6 weeks (interquartile range 34.0-44.0 weeks) and 45.0 weeks (interquartile range 20.0-57.0 weeks), respectively, in the anterior cervical discectomy group (n = 9). Scores appeared to reduce (i.e. improve) in the posterior cervical foraminotomy group, but not in the anterior cervical discectomy group. The median Eating Assessment Tool-10 items score for swallowing was higher (worse) after anterior cervical discectomy (13.5) than after posterior cervical foraminotomy (0) on day 1, but not at other time points, whereas the median Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale score for globus was higher (worse) after anterior cervical discectomy (15, 7, 6, 6, 2, 2.5) than after posterior cervical foraminotomy (3, 0, 0, 0.5, 0, 0) at all postoperative time points. Five postoperative complications occurred within 6 weeks of surgery, all after anterior cervical discectomy. Neck pain was more severe on day 1 following posterior cervical foraminotomy (Numerical Rating Scale - Neck Pain score 8.5) than at the same time point after anterior cervical discectomy (Numerical Rating Scale - Neck Pain score 7.0). The median health-care costs of providing initial surgical intervention were £2610 for posterior cervical foraminotomy and £4411 for anterior cervical discectomy. Conclusions: The data suggest that posterior cervical foraminotomy is associated with better outcomes, fewer complications and lower costs, but the trial recruited slowly and closed early. Consequently, the trial is underpowered and definitive conclusions cannot be drawn. Recruitment was impaired by lack of individual equipoise and by concern about randomising on the day of surgery. A large prospective multicentre trial comparing anterior cervical discectomy and posterior cervical foraminotomy in the treatment of cervical brachialgia is still required. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN10133661. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 21. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cervical brachialgia is pain that starts in the neck and passes down into the arm. Although most people with cervical brachialgia recover quickly, in some patients pain persists, and in 15% of patients pain is so severe that they are unable to work. In the posterior cervical FORaminotomy Versus Anterior cervical Discectomy in the treatment of cervical brachialgia trial, we investigated two neck surgeries used to treat this problem: posterior cervical foraminotomy (surgery from the back of the neck) and anterior cervical discectomy (surgery from the front of the neck). This trial aimed to find out if one of them is better than the other at relieving pain and more cost-effective for the National Health Service. We assessed patients' quality of life 1 year after their surgery and how their pain changed over the course of the year. We also measured the number of complications patients had in the first 6 weeks after their operation. Recruitment was slow and so the trial was stopped early, after only 23 patients from 11 hospitals had been randomly allocated to the two surgery groups. We had planned to recruit 252 participants to the trial; the number of participants we were able to recruit in practice was too small to enable us to determine which surgery is better at relieving pain. To find out why the trial had struggled to recruit, we asked hospital staff and participants about their experiences. We found that hospital staff sometimes struggled to organise everything needed to randomise patients on the day of surgery. Some staff also found it difficult to randomise patients as they had an opinion on which surgery they thought the patient should receive. The data collected in the trial will still be useful to help design future research. Finding out which surgery is better at relieving pain remains important, and the data we have collected will support answering this question in future.

A pragmatic, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial to assess the safety, clinical and cost-effectiveness of mirtazapine and carbamazepine in people with Alzheimer's disease and agitated behaviours: the HTA-SYMBAD trial.

