Decreasing alloimmunization-specific mortality in sickle cell disease in the United States: Cost-effectiveness of a shared transfusion resource.

Red blood cell alloimmunization and consequent delayed hemolytic transfusion reaction (DHTR) incidence and mortality in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) are high. A shared transfusion resource has decreased both in other countries, while in the United States cost concerns persist. We conducted a Markov cohort simulation of a birth cohort of alloimmunized patients with SCD to estimate lifetime DHTR incidence, DHTR-specific mortality, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE), and costs with the implementation of a shared transfusion resource to identify antibody history versus without (i.e., status quo). We conducted our analysis using a lifetime analytic time horizon and from a United States health system perspective. Implementation of shared transfusion resource projects to decrease cumulative DHTR-specific mortality by 26% for alloimmunized patients with SCD in the United States, relative to the status quo. For an average patient population of 32 000, this intervention would generate a discounted increment of 4000 QALYs at an incremental discounted cost of $0.3 billion, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $75 600/QALY [95% credible interval $70 200-81 400/QALY]. The results are most sensitive to the baseline lifetime medical expenditure of patients with SCD. Alloantibody data exchange is cost-effective in 100% of 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations. The resource would theoretically need a minimum patient population of 1819 patients or cost no more than $5.29 million annually to be cost-effective. By reducing DHTR-specific mortality, a shared transfusion resource in the United States projects to be a life-saving and cost-effective intervention for patients with SCD in the United States.

Integrating decision modeling and machine learning to inform treatment stratification.

There is increasing interest in moving away from "one size fits all (OSFA)" approaches toward stratifying treatment decisions. Understanding how expected effectiveness and cost-effectiveness varies with patient covariates is a key aspect of stratified decision making. Recently proposed machine learning (ML) methods can learn heterogeneity in outcomes without pre-specifying subgroups or functional forms, enabling the construction of decision rules ('policies') that map individual covariates into a treatment decision. However, these methods do not yet integrate ML estimates into a decision modeling framework in order to reflect long-term policy-relevant outcomes and synthesize information from multiple sources. In this paper, we propose a method to integrate ML and decision modeling, when individual patient data is available to estimate treatment-specific survival time. We also propose a novel implementation of policy tree algorithms to define subgroups using decision model output. We demonstrate these methods using the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), comparing outcomes for "standard" and "intensive" blood pressure targets. We find that including ML into a decision model can impact the estimate of incremental net health benefit (INHB) for OSFA policies. We also find evidence that stratifying treatment using subgroups defined by a tree-based algorithm can increase the estimates of the INHB.

Distributional Cost-Effectiveness of Equity-Enhancing Gene Therapy in Sickle Cell Disease in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Gene therapy is a potential cure for sickle cell disease (SCD). Conventional cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) does not capture the effects of treatments on disparities in SCD, but distributional CEA (DCEA) uses equity weights to incorporate these considerations. OBJECTIVE: To compare gene therapy versus standard of care (SOC) in patients with SCD by using conventional CEA and DCEA. DESIGN: Markov model. DATA SOURCES: Claims data and other published sources. TARGET POPULATION: Birth cohort of patients with SCD. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: U.S. health system. INTERVENTION: Gene therapy at age 12 years versus SOC. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (in dollars per quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] gained) and threshold inequality aversion parameter (equity weight). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Gene therapy versus SOC for females yielded 25.5 versus 15.7 (males: 24.4 vs. 15.5) discounted lifetime QALYs at costs of $2.8 million and $1.0 million (males: $2.8 million and $1.2 million), respectively, with an ICER of $176 000 per QALY (full SCD population). The inequality aversion parameter would need to be 0.90 for the full SCD population for gene therapy to be preferred per DCEA standards. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: SOC was favored in 100.0% (females) and 87.1% (males) of 10 000 probabilistic iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY. Gene therapy would need to cost less than $1.79 million to meet conventional CEA standards. LIMITATION: Benchmark equity weights (as opposed to SCD-specific weights) were used to interpret DCEA results. CONCLUSION: Gene therapy is cost-ineffective per conventional CEA standards but can be an equitable therapeutic strategy for persons living with SCD in the United States per DCEA standards. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Yale Bernard G. Forget Scholars Program and Bunker Endowment.

