Overcoming provider barriers to therapeutic drug monitoring of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis: a qualitative analysis.

Objective: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors (TNFi), by measuring drug levels and/or anti-drug antibodies, is being considered by various international bodies to improve patient health outcomes and the value of care for people with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology care providers may perceive barriers to adopting TNFi TDM within their own clinical practice, limiting the potential for patients and health care systems to benefit. This study aimed to explore the barriers perceived by rheumatologists that may reduce their uptake of TNFi TDM for rheumatoid arthritis. Method: Semi-structured one-to-one telephone interviews were performed with a convenience sample of senior rheumatologists with experience of managing people with rheumatoid arthritis. The interviews explored the rheumatologists' understanding of TDM and their beliefs about how it can be integrated into their own routine practice. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and anonymized. Transcripts were coded inductively and barriers to using TNFi TDM were identified by thematic framework analysis. Result: A sample of eleven senior rheumatologists were interviewed. The rheumatologists described five barriers to adopting TNFi TDM in routine practice: (i) observing clinical need; (ii) understanding how testing can improve practice; (iii) insufficient clinical evidence; (iv) insufficient resources to pay for testing; and (v) insufficient capability to deliver testing. Conclusion: Barriers to adopting TNFi TDM in routine care settings will restrict the ability for patients to benefit from effective monitoring strategies as they begin to emerge. Strategies to overcome these barriers are suggested which will require a coordinated response from stakeholders across health care systems.

Public preferences for pharmacogenetic testing in the NHS: Embedding a discrete choice experiment within service design to better meet user needs.

AIMS: Genetic testing can be used to improve the safety and effectiveness of commonly prescribed medicines-a concept known as pharmacogenetics. This study aimed to quantify members of the UK public's preferences for a pharmacogenetic service to be delivered in primary care in the National Health Service. METHODS: Members of the UK population were surveyed via an online panel company. Respondents completed 1 of 2 survey versions, asking respondents to select their preferred pharmacogenetic testing service in the context of a presentation of low mood or pain. A conditional logit model was estimated, before the best functional form for the dataset was identified. Preference heterogeneity was identified via latent class analysis. Coefficients from the final selected models were used to estimate uptake in the context of different hypothetical pharmacogenetic services. RESULTS: Responses from 1993 individuals were included in the analysis. There were no differences observed in preference between the 2 clinical scenarios. Conditional logit analysis, using maximum likelihood estimation, indicated that respondents preferred to have noninvasive tests and wanted their data to be shared between different healthcare organizations to guide future prescribing. There was a preference for regional over national data sharing initiatives, and respondents preferred to have access to their data. Predicted uptake varied considerably, ranging from 51% to >99%, depending on design of the service. CONCLUSION: This study identifies public preferences for a pharmacogenetic testing service and demonstrates how predicted uptake can be impacted by relatively minor adaptations. This highlights areas for prioritization during development of future pharmacogenetic services.

Understanding the Impact of Different Modes of Information Provision on Preferences for a Newborn Bloodspot Screening Program in the United Kingdom.

Introduction. This study aimed to understand the impact of alternative modes of information provision on the stated preferences of a sample of the public for attributes of newborn bloodspot screening (NBS) in the United Kingdom. Methods. An online discrete choice experiment survey was designed using 4 attributes to describe NBS (effect of treatment on the condition, time to receive results, whether the bloodspot is stored, false-positive rate). Survey respondents were randomized to 1 of 2 survey versions presenting the background training materials using text from a leaflet (leaflet version) or an animation (animation version). Heteroskedastic conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the effect of mode of information provision on error variance. Results. The survey was completed by 1,000 respondents (leaflet = 525; animation = 475). Preferences for the attributes in the DCE were the same in both groups, but the group receiving the animation version had 9% less error variance in their responses. Respondents completing the animation version gave higher ratings compared with the leaflet version in terms of ease of perceived understanding. Subgroup analysis suggested that the animation was particularly effective at reducing error variance for women (20%), people with previous children (16.5%), and people between the ages of 35 and 45 y (11.8%). Limitations. This study used simple DCE with 4 attributes, and the results may vary for more complex choice questions. Conclusion. This study provides evidence that that supplementing the information package offered to parents choosing to take part in NBS with an animation may aid them their decision making. Further research would be needed to test the animation in the health system. Implications. Researchers designing DCE should carefully consider the design of their training materials to improve the quality of data collected. Highlights: Prior to completing a discrete choice experiment about newborn bloodspot screening, respondents were shown information using either a leaflet-based or animated format.Respondents receiving information using an animation version reported that the information was slightly easier to understand and exhibited 9% less error variance in expressing their preferences for a newborn screening program.Using the animation version to present information appeared to have a larger impact in reducing the error variance of responses for specific respondents including women, individuals with children, individuals between the ages of 35 and 45 y, and individuals educated to degree level.