Background: Agitation is common and impacts negatively on people with dementia and carers. Non-drug patient-centred care is first-line treatment, but we need other treatment when this fails. Current evidence is sparse on safer and effective alternatives to antipsychotics. Objectives: To assess clinical and cost-effectiveness and safety of mirtazapine and carbamazepine in treating agitation in dementia. Design: Pragmatic, phase III, multicentre, double-blind, superiority, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness of mirtazapine over 12 weeks (carbamazepine arm discontinued). Setting: Twenty-six UK secondary care centres. Participants: Eligibility: probable or possible Alzheimer's disease, agitation unresponsive to non-drug treatment, Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score ≥ 45. Interventions: Mirtazapine (target 45 mg), carbamazepine (target 300 mg) and placebo. Outcome measures: Primary: Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score 12 weeks post randomisation. Main economic outcome evaluation: incremental cost per six-point difference in Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score at 12 weeks, from health and social care system perspective. Data from participants and informants at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks. Long-term follow-up Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory data collected by telephone from informants at 6 and 12 months. Randomisation and blinding: Participants allocated 1 : 1 : 1 ratio (to discontinuation of the carbamazepine arm, 1 : 1 thereafter) to receive placebo or carbamazepine or mirtazapine, with treatment as usual. Random allocation was block stratified by centre and residence type with random block lengths of three or six (after discontinuation of carbamazepine, two or four). Double-blind, with drug and placebo identically encapsulated. Referring clinicians, participants, trial management team and research workers who did assessments were masked to group allocation. Results: Two hundred and forty-four participants recruited and randomised (102 mirtazapine, 102 placebo, 40 carbamazepine). The carbamazepine arm was discontinued due to slow overall recruitment; carbamazepine/placebo analyses are therefore statistically underpowered and not detailed in the abstract. Mean difference placebo-mirtazapine (-1.74, 95% confidence interval -7.17 to 3.69; p = 0.53). Harms: The number of controls with adverse events (65/102, 64%) was similar to the mirtazapine group (67/102, 66%). However, there were more deaths in the mirtazapine group (n = 7) by week 16 than in the control group (n = 1). Post hoc analysis suggests this was of marginal statistical significance (p = 0.065); this difference did not persist at 6- and 12-month assessments. At 12 weeks, the costs of unpaid care by the dyadic carer were significantly higher in the mirtazapine than placebo group [difference: £1120 (95% confidence interval £56 to £2184)]. In the cost-effectiveness analyses, mean raw and adjusted outcome scores and costs of the complete cases samples showed no differences between groups. Limitations: Our study has four important potential limitations: (1) we dropped the proposed carbamazepine group; (2) the trial was not powered to investigate a mortality difference between the groups; (3) recruitment beyond February 2020, was constrained by the COVID-19 pandemic; and (4) generalisability is limited by recruitment of participants from old-age psychiatry services and care homes. Conclusions: The data suggest mirtazapine is not clinically or cost-effective (compared to placebo) for agitation in dementia. There is little reason to recommend mirtazapine for people with dementia with agitation. Future work: Effective and cost-effective management strategies for agitation in dementia are needed where non-pharmacological approaches are unsuccessful. Study registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN17411897/NCT03031184. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 23. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

It is common for people with Alzheimer's disease to experience agitation, for example feeling restless or unsettled. If left untreated, agitation can lead to poorer quality of life and increased hospitalisation and strain for family carers. Often these symptoms are treated with medications that are usually used to manage psychosis (antipsychotic drugs), but such medication has limited effectiveness and can cause serious adverse effects to patients, including risk of increased death. Two medications that are already commonly prescribed for other health issues, mirtazapine (an antidepressant) and carbamazepine (a drug used to treat epilepsy), had been identified as a possible alternative way of treating agitation in Alzheimer's disease that might not have the harms associated with antipsychotic medication. In this study, we compared the effects of giving mirtazapine or carbamazepine with a dummy drug (placebo) in people with Alzheimer's disease who were experiencing agitation. The results of the study showed that neither medication was any more effective than the placebo in reducing agitation over 12 weeks in terms of improving symptoms, or in economic terms. Mirtazapine may lead to additional carer costs as compared to placebo. The study findings are stronger for mirtazapine than carbamazepine because the carbamazepine arm was stopped when it had recruited less than half the numbers needed. That was done because the study was not recruiting quickly enough to support both the mirtazapine and the carbamazepine arms. The findings from this study show that mirtazapine should not be recommended to treat agitation in Alzheimer's disease. More work is needed to formulate effective ways and to test new drug and non-drug treatments for agitation in dementia.

A Meta-Review to Guide Military Screening and Treatment of Gambling Problems.

