Cost Utility and Value of Information Analysis of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery.

Importance: The efficacy and safety of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery is well documented. An important requirement for decision makers is the evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) over a sufficiently long horizon. Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of this treatment was a preplanned secondary objective of the Economic Evaluation of Femtosecond Laser Assisted Cataract Surgery (FEMCAT) trial. Objective: To estimate the cost utility of FLACS compared with phacoemulsification cataract surgery (PCS) on a 12-month time horizon. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter randomized clinical trial compared FLACS with PCS in parallel groups. All FLACS procedures were performed using the CATALYS precision system. Participants were recruited and treated in ambulatory surgery settings in 5 university-hospital centers in France. All consecutive patients eligible for a unilateral or bilateral cataract surgery 22 years or older with written informed consent were included. Data were collected from October 2013 to October 2018, and data were analyzed from January 2020 to June 2022. Interventions: FLACS or PCS. Main Outcomes and Measures: Utility was measured through the Health Utility Index questionnaire. Costs of cataract surgery were estimated by microcosting. All inpatient and outpatient costs were collected from the French National Health Data System. Results: Of 870 randomized patients, 543 (62.4%) were female, and the mean (SD) age at surgery was 72.3 (8.6) years. A total of 440 patients were randomized to receive FLACS and 430 to receive PCS; the rate of bilateral surgery was 63.3% (551 of 870). The mean (SD) costs of cataract surgery were €1124.0 (€162.2; US $1235) for FLACS and €565.5 (€61.4; US $621) for PCS. The total mean (SD) cost of care at 12 months was €7085 (€6700; US $7787) in participants treated with FLACS and €6502 (€7323; US $7146) in participants treated with PCS. FLACS yielded a mean (SD) of 0.788 (0.009) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and PCS yielded 0.792 (0.009) QALYs. The difference in mean costs was €545.9 (95% CI, -434.1 to 1525.8; US $600), and the difference in QALYs was -0.004 (95% CI, -0.028 to 0.021). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was -€136 476 (US $150 000) per QALY. The cost-effectiveness probability of FLACS compared with PCS was 15.7% for a cost-effectiveness threshold of €30 000 (US $32 973) per QALY. At this threshold, the expected value of perfect information was €246 139 079 (US $270 530 231). Conclusions and Relevance: The ICER of FLACS compared with PCS was not within the $50 000 to $100 000 per QALY range frequently cited as cost-effective. Additional research and development on FLACS is needed to improve its effectiveness and lower its price. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01982006.

A phase III randomized trial evaluating the quality of life impact of a tailored versus systematic use of defunctioning ileostomy following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer-GRECCAR 17 trial protocol.

AIM: The systematic use of a defunctioning ileostomy for 2-3 months postoperatively to protect low colorectal anastomosis (<7 cm from the anal verge) has been the standard practice after total mesorectal excision (TME). However, stoma-related complications can occur in 20%-60% of cases, which may lead to prolonged inpatient care, urgent reoperation and long-term definitive stoma. A negative impact on quality of life (QoL) and increased healthcare expenses are also observed. Conversely, it has been reported that patients without a defunctioning stoma or following early stoma closure (days 8-12 after TME) have a better functional outcome than patients with systematic defunctioning stoma in situ for 2-3 months. METHOD: The main objective of this trial is to compare the QoL impact of a tailored versus systematic use of a defunctioning stoma after TME for rectal cancer. The primary outcome is QoL at 12 months postoperatively using the European Organization for. Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL questionnaire QLQ-C30. Among 29 centres of the French GRECCAR network, 200 patients will be recruited over 18 months, with follow-up at 1, 4, 8 and 12 months postoperatively, in an open-label, randomized, two-parallel arm, phase III superiority clinical trial. The experimental arm (arm A) will undergo a tailored use of defunctioning stoma after TME based on a two-step process: (i) to perform or not a defunctioning stoma according to the personalized risk of anastomotic leak (defunctioning stoma only if modified anastomotic failure observed risk score ≥2) and (ii) if a stoma is fashioned, whether to perform an early stoma closure at days 8-12, according to clinical (fever), biochemical (C-reactive protein level on days 2 and 4 postoperatively) and radiological postoperative assessment (CT scan with retrograde contrast enema at days 7-8 postoperatively). The control arm (arm B) will undergo systematic use of a defunctioning stoma for 2-3 months after TME for all patients, in keeping with French national and international guidelines. Secondary outcomes will include comprehensive analysis of functional outcomes (including bowel, urinary and sexual function) again up to 12 months postoperatively and a cost analysis. Regular assessments of anastomotic leak rates in both arms (every 50 randomized patients) will be performed and an independent data monitoring committee will recommend trial cessation if this rate is excessive in arm A compared to arm B. CONCLUSION: The GRECCAR 17 trial is the first randomized trial to assess a tailored, patient-specific approach to decisions regarding defunctioning stoma use and closure after TME according to personalized risk of anastomotic leak. The results of this trial will describe, for the first time, the QoL and morbidity impact of selective use of a defunctioning ileostomy and the potential health economic effect of such an approach.