Prioritizing Quality Measures in Acute Stroke Care : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association and American Stroke Association (AHA/ASA) endorsed 15 process measures for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) to improve the quality of care. Identifying the highest-value measures could reduce the administrative burden of quality measure adoption while retaining much of the value of quality improvement. OBJECTIVE: To prioritize AHA/ASA-endorsed quality measures for AIS on the basis of health impact and cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: Individual-based stroke simulation model. DATA SOURCES: Published literature. TARGET POPULATION: U.S. patients with incident AIS. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care sector. INTERVENTION: Current versus complete (100%) implementation at the population level of quality measures endorsed by the AHA/ASA with sufficient clinical evidence (10 of 15). OUTCOME MEASURES: Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and incremental net health benefits. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Discounted life-years gained from complete implementation would range from 472 (tobacco use counseling) to 34 688 (early carotid imaging) for an annual AIS patient cohort. All AIS quality measures were cost-saving or highly cost-effective by AHA standards (<$50 000 per QALY for high-value care). Early carotid imaging and intravenous tissue plasminogen activator contributed the largest fraction of the total potential value of quality improvement (measured as incremental net health benefit), accounting for 72% of the total value. The top 5 quality measures accounted for 92% of the total potential value. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: A web-based user interface allows for context-specific sensitivity and scenario analyses. LIMITATION: Correlations between quality measures were not incorporated. CONCLUSION: Substantial variation exists in the potential net benefit of quality improvement across AIS quality measures. Benefits were highly concentrated among 5 of 10 measures assessed. Our results can help providers and payers set priorities for quality improvement efforts and value-based payments in AIS care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.

Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic emicizumab versus prophylactic recombinant factor VIII in patients with moderate or mild hemophilia A without inhibitors in the United States.

Prophylactic emicizumab is cost-ineffective in adults with moderate or mild hemophilia A without inhibitors at current pricing. The price of prophylactic emicizumab would need to decrease by >35% to become cost-effective in this patient population.

Smartphone-Based DIY Home Microsurgical Training with 3D Printed Microvascular Clamps and Japanese Noodles.

We have recently incorporated simple modifications of the konjac flour noodle model to enable DIY home microsurgical training by (i) placing a smartphone on a mug to act as a microscope with at least ×3.5-5 magnification, and (ii) rather than cannulating with a 22G needle as described by others, we have found that cannulation with a 23G needle followed by a second pass with an 18G needle will create a lumen (approximately 0.83 mm) without an overly thick and unrealistic "vessel" wall. The current setup, however, did not allow realistic evaluation of anastomotic patency as the noodles became macerated after application of standard microvascular clamps, which also did not facilitate practice of back-wall anastomoses. In order to simulate the actual operative environment as much as possible, we introduced the use of 3D-printed microvascular clamps. These were modified from its previous iteration (suitable for use in silastic and chicken thigh vessels), and video recordings were submitted for internal validation by senior surgeons. A "wet" operative field where the konjac noodle lumen can be distended or collapsed, unlike other nonliving models, was noted by senior surgeons. With the 3D clamps, the noodle could now be flipped over for back-wall anastomosis and allowed patency testing upon completion as it did not become macerated, unlike that from clinical microvascular clamps. The perceived advantages of this model are numerous. Not only does it comply with the 3Rs of simulation-based training, but it can also reduce the associated costs of training by up to a hundred-fold or more when compared to a traditional rat course and potentially be extended to low-middle income countries without routine access to microsurgical training for capacity development. That it can be utilized remotely also bodes well with the current limitations on face-to-face training due to COVID restrictions and lockdowns.

Affordability and Value in Decision Rules for Cost-Effectiveness: A Survey of Health Economists.

OBJECTIVES: New health technologies are often expensive, but may nevertheless meet standard thresholds for cost effectiveness, a situation exemplified by recent hepatitis C cures. Currently, cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) does not supply practical means of weighing trade-offs between cost-effectiveness and affordability, particularly when costs and benefits are temporally separated and in health systems with multiple payers, such as the United States. We formally characterized disagreements in CEA theory and identified how these trade-offs are presently addressed in practice. METHODS: We surveyed 170 health economics researchers. RESULTS: When presented with a hypothetical cost-effective drug therapy in the United States that would require 20% of a state's Medicaid budget over 5 years, 34% of survey respondents recommended that policy makers fund the drug for all patients and 26% for a subset. By contrast, 26% recommended against funding the drug. We found additional disagreement regarding whether the willingness-to-pay threshold should be based on the budget (42%) or societal preferences (41%) and identified 4 approaches to weighing cost-effectiveness and affordability. A total of 61% of respondents did not believe that the threshold used in their last article (most often 1×-3× per capita gross domestic product) represented either the budget or societal willingness-to-pay threshold. CONCLUSIONS: We use these findings to recommend metrics that can inform translation of CEA theory into practice. By contextualizing cost and value, researchers can provide more actionable policy recommendations.