INTRODUCTION: Excessive gambling can cause substantial biopsychosocial problems (e.g., difficulties with finances, relationships, mental, and physical health). For military Service Members, it can also result in security clearance denial or revocation, failure to achieve promotions, and premature career termination. Recent congressional mandates have obligated the U.S. Department of Defense to screen for problematic gambling, the predictive values of which are a function of (i) problem prevalence and (ii) tool sensitivity and specificity. This meta-review (i.e., systematic review of systematic reviews) on the screening properties of gambling assessment tools and the effectiveness of treatments for gambling disorder is to inform military services on responding to Service Members' gambling problems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: EBSCO Discovery Service, PubMed, PsycINFO, Ovid Medline, Social Care Online, Epistemonikos, International Health Technology Assessment, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases were searched up to December 2022 for systematic reviews and meta-analyses on measurements of adult subclinical or gambling, and interventions targeting individuals with GD. Three and four studies were included in each section of the current meta-review (i.e., assessment tools and treatment). For review 1, the estimated risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews. RESULTS: Thirty-one tools were identified through the three systematic reviews. All had modest sensitivities and specificities; combined with low prevalences in the general SM population, positive results would be incorrect 64-99% of the time. However, if screening were conducted with SMs referred for alcohol problems, a positive result on the best screening tools would be correct 76% of the time. Several commonly used treatment approaches had demonstrated efficacy for GD. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of low prevalence of GD and subclinical gambling problems in the general population, coupled with modest sensitivity and specificity, makes screening unfeasible in the general SM population. However, dual-phase screening in higher-prevalence subpopulations (i.e., SMs already identified with substance-abuse or mental-health problems) would be viable. Regarding treatment, several interventions-already used in military healthcare-with extensive empirical track records have been successfully used to treat adults with GD.

Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacist Care in Diabetes Management: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, the role of pharmacists has undergone significant transformation to become more patient-centered and involved in managing chronic diseases. Nonetheless, it remains unclear whether pharmacist involvement in diabetes management is cost-effective. This study aimed to systematically review the cost-effectiveness and reporting quality in comprehensive economic evaluations of pharmacist management compared to standard care in diabetes. METHODS: Eligible studies included cost-effectiveness analyses employing pharmacist professional services as the intervention for diabetes. A literature search was conducted in the bibliographic databases Pubmed, Scopus, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and the International Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database from their inception until July 2023. Two independent reviewers performed title, abstract, full-text screening, and data abstraction and assessed the quality of reporting and methodological approaches using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS 2022) checklists. RESULTS: Twelve studies were identified with an average research quality score of 19.8, including cost-utility (n = 5) and cost-effectiveness (n = 7) analyses, with only four studies rated as high quality. The efficacy data were derived from randomized controlled trials (n = 7), retrospective studies (n = 2), and published literature sources (n = 2). Half of the included studies were conducted in high-income countries, while the other half was in upper-middle and lower-middle-income countries, respectively. Despite significant variations in the cost of pharmacist intervention, consistent findings demonstrate that pharmacist involvement in diabetes management is more cost-effective or even cost-saving than standard care, primarily attributed to better glycemic control, enhanced patient compliance, and reduced risks of medication-related problems. CONCLUSION: This systematic review substantiates that pharmacist involvement in diabetes management is cost-effective compared with standard care. However, the overall quality of reporting needs to be improved, and high-quality evidence is urgently needed to support healthcare decision-making in pharmacy practice.

Procedural fairness in benefit package design: inclusion of pre-exposure prophylaxis of HIV in Universal Coverage Scheme in Thailand.

Since 2002, Thailand's Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) has adopted a comprehensive benefits package with few exclusions. A positive-list approach has gradually been applied, with pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) of HIV recently being included. Disagreements resulting from competing values and diverging interests necessitate an emphasis on procedural fairness when making any decisions. This qualitative study analyses agenda setting, policy formulation and early implementation of PrEP from a procedural fairness lens. Literature reviews and in-depth interviews with 13 key stakeholders involved in PrEP policy processes were conducted. Civil society organizations (CSOs) and academia piloted PrEP service models and co-produced evidence on programmatic feasibility and outcomes. Through a broad stakeholder representation process, the Department of Disease Control proposed PrEP for inclusion in UCS benefits package in 2017. PrEP was shown to be cost-effective and affordable through rigorous health technology assessment, peer review, use of up-to-date evidence and safe-guards against conflicts of interest. In 2021, Thailand's National Health Security Board decided to include PrEP as a prevention and promotion package, free of charge, for the populations at risk. Favourable conditions for procedural fairness were created by Thailand's legislative provisions that enable responsive governance, notably inclusiveness, transparency, safeguarding public interest and accountable budget allocations; longstanding institutional capacity to generate local evidence; and implementation capacity for realisation of procedural fairness criteria. Multiple stakeholders including CSOs, academia and the government deliberated in the policy process through working groups and sub-committees. However, a key lesson from Thailand's deliberative process concerns a possible 'over interpretation' of conflicts of interest, intended to promote impartial decision-making, which inadvertently limited the voices of key populations represented in the decision processes. Finally, this case study underscores the value of examining the full policy cycle when assessing procedural fairness, since some stages of the process may be more amenable to certain procedural criteria than others.