Budget Impact of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Discontinuation in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia With Sustained Deep Molecular Response.

OBJECTIVES: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) account for the vast majority of healthcare expenditure on patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), and it has been demonstrated that TKI discontinuation in patients in long-term deep molecular remission (DMR) is safe and improves quality of life. Our objective was to estimate the budget impact of TKI discontinuation in CML patients in long-term DMR from the perspective of the French healthcare system. METHODS: This analysis was conducted over a 5-year time horizon using a Markov model with cycles of 6 months. Transition probabilities were estimated through systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Costs were estimated from the French National Claims Database. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to take into account the uncertainty surrounding model parameters. Sensitivity analyses were carried out by varying the size of the target population and the cost of TKIs. RESULTS: Over a 5-year period and for a target population of 100 patients each year eligible and agreeing to stop TKI, the TKI discontinuation strategy would save €25.5 million (95% confidence interval -39.3 to 70.0). In this model, the probability that TKI discontinuation would be more expensive than TKI continuation was 12.0%. In sensitivity analyses, mean savings ranged from €14.9 million to €62.9 million. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides transparent, reproducible, and interpretable results for healthcare professionals and policy makers. Our results clearly show that innovative healthcare strategies can benefit both the healthcare system and patients. Savings from generalizing TKI discontinuation in CML patients in sustained DMR should yield health gains for other patients.

Discontinuing statins or not in the elderly? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The risk/benefit ratio of using statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular (CV) events in elderly people has not been established. The main objectives of the present study are to assess the cost-effectiveness of statin cessation and to examine the non-inferiority of statin cessation in terms of mortality in patients aged 75 years and over, treated with statins for primary prevention of CV events. METHODS: The "Statins in the elderly" (SITE) study is an ongoing 3-year follow-up, open-label comparative multi-centre, randomized clinical trial that is being conducted in two parallel groups in outpatient primary care offices. Participants meeting the following criteria are included: people aged 75 years and older being treated with statins as primary prevention for CV events, who provide informed consent. After randomization, patients in the statin-cessation strategy are instructed to withdraw their treatment. In the comparison strategy, patients continue their statin treatment at the usual dosage. The cost-effectiveness of the statin-cessation strategy compared to continuing statins will be estimated through the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained at 36 months, from the perspective of the French healthcare system. Overall mortality will be the primary clinical endpoint. We assumed that the mortality rate at 3 years will be 15%. The sample size was computed to achieve 90% power in showing the non-inferiority of statin cessation, assuming a non-inferiority margin of 5% of the between-group difference in overall mortality. In total, the SITE study will include 2430 individuals. DISCUSSION: There is some debate on the value of statins in people over 75 years old, especially for primary prevention of CV events, due to a lack of evidence of their efficacy in this population, potential compliance-related events, drug-drug interactions and side effects that could impair quality of life. Data from clinical trials guide the initiation of medication therapy for primary or secondary prevention of CV disease but do not define the timing, safety, or risks of discontinuing the agents. The SITE study is one of the first to examine whether treatment cessation is a cost-effective and a safe strategy in people of 75 years and over, formerly treated with statins. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02547883. Registered on 11 September 2015.

Femtosecond laser-assisted versus phacoemulsification cataract surgery (FEMCAT): a multicentre participant-masked randomised superiority and cost-effectiveness trial.