Evidence-based cardiovascular magnetic resonance cost-effectiveness calculator for the detection of significant coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Although prior reports have evaluated the clinical and cost impacts of cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) for low-to-intermediate-risk patients with suspected significant coronary artery disease (CAD), the cost-effectiveness of CMR compared to relevant comparators remains poorly understood. We aimed to summarize the cost-effectiveness literature on CMR for CAD and create a cost-effectiveness calculator, useable worldwide, to approximate the cost-per-quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) of CMR and relevant comparators with context-specific patient-level and system-level inputs. METHODS: We searched the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry and PubMed for cost-per-QALY or cost-per-life-year-saved studies of CMR to detect significant CAD. We also developed a linear regression meta-model (CMR Cost-Effectiveness Calculator) based on a larger CMR cost-effectiveness simulation model that can approximate CMR lifetime discount cost, QALY, and cost effectiveness compared to relevant comparators [such as single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)] or invasive coronary angiography. RESULTS: CMR was cost-effective for evaluation of significant CAD (either health-improving and cost saving or having a cost-per-QALY or cost-per-life-year result lower than the cost-effectiveness threshold) versus its relevant comparator in 10 out of 15 studies, with 3 studies reporting uncertain cost effectiveness, and 2 studies showing CCTA was optimal. Our cost-effectiveness calculator showed that CCTA was not cost-effective in the US compared to CMR when the most recent publications on imaging performance were included in the model. CONCLUSIONS: Based on current world-wide evidence in the literature, CMR usually represents a cost-effective option compared to relevant comparators to assess for significant CAD.

Cost-effectiveness of routine versus indicated antibiotic therapy in the management of severe wasting in children.

BACKGROUND: In the outpatient management of severe wasting, routine antibiotic therapy is recommended for all children upon admission regardless of whether clinical signs of infection are present. Indicated antibiotic therapy, where antibiotics are provided only upon presentation of clinical signs of infection, may be considered for its potential to allow for more prudent antibiotic use and greater program coverage, reducing the risk of antibiotic resistance as well as costs and logistical burdens associated with treatment. We therefore conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to measure the effects of indicated antibiotic therapy compared to routine antibiotic therapy in terms of incremental cost-per-life-year saved in Niger. METHODS: We used a cohort model to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis from a healthcare system perspective to project and weigh the lifetime discounted costs and effects of indicated antibiotic therapy compared to routine antibiotic therapy in the treatment of uncomplicated severe wasting in children in Niger. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in terms of treatment-related healthcare costs per discounted life-years saved (LYS), and conducted program coverage scenario and sensitivity analyses to assess model uncertainty. RESULTS: The ICER for indicated antibiotic therapy compared to routine antibiotic therapy was $8.5/LYS, which is under the cost-effectiveness threshold for Niger. The probability of the indicated strategy being optimal was 76.1% when program coverage was equal to coverage associated with routine therapy but was 100% likely to be optimal in probabilistic sensitivity analysis scenarios where indicated program coverage improved 5 percentage points. CONCLUSIONS: Indicated antibiotic therapy likely represents a cost-effective strategy, particularly if indicated treatment can result in expanded coverage. With the risk of increasing antibiotic resistance worldwide, antibiotic stewardship and simplified treatment protocols for severe wasting using indicated antibiotic therapy may represent good value for money in some low risk populations.

Access to Mechanical Thrombectomy for Ischemic Stroke in the United States.

Background and Purpose: Mechanical thrombectomy helps prevent disability in patients with acute ischemic stroke involving occlusion of a large cerebral vessel. Thrombectomy requires procedural expertise and not all hospitals have the staff to perform this intervention. Few population-wide data exist regarding access to mechanical thrombectomy. Methods: We examined access to thrombectomy for ischemic stroke using discharge data from calendar years 2016 to 2018 from all nonfederal emergency departments and acute care hospitals across 11 US states encompassing 80 million residents. Facilities were classified as hubs if they performed mechanical thrombectomy, gateways if they transferred patients who ultimately underwent mechanical thrombectomy, and gaps otherwise. We used standard descriptive statistics and unadjusted logistic regression models in our primary analyses. Results: Among 205 681 patients with ischemic stroke, 100 139 (48.7% [95% CI, 48.5%­48.9%]) initially received care at a thrombectomy hub, 72 534 (35.3% [95% CI, 35.1%­35.5%]) at a thrombectomy gateway, and 33 008 (16.0% [95% CI, 15.9%­16.2%]) at a thrombectomy gap. Patients who initially received care at thrombectomy gateways were substantially less likely to ultimately undergo thrombectomy than patients who initially received care at thrombectomy hubs (odds ratio, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.25­0.28]). Rural patients had particularly limited access: 27.7% (95% CI, 26.9%­28.6%) of such patients initially received care at hubs versus 69.5% (95% CI, 69.1%­69.9%) of urban patients. For 93.8% (95% CI, 93.6%­94.0%) of patients with stroke at gateways, their initial facility was capable of delivering intravenous thrombolysis, compared with 76.3% (95% CI, 75.8%­76.7%) of patients at gaps. Our findings were unchanged in models adjusted for demographics and comorbidities and persisted across multiple sensitivity analyses, including analyses adjusting for estimated stroke severity. Conclusions: We found that a substantial proportion of patients with ischemic stroke across the United States lacked access to thrombectomy even after accounting for interhospital transfers. US systems of stroke care require further development to optimize thrombectomy access.