The Checklist for Standard Methodological Requirements and Reporting of Economic Evaluation of Medicines in Slovakia.

OBJECTIVES: We have developed a scientifically well-grounded, methodological, and reporting checklist for economic evaluation (EE) of medicines in the Slovak health technology assessment process, which serves as a supplement to the Slovak pharmacoeconomic guidelines. METHODS: The checklist was developed using an iterative process in which items were generated and gradually added to the baseline checklist based on shortcomings identified in an analysis of Slovak EEs, using relevant published checklists, and Slovak, as well as international, methodological guidance that was identified in the systematic literature review. The selection of checklist recommendations, their clarity, and relevance to the Slovak setting were validated in the online survey. RESULTS: From the sample of 151 price and reimbursement submissions published between January 2018 and July 2021, almost half of them (n = 73) received at least 1 request from the Ministry of Healthcare to justify or modify the methodology used in the EE; and in 18 proceedings, a negative opinion was issued because of shortcomings identified in the EE. The 25-items preliminary checklist, resulting from an iterative working process, has been validated in an online survey conducted among members of ISPOR Chapter Slovakia. After incorporating relevant comments, the final proposal for the Slovak checklist consists of 55 recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The research represented the first attempt to create a Slovak EE checklist, which serves as a part of ISPOR Slovakia pharmacoeconomic guidelines. Implementation of the checklist allows checking whether EE meets legislative and methodological requirements and thus helps in improving the appropriateness and standardization of EEs in Slovakia.

Evidence-based clinical engineering: Health information technology adverse events identification and classification with natural language processing.

The primary goal of this project is to create a framework to extract Real-World Evidence to support Health Technology Assessment, Health Technology Management, Evidence-Based Maintenance, and Post Market Surveillance (as outlined in the EU Medical Device Regulation 2017/745) of medical devices using Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Artificial Intelligence. An initial literature review on Spontaneous Reporting System databases, Health Information Technologies (HIT) fault classification, and Natural Language Processing has been conducted, from which it clearly emerges that adverse events related to HIT are increasing over time. The proposed framework uses NLP techniques and Explainable Artificial Intelligence models to automatically identify HIT-related adverse event reports. The designed model employs a pre-trained version of ClinicalBERT that has been fine-tuned and tested on 3,075 adverse event reports extracted from the FDA MAUDE database and manually labelled by experts.

