Clinical and economic aspects of newborn screening for severe combined immunodeficiency: DEPISTREC study results.

PURPOSE: Severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) refers to a group of genetic disorders characterized by greatly compromised cellular and humoral immunity. Children with SCID are asymptomatic at birth, but they die from infections within the first months of life if not treated. Quantification of T-cell receptor excision circles is an extremely sensitive screening method for detecting newborns who may have SCID.The goal of the DEPISTREC study was to evaluate the feasibility of nationwide newborn screening for severe T-cell lymphopenia in France as well as its economic and clinical utility. METHODS: The test universally used for neonatal screening for SCID was the quantification of TRECs on Guthrie cards. We compared a group of 190,517 babies from 48 maternities across the country who underwent newborn SCID screening with a control group of 1.4 million babies out of whom 28 were diagnosed with SCID without such screening during the course of the study. RESULTS: Within the screening group, 62 babies were found to be lymphopenic, including three with SCID. The cost of screening ranged from 4.7€ to €8.15 per newborn. The average 18-month cost was €257,574 vs €204,697 in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: In this large-scale study, we demonstrate that routine SCID screening is feasible and effective. This screening offers the additional benefit of aiding in the diagnosis of non-SCID lymphopenia. Economic evaluation allowed us to calculate the cost per test. Newborn screening may also prevent death by SCID before any curative treatment can be administered. The difference in cost between screened and control children could not be ascertained because of the very low numbers and death of one of the children tested.

Specialist Advice Support for Management of Severe Hereditary Angioedema Attacks: A Multicenter Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Hereditary angioedema is a rare disease associated with unpredictable, recurrent attacks of potentially life-threatening edema. Management of severe attacks is currently suboptimal because emergency medical teams are often unaware of new specific treatments. The objective of this trial is to test whether a dedicated national telephone care-management strategy would reduce resource use during severe hereditary angioedema attacks. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized multicenter prospective trial of patients with a documented diagnosis of hereditary angioedema (type I, II or FXII hereditary angioedema). Participants were enrolled between March 2013 and June 2014 at 8 participating reference centers. The randomized units were the reference centers (clusters). Patients in the intervention arm were given a national free telephone number to call in the event of a severe attack. Emergency physicians in the SOS-hereditary angiœdema (SOS-HAE) call center were trained to advise or prescribe specific treatments. The primary outcome was number of admissions for angioedema attacks. Economic evaluation was also performed. RESULTS: We included 100 patients in the SOS-HAE group and 100 in the control group. During the 2 years, there were 2,368 hereditary angioedema attacks among 169 patients (85%). Mean number of hospital admissions per patient in the 2-year period was significantly greater in the usual-practice group (mean 0.16 [range 0 to 2] versus 0.03 [range 0 to 1]); patient risk difference was significant: -0.13 (95% confidence interval -0.22 to -0.04; P=.02). Probabilistic sensitivity graphic analysis indicated a trend toward increased quality-adjusted life-years in the SOS-HAE group. CONCLUSION: A national dedicated call center for management of severe hereditary angioedema attacks is associated with a decrease in hospital admissions and may be cost-effective if facilities and staff are available to deliver the intervention alongside existing services.

Systematic neonatal screening for severe combined immunodeficiency and severe T-cell lymphopenia: Analysis of cost-effectiveness based on French real field data.

BACKGROUND: The inclusion of severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) in a Europe-wide screening program is currently debated. OBJECTIVE: In making a case for inclusion in the French newborn screening program, we explored the costs incurred and potentially saved by early management of SCID. METHODS: For test costs, a microcosting study documented the resources used in a laboratory piloting a newborn screening test on Guthrie cards using the T-cell receptor excision circle quantification method. For treatment costs, patients with SCID admitted to the national reference center for primary immunodeficiency in France between 2006 and 2010 were included. Costs of admission were estimated from actual national production costs. We estimated the costs for patients who underwent early versus delayed hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT; age, ≤3 vs. >3 months, respectively). RESULTS: The unit cost of the test varied between €4.69 and €6.79 for 33,800 samples per year, depending on equipment use and saturation. Of the 30 patients included, 27 underwent HSCT after age 3 months. At 1 year after HSCT, 10 of these had died, and all 3 patients undergoing early transplantation survived. The medical costs for HSCT after 3 months were €195,776 (interquartile range, €165,884-€257,160) versus €86,179 (range, €59,014-€272,577) when performed before 3 months of age. In patients undergoing late transplantation, active infection contributed to high cost and poor outcome. CONCLUSION: Early detection of SCID could reduce the cost of treatment by €50,000-100,000 per case. Assuming a €5 unit cost per test, the incidence required to break even is 1:20,000; however, if the survival advantage of HSCT before 3 months is confirmed, universal screening is likely to be cost-effective.