The implications of competing risks and direct treatment disutility in cardiovascular disease and osteoporotic fracture: risk prediction and cost effectiveness analysis.

Background: Clinical guidelines commonly recommend preventative treatments for people above a risk threshold. Therefore, decision-makers must have faith in risk prediction tools and model-based cost-effectiveness analyses for people at different levels of risk. Two problems that arise are inadequate handling of competing risks of death and failing to account for direct treatment disutility (i.e. the hassle of taking treatments). We explored these issues using two case studies: primary prevention of cardiovascular disease using statins and osteoporotic fracture using bisphosphonates. Objectives: Externally validate three risk prediction tools [QRISK®3, QRISK®-Lifetime, QFracture-2012 (ClinRisk Ltd, Leeds, UK)]; derive and internally validate new risk prediction tools for cardiovascular disease [competing mortality risk model with Charlson Comorbidity Index (CRISK-CCI)] and fracture (CFracture), accounting for competing-cause death; quantify direct treatment disutility for statins and bisphosphonates; and examine the effect of competing risks and direct treatment disutility on the cost-effectiveness of preventative treatments. Design, participants, main outcome measures, data sources: Discrimination and calibration of risk prediction models (Clinical Practice Research Datalink participants: aged 25-84 years for cardiovascular disease and aged 30-99 years for fractures); direct treatment disutility was elicited in online stated-preference surveys (people with/people without experience of statins/bisphosphonates); costs and quality-adjusted life-years were determined from decision-analytic modelling (updated models used in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence decision-making). Results: CRISK-CCI has excellent discrimination, similar to that of QRISK3 (Harrell's c = 0.864 vs. 0.865, respectively, for women; and 0.819 vs. 0.834, respectively, for men). CRISK-CCI has systematically better calibration, although both models overpredict in high-risk subgroups. People recommended for treatment (10-year risk of ≥ 10%) are younger when using QRISK-Lifetime than when using QRISK3, and have fewer observed events in a 10-year follow-up (4.0% vs. 11.9%, respectively, for women; and 4.3% vs. 10.8%, respectively, for men). QFracture-2012 underpredicts fractures, owing to under-ascertainment of events in its derivation. However, there is major overprediction among people aged 85-99 years and/or with multiple long-term conditions. CFracture is better calibrated, although it also overpredicts among older people. In a time trade-off exercise (n = 879), statins exhibited direct treatment disutility of 0.034; for bisphosphonates, it was greater, at 0.067. Inconvenience also influenced preferences in best-worst scaling (n = 631). Updated cost-effectiveness analysis generates more quality-adjusted life-years among people with below-average cardiovascular risk and fewer among people with above-average risk. If people experience disutility when taking statins, the cardiovascular risk threshold at which benefits outweigh harms rises with age (≥ 8% 10-year risk at 40 years of age; ≥ 38% 10-year risk at 80 years of age). Assuming that everyone experiences population-average direct treatment disutility with oral bisphosphonates, treatment is net harmful at all levels of risk. Limitations: Treating data as missing at random is a strong assumption in risk prediction model derivation. Disentangling the effect of statins from secular trends in cardiovascular disease in the previous two decades is challenging. Validating lifetime risk prediction is impossible without using very historical data. Respondents to our stated-preference survey may not be representative of the population. There is no consensus on which direct treatment disutilities should be used for cost-effectiveness analyses. Not all the inputs to the cost-effectiveness models could be updated. Conclusions: Ignoring competing mortality in risk prediction overestimates the risk of cardiovascular events and fracture, especially among older people and those with multimorbidity. Adjustment for competing risk does not meaningfully alter cost-effectiveness of these preventative interventions, but direct treatment disutility is measurable and has the potential to alter the balance of benefits and harms. We argue that this is best addressed in individual-level shared decision-making. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021249959. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 15/12/22) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 4. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Before offering a medicine to prevent disease, prescribers must expect it to do more good than harm. This balance depends on how likely it is that the person will develop the disease we want to prevent. But people might first die for other reasons. We call this a 'competing risk'. In most cases, the mathematical tools we use to estimate the chance of developing a disease do not account for competing risks. Another problem is that, when weighing up the benefits and harms of medicines, we ignore the hassle they cause patients, even when they do not cause side effects. We used two examples: statins to prevent heart disease and bisphosphonates to prevent fractures. First, we assessed if existing tools get predictions wrong by not accounting for competing risks. We found that they exaggerate the chance of heart attacks and strokes. However, the exaggeration is greatest among people who would clearly benefit from preventative treatment. So it may not change treatment decisions much. The fracture prediction tool we studied was very inaccurate, exaggerating risk among older people, but underestimating risk among younger people. We made a new fracture risk prediction tool. It gave better predictions, but it was still inaccurate for people aged > 85 years and those with several health problems. Next, we asked people questions designed to put a number on the hassle that statins and bisphosphonates cause. Most people thought that taking either is inconvenient, but the hassle factor for bisphosphonates is bigger. Finally, we updated the mathematical models that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence used when recommending statins and bisphosphonates. We worked out if competing risks and the hassle of taking medicines make a difference to results. Statins remain a good idea for almost everyone, unless they really hate the idea of taking them. But bisphosphonates would do more harm than good for anyone who agrees with the hassle factor we found.