BACKGROUND: Cataract surgery is one of the most common operations in health care. Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) enables more precise ocular incisions and lens fragmentation than does phacoemulsification cataract surgery (PCS). We hypothesised that FLACS might improve outcomes in cataract surgery compared with PCS despite having higher costs. METHODS: We did a participant-masked randomised superiority clinical trial comparing FLACS and PCS in two parallel groups (permuted block randomisation stratified on centres via a centralised web-based application, allocation ratio 1:1, block size of 2 or 4 for unilateral cases and 2 or 6 for bilateral cases). Five French University Hospitals enrolled consecutive patients aged 22 years or older who were eligible for unilateral or bilateral cataract surgery. Participants, outcome assessors, and technicians carrying out examinations were masked to the surgical treatment allocation until the last follow-up visit and a sham laser procedure was set up for participants randomly assigned to the PCS arm. The primary clinical endpoint was the success rate of surgery, defined as a composite of four outcomes at a 3-month postoperative visit: absence of severe perioperative complication, a best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 0·0 LogMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) or better, an absolute refractive error of 0·75 dioptres or less, and unchanged postoperative corneal astigmatism power (≤0·5 dioptres) and axis (≤20°). The primary economic endpoint was the incremental cost per additional patient who had treatment success at 3 months. Primary outcomes were assessed in all randomly assigned patients who met all eligibility criteria (missing data considered as failure). We used mixed logistic regression models or mixed linear regression models for statistical comparisons, adjusted on centres and whether cataract surgery was bilateral or unilateral. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01982006. FINDINGS: Of the 907 patients (1476 eyes) randomly assigned between Oct 9, 2013, and Oct 30, 2015, 870 (704 eyes in FLACS group and 685 eyes in the PCS group) were analysed. We identified no significant difference in the success rate of surgery between the FLACS and PCS groups (FLACS: 41·1% [289 eyes]; PCS: 43·6% [299 eyes]); adjusted odds ratio 0·85, 95% CI 0·64-1·12, p=0·250). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €10 703 saved per additional patient who had treatment success with PCS compared with FLACS. We observed no severe adverse events during the femtosecond laser procedure, and most of the complications in the FLACS group related to the primary outcome measures occurred during the phacoemulsification phase or postoperatively. INTERPRETATION: Despite its advanced technology, femtosecond laser was not superior to phacoemulsification in cataract surgery and, with higher costs, did not provide an additional benefit over phacoemulsification for patients or health-care systems. FUNDING: French Ministry of Social Affairs and Health.

Maintenance of occupational therapy (OT) for dementia: protocol of a multi-center, randomized controlled and pragmatic trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in developing tailored non-pharmacological strategies to face patients' needs in dementia. Occupational therapy (OT) may contribute to promote self-empowerment of both patients and caregivers. France has implemented nationwide OT over a short-term period of 3/4 months. The main objective of the MathéoAlz study is to measure the impact of maintaining OT over 4 supplementary months on patients' neuropsychiatric symptoms. METHODS/DESIGN: The MatheoAlz trial (Maintenance of Occupational Therapy in Alzheimer's disease) is a multi-center, pragmatic randomized controlled trial testing maintenance of OT over 4 supplementary months compared to routine OT delivered as recommended. This paper describes the study protocol. MatheoAlz plans to enroll 240 dyads, i.e. dementia patients and caregivers, whose main inclusion criteria are: prescription for routine OT, patients with mild or moderate dementia, living at home, receiving support from an informal caregiver. The study will compare a control group of patients benefiting from 12 to 15 initial sessions of OT over 3/4 months and an intervention group of patients benefiting from these initial sessions plus 8 extra home sessions over 4 supplementary months. The main outcome is the patient's neuropsychiatric symptoms assessed by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory at 8 months. Several clinical outcomes and economic consequences are measured at 4, 8 and 12 months. DISCUSSION: This is the first trial designed to assess the specific impact of the maintaining OT on the patients' neuropsychiatric symptoms burden. The results will inform policymakers on strategies to implement in the near future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on February 16, 2018, identifier: NCT03435705 .

[Principles of health economic evaluation for use by caregivers]. / Principes de l'évaluation médico-économique à l'usage des soignants.

The aim of health economic evaluation is to maximize health gains from limited resources. By definition, health economic evaluation is comparative, based on average costs and outcomes of compared interventions. Incremental costs and outcomes are used to calculate the cost-effectiveness ratio, which represents the average incremental cost per gained unit of effectiveness (i.e.: a year of life) with the evaluated intervention compared to the reference. The health economic rationale applies to all health domains. We cannot spend collective resources (health insurance) without asking ourselves about their potential alternative uses. This reasoning is useful to caregivers for understanding resources allocation decisions and healthcare recommandations. Caregivers should grab this field of expertise because they are central in this strategic reflection for defining the future French healthcare landscape.