Effect of Prehabilitation Before Total Knee Replacement for Knee Osteoarthritis on Functional Outcomes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Multidisciplinary prehabilitation before total knee replacement (TKR) for osteoarthritis may improve outcomes in the postoperative period. Objective: To compare multidisciplinary prehabilitation with usual care before TKR for osteoarthritis in terms of functional independence and activity limitations after surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, open-label randomized clinical trial recruited participants 50 to 85 years of age with knee osteoarthritis according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria for whom a TKR was scheduled at 3 French tertiary care centers. Recruitment started on October 4, 2012, with follow-up completed on November 29, 2017. Statistical analyses were conducted from March 29, 2018, to March 6, 2019. Interventions: Four supervised sessions of multidisciplinary rehabilitation and education (2 sessions per week, at least 2 months before TKR, delivered to groups of 4-6 participants at each investigating center; session duration was 90 minutes and included 30 minutes of education followed by 60 minutes of exercise therapy) or usual care (information booklet and standard advice by the orthopedic surgeon) before TKR. Main Outcomes and Measures: The short-term primary end point was the proportion of participants achieving functional independence a mean (SD) of 4 (1) days after surgery defined as level 3 on the 4 functional tests. The midterm primary end point was activity limitations within 6 months after TKR assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the self-administered Western Ontario Questionnaire and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index function subscale. Results: A total of 262 patients (mean [SD] age, 68.6 [8.0] years; 178 women [68%]) were randomized (131 to each group). A mean (SD) of 4 (1) days after surgery, 34 of 101 (34%) in the experimental group vs 26 of 95 (27%) in the control group achieved functional independence (risk ratio, 1.4; 97.5% CI, 0.9-2.1; P = .15). At 6 months, the mean (SD) area under the curve for the Western Ontario Questionnaire and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index function subscale was 38.1 (16.5) mm2 in the experimental group vs 40.6 (17.8) mm2 in the control group (absolute difference, -2.8 mm2; 97.5% CI, -7.8 to 2.3; P = .31 after multiple imputation). No differences were found in secondary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found no evidence that multidisciplinary prehabilitation before TKR for osteoarthritis improves short-term functional independence or reduces midterm activity limitations after surgery. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01671917.

Economic evaluation of fractional flow reserve-guided versus angiography-guided multivessel revascularisation in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients in the FLOWER-MI randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who have multivessel disease, the FLOWER-MI trial found no significant clinical benefit to fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared to angiography-guided PCI. AIMS: Our aim was to estimate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of FFR-guided PCI, the secondary endpoint of the FLOWER-MI trial. METHODS: Costs, major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction [MI], and unplanned hospitalisation leading to urgent revascularisation), and quality-adjusted life years were calculated in both groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios were estimated. Uncertainty was explored by probabilistic bootstrapping. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the health care provider with a time horizon of one year. RESULTS: At one year, the average cost per patient was 7,560€ (±2,218) in the FFR-guided group and 7,089€ (±1,991) in the angiography-guided group (p-value<0.01). The point estimates for the incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios found that the angiography-guided strategy was cost saving and improved outcomes, with a probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirming dominance. CONCLUSIONS: The FFR-guided strategy at one year is unlikely to be cost effective compared to the angiography-guided strategy on both clinical and quality of life outcomes.

Dedicated call center (SOS-HAE) for hereditary angioedema attacks: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of guidelines for the specific treatment of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks, HAE morbidity and mortality rates remain substantial. HAE attacks are a major medical issue requiring specific treatment as well as a considerable socio-economic burden. We report a protocol designed to test whether a dedicated call centre is more effective than usual practice in the management of patients experiencing an HAE attack. METHODS/DESIGN: This prospective, cluster-randomised, single-blind, parallel-group, multicentre trial evaluates the morbidity and consequent socio-economic costs of the management of patients experiencing an HAE attack by a dedicated call centre as compared to usual practice. The trial aims to recruit 200 patients. Patients in the intervention arm are provided with an SOS-HAE card with the call centre's freephone number that they can access in the case of an attack. The centre's mission is to provide recommended expert advice on early home treatment. The centre can route the call to a local emergency medical service with competency in HAE management or even arrange for the drugs needed for the specific treatment of an HAE attack to be sent to the emergency department of the local hospital. The primary outcome measure is the number of hospital admissions for an HAE attack. Each patient will be followed up every 2 months for 2 years. The study has been approved by the ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes d'Ile de France 10; registration number: 2012-A00044-39; date of approval: 19 January 2012). DISCUSSION: The SOS-HAE protocol has been designed to address the handling of attacks experienced by patients with HAE in the home. The proposed trial will determine whether the setting up of a dedicated call centre is more effective than usual practice in terms of reducing morbidity as given by the numbers of hospital admissions. The results are also anticipated to have important implications in terms of socio-economic costs for both healthcare services and patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01679912 .