International Systematic Review of Utility Values Associated with Cardiovascular Disease and Reflections on Selecting Evidence for a UK Decision-Analytic Model.

PURPOSE: Evaluating interventions for cardiovascular disease (CVD) requires estimates of its effect on utility. We aimed to 1) systematically review utility estimates for CVDs published since 2013 and 2) critically appraise UK-relevant estimates and calculate corresponding baseline utility multipliers. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and Embase (April 22, 2021) using CVD and utility terms. We screened results for primary studies reporting utility distributions for people with experience of heart failure, myocardial infarction, peripheral arterial disease, stable angina, stroke, transient ischemic attack, or unstable angina. We extracted characteristics from studies included. For UK estimates based on the EuroQoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D) measure, we assessed risk of bias and applicability to a decision-analytic model, pooled arms/time points as appropriate, and estimated baseline utility multipliers using predicted utility for age- and sex- matched populations without CVD. We sought utility sources from directly applicable studies with low risk of bias, prioritizing plausibility of severity ordering in our base-case model and highest population ascertainment in a sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Most of the 403 studies identified used EQ-5D (n = 217) and most assessed Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development populations (n = 262), although measures and countries varied widely. UK studies using EQ-5D (n = 29) produced very heterogeneous baseline utility multipliers for each type of CVD, precluding meta-analysis and implying different possible severity orderings. We could find sources that provided a plausible ordering of utilities while adequately representing health states. CONCLUSIONS: We cataloged international CVD utility estimates and calculated UK-relevant baseline utility multipliers. Modelers should consider unreported sources of heterogeneity, such as population differences, when selecting utility evidence from reviews. HIGHLIGHTS: Published systematic reviews have summarized estimates of utility associated with cardiovascular disease published up to 2013.We 1) reviewed utility estimates for 7 types of cardiovascular disease published since 2013, 2) critically appraised UK-relevant studies, and 3) estimated the effect of each cardiovascular disease on baseline utility.Our review 1) recommends a consistent and reliable set of baseline utility multipliers for 7 types of cardiovascular disease and 2) provides systematically identified reference information for researchers seeking utility evidence for their own context.

Development of a point-of-care genetic test for effective treatment of ischaemic stroke: an early model-based cost-effectiveness analysis.

Background: People who have experienced a stroke are at high risk of recurrent strokes. Clopidogrel is prescribed to people who have had a non-cardioembolic stroke. There is evidence that clopidogrel is not effective for patients with CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles. Pharmacogenetic testing is a potential strategy to identify such patients and guide prescription of appropriate antiplatelet treatment. This study aimed to provide an early estimate of the cost-effectiveness of using a point-of-care pharmacogenetic CYP2C19 test in the UK National Health System. Methods: A decision-analytic model comprising a linked decision tree and Markov model were created in R comparing pharmacogenetic testing with current prescribing practice. In the pharmacogenetic testing arm, patients identified to have one of three loss-of-function alleles were prescribed modified-release dipyridamole and aspirin or aspirin alone. Indicative data were sourced from reviews of the literature supported by expert consultation to select the most appropriate value for the input parameters. The healthcare costs (£;2021) and quality adjusted life years resulting from each strategy were estimated and the incremental cost-effectiveness of testing calculated. Deterministic threshold analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was conducted to account for uncertainty in the parameter estimates. Results: The pharmacogenetic testing strategy generated 0.107 additional QALYs per patient tested and saved £512. Pharmacogenetic testing dominated current prescribing practice. The results were robust to extreme changes in key input variables. The PSA suggested that there was a 77% chance that pharmacogenetic testing would be cost-effective with a 62% chance it is cost-saving. Conclusions: A point-of-care pharmacogenetic test to guide prescription of clopidogrel for people who have experienced a stroke has the potential to provide a significant health gain by preventing secondary strokes and may save resources in the health system. This early economic analysis has also informed the direction for future research.