Alternative cascade-testing protocols for identifying and managing patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia: systematic reviews, qualitative study and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Background: Cascade testing the relatives of people with familial hypercholesterolaemia is an efficient approach to identifying familial hypercholesterolaemia. The cascade-testing protocol starts with identifying an index patient with familial hypercholesterolaemia, followed by one of three approaches to contact other relatives: indirect approach, whereby index patients contact their relatives; direct approach, whereby the specialist contacts the relatives; or a combination of both direct and indirect approaches. However, it is unclear which protocol may be most effective. Objectives: The objectives were to determine the yield of cases from different cascade-testing protocols, treatment patterns, and short- and long-term outcomes for people with familial hypercholesterolaemia; to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternative protocols for familial hypercholesterolaemia cascade testing; and to qualitatively assess the acceptability of different cascade-testing protocols to individuals and families with familial hypercholesterolaemia, and to health-care providers. Design and methods: This study comprised systematic reviews and analysis of three data sets: PASS (PASS Software, Rijswijk, the Netherlands) hospital familial hypercholesterolaemia databases, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD)-Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) linked primary-secondary care data set, and a specialist familial hypercholesterolaemia register. Cost-effectiveness modelling, incorporating preceding analyses, was undertaken. Acceptability was examined in interviews with patients, relatives and health-care professionals. Result: Systematic review of protocols: based on data from 4 of the 24 studies, the combined approach led to a slightly higher yield of relatives tested [40%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 37% to 42%] than the direct (33%, 95% CI 28% to 39%) or indirect approaches alone (34%, 95% CI 30% to 37%). The PASS databases identified that those contacted directly were more likely to complete cascade testing (p < 0.01); the CPRD-HES data set indicated that 70% did not achieve target treatment levels, and demonstrated increased cardiovascular disease risk among these individuals, compared with controls (hazard ratio 9.14, 95% CI 8.55 to 9.76). The specialist familial hypercholesterolaemia register confirmed excessive cardiovascular morbidity (standardised morbidity ratio 7.17, 95% CI 6.79 to 7.56). Cost-effectiveness modelling found a net health gain from diagnosis of -0.27 to 2.51 quality-adjusted life-years at the willingness-to-pay threshold of £15,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The cost-effective protocols cascaded from genetically confirmed index cases by contacting first- and second-degree relatives simultaneously and directly. Interviews found a service-led direct-contact approach was more reliable, but combining direct and indirect approaches, guided by index patients and family relationships, may be more acceptable. Limitations: Systematic reviews were not used in the economic analysis, as relevant studies were lacking or of poor quality. As only a proportion of those with primary care-coded familial hypercholesterolaemia are likely to actually have familial hypercholesterolaemia, CPRD analyses are likely to underestimate the true effect. The cost-effectiveness analysis required assumptions related to the long-term cardiovascular disease risk, the effect of treatment on cholesterol and the generalisability of estimates from the data sets. Interview recruitment was limited to white English-speaking participants. Conclusions: Based on limited evidence, most cost-effective cascade-testing protocols, diagnosing most relatives, select index cases by genetic testing, with services directly contacting relatives, and contacting second-degree relatives even if first-degree relatives have not been tested. Combined approaches to contact relatives may be more suitable for some families. Future work: Establish a long-term familial hypercholesterolaemia cohort, measuring cholesterol levels, treatment and cardiovascular outcomes. Conduct a randomised study comparing different approaches to contact relatives. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018117445 and CRD42019125775. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Familial hypercholesterolaemia is an inherited condition that causes raised cholesterol levels from birth and increases risk of heart disease if left untreated. After someone in a family is found to have familial hypercholesterolaemia (called an index case), their close relatives need to be contacted and checked to see if they have familial hypercholesterolaemia, using genetic or cholesterol testing. This is called 'cascade testing'. We planned to find the most cost-effective and acceptable way to do this. The relatives could be contacted for testing by the index case (indirect approach), by a health-care professional (direct approach) or by a combination of both approaches. We found, based on looking at hospital records, that more relatives were tested if health-care professionals directly contacted relatives. In previous studies, slightly more relatives were tested for familial hypercholesterolaemia with a combination approach. Interviews with patients also suggested that the direct approach was the most effective, but the most acceptable and successful approach depends on family relationships: using one approach for some families and using both for other families. Furthermore, by looking at the health-care records of large numbers of patients, we confirmed that people with a recorded diagnosis of familial hypercholesterolaemia in general practice records have a much higher risk of heart disease than the general population, and this was especially so for those with previous heart disease and/or raised cholesterols levels when diagnosed. However, one-quarter of new patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia recorded in their records were not treated within 2 years, with less than one-third reaching recommended cholesterol levels. We used what we had learned to help us estimate the most cost-effective way to do cascade testing. This showed that if the health service directly contact all relatives simultaneously for further assessment, rather than the current approach whereby close (first-degree) relatives are contacted first, this was cost-effective and good value for money.

Surrogacy and the Valuation of ATMPs: Taking Our Place in the Evidence Generation/Assessment Continuum.

Medical technology is advancing rapidly, but established methods for health technology assessment are struggling to keep up. This challenge is particularly stark for the assessment of advanced therapy medicinal products-therapies often launched on the basis of single-arm studies powered to a surrogate primary endpoint. The most robust surrogacy methods investigate trial-level correlations between the treatment effect on the surrogate and the outcome of ultimate interest. However, these methods are often impossible with the evidence usually available for advanced therapy medicinal products at the time of the launch (randomized controlled trials are necessary for these advanced methods). Additionally, these surrogacy relationships are usually considered to be technology specific, adding uncertainty for any approach that primarily relies on historic data to estimate the surrogacy relationship for novel interventions such as advanced therapy medicinal products. The literature has already highlighted the need for early dialogue, staged assessment processes, and pricing arrangements that responsibly share the risk between the manufacturer and payer. However, it is our view that in addition to these critical developments, the modeling methods employed could also improve. Currently, health technology assessment practitioners typically either ignore the surrogate and simply extrapolate the endpoint of greatest patient relevance irrespective of the degree of maturity or assume historic surrogate relationships apply to the novel technology. In this opinion piece, we outline an additional avenue. By drawing on the understanding of the mechanism of action and insights generated earlier in the evidence generation/assessment continuum, cost-effectiveness modelers can make better use of the wider data available. These efforts are expected to reduce uncertainty at the time of the initial launch of pharmaceutical products and increase the value of subsequent data collection efforts.