Quantifying the impact of taking medicines for primary prevention: a time-trade off study to elicit direct treatment disutility in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Direct treatment disutility (DTD) represents an individual's disutility associated with the inconvenience of taking medicine over a long period of time. OBJECTIVES: The main aim of this study was to elicit DTD values for taking a statin or a bisphosphonate for primary prevention. A secondary aim was to understand factors which influence DTD values. METHODS: Design: We used a cross-sectional study consisting of time-trade off exercises embedded within online surveys. Respondents were asked to compare a one-off pill ('Medicine A') assumed to have no inconvenience and a daily pill ('Medicine B') over 10 years (statins) or 5 years (bisphosphonates).Setting: Individuals from National Health Service (NHS) primary care and the general population were surveyed using an online panel company.Participants: Two types of participants were recruited. First, a purposive sample of patients with experience of taking a statin (n=260) or bisphosphonate (n=100) were recruited from an NHS sampling frame. Patients needed to be aged over 30, have experience of taking the medicine of interest and have no diagnosis of dementia or of using dementia drugs. Second, a demographically balanced sample of members of the public were recruited for statins (n=376) and bisphosphonates (n=359).Primary and secondary outcome measures: Primary outcome was mean DTD. Regression analysis explored factors which could influence DTD values. RESULTS: A total of 879 respondents were included for analysis (514 for statins and 365 for bisphosphonates). The majority of respondents reported a disutility associated with medicine use. Mean DTD for statins was 0.034 and for bisphosphonates 0.067, respectively. Respondent characteristics including age and sex did not influence DTD. Experience of bisphosphonate-use reduced reported disutilities. CONCLUSIONS: Statins and bisphosphonates have a quantifiable DTD. The size of estimated disutilities suggest they are likely to be important for cost-effectiveness, particularly in individuals at low-risk when treated for primary prevention.

Estimating the Cost of 3 Risk Prediction Strategies for Potential Use in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program.

Background: Economic evaluations have suggested that risk-stratified breast cancer screening may be cost-effective but have used assumptions to estimate the cost of risk prediction. The aim of this study was to identify and quantify the resource use and associated costs required to introduce a breast cancer risk-stratification approach into the English national breast screening program. Methods: A micro-costing study, conducted alongside a cohort-based prospective trial (BC-PREDICT), identified the resource use and cost per individual (£; 2021 price year) of providing a risk-stratification strategy at a woman's first mammography. Costs were calculated for 3 risk-stratification approaches: Tyrer-Cuzick survey, Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement, and Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement and testing for 142 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP). Costs were determined for the intervention as implemented in the trial and in the health service. Results: The cost of providing the risk-stratification strategy was calculated to be £16.45 for the Tyrer-Cuzick survey approach, £21.82 for the Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement, and £102.22 for the Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement and SNP testing. Limitations: This study did not use formal expert elicitation methods to synthesize estimates. Conclusion: The costs of risk prediction using a survey and breast density measurement were low, but adding SNP testing substantially increases costs. Implementation issues present in the trial may also significantly increase the cost of risk prediction. Implications: This is the first study to robustly estimate the cost of risk-stratification for breast cancer screening. The cost of risk prediction using questionnaires and automated breast density measurement was low, but full economic evaluations including accurate costs are required to provide evidence of the cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified breast cancer screening. Highlights: Economic evaluations have suggested that risk-stratified breast cancer screening may be a cost-effective use of resources in the United Kingdom.Current estimates of the cost of risk stratification are based on pragmatic assumptions.This study provides estimates of the cost of risk stratification using 3 strategies and when these strategies are implemented perfectly and imperfectly in the health system.The cost of risk stratification is relatively low unless single nucleotide polymorphisms are included in the strategy.

Pelvic vein incompetence and chronic pelvic pain: a case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between chronic pelvic pain (CPP) and pelvic vein incompetence (PVI) or pelvic varices. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: Gynaecology and vascular surgery services in two teaching hospitals in north-west England. SAMPLE: A total of 328 premenopausal women (aged 18-54 years), comprising 164 women with CPP and 164 matched controls with no history of CPP. METHODS: Symptom and quality-of-life questionnaires and transvaginal duplex ultrasound for PVI and pelvic varices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Venous reflux of >0.7 s in the ovarian or internal iliac veins (primary outcome) and presence of pelvic varices (secondary outcome). Statistical analysis compared the prevalence of PVI between women with and without CPP using the two-sided chi-square test. Logistic regression was used to compare the odds of having PVI and pelvic varices between women with and without CPP. RESULTS: Pelvic vein incompetence was found on transvaginal duplex ultrasound in 101/162 (62%) women with CPP, compared with 30/164 (19%) asymptomatic controls (OR 6.79, 95% CI 4.11-11.47, p < 0.001). Forty-three of 164 (27%) women with CPP had pelvic varices compared with three of 164 (2%) asymptomatic women (OR 18.9, 95% CI 5.73-62.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant association between PVI, as detected by transvaginal duplex imaging, and CPP. Pelvic varices were strongly associated with CPP and were infrequently seen in control patients. These results justify further evaluation of PVI and its treatment in well-designed research.

Transvenous occlusion of incompetent pelvic veins to treat chronic pelvic pain in women: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of transvenous occlusion of incompetent pelvic veins in women presenting with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) in improving symptoms and quality of life. DESIGN: Patient-blinded randomised controlled trial with objective outcome measures. Results were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. SETTING: Gynaecology and Vascular Surgery Services of two teaching hospitals in northwest England. POPULATION: Sixty women aged 18-54 years presenting with CPP after exclusion of other pathology, and who were found to have pelvic vein incompetence. METHODS: Participants were randomised and assigned to contrast venography alone or contrast venography plus transvenous occlusion of the incompetent pelvic veins. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was change in pain score measured using the short-form McGill Pain Score (SF-MPQ) and the Visual Analogue Score (VAS) recorded at 12 months post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes included quality of life using the EQ-5D instrument, symptomatic improvement and procedure-related complications. RESULTS: Sixty participants were randomised to transvenous occlusion of incompetent pelvic veins or venography only. At 12 months, median pain scored 2 (3-10) in the intervention group versus 9 (5-22) in controls (p = 0.016). Pain on the VAS scored 15 (0-3) versus 53 (20-71), respectively (p = 0.002). Median EQ-5D improved after intervention from 0.79 (0.74-0.84) to 0.84 (0.79-1.00; p = 0.008) over 12 months. No major complications were reported. CONCLUSION: Transvenous occlusion of pelvic vein incompetence reduced pain scores, improved quality of life and diminished symptom burden with no major reported complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 15091500.

Quantitative Benefit-Risk Assessment in Medical Product Decision Making: A Good Practices Report of an ISPOR Task Force.

Benefit-risk assessment is commonly conducted by drug and medical device developers and regulators, to evaluate and communicate issues around benefit-risk balance of medical products. Quantitative benefit-risk assessment (qBRA) is a set of techniques that incorporate explicit outcome weighting within a formal analysis to evaluate the benefit-risk balance. This report describes emerging good practices for the 5 main steps of developing qBRAs based on the multicriteria decision analysis process. First, research question formulation needs to identify the needs of decision makers and requirements for preference data and specify the role of external experts. Second, the formal analysis model should be developed by selecting benefit and safety endpoints while eliminating double counting and considering attribute value dependence. Third, preference elicitation method needs to be chosen, attributes framed appropriately within the elicitation instrument, and quality of the data should be evaluated. Fourth, analysis may need to normalize the preference weights, base-case and sensitivity analyses should be conducted, and the effect of preference heterogeneity analyzed. Finally, results should be communicated efficiently to decision makers and other stakeholders. In addition to detailed recommendations, we provide a checklist for reporting qBRAs developed through a Delphi process conducted with 34 experts.

Quantifying the effects of risk-stratified breast cancer screening when delivered in real time as routine practice versus usual screening: the BC-Predict non-randomised controlled study (NCT04359420).

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification as a routine part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) could provide a better balance of benefits and harms. We developed BC-Predict, to offer women when invited to the NHSBSP, which collects standard risk factor information; mammographic density; and in a sub-sample, a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS). METHODS: Risk prediction was estimated primarily from self-reported questionnaires and mammographic density using the Tyrer-Cuzick risk model. Women eligible for NHSBSP were recruited. BC-Predict produced risk feedback letters, inviting women at high risk (≥8% 10-year) or moderate risk (≥5-<8% 10-year) to have appointments to discuss prevention and additional screening. RESULTS: Overall uptake of BC-Predict in screening attendees was 16.9% with 2472 consenting to the study; 76.8% of those received risk feedback within the 8-week timeframe. Recruitment was 63.2% with an onsite recruiter and paper questionnaire compared to <10% with BC-Predict only (P < 0.0001). Risk appointment attendance was highest for those at high risk (40.6%); 77.5% of those opted for preventive medication. DISCUSSION: We have shown that a real-time offer of breast cancer risk information (including both mammographic density and PRS) is feasible and can be delivered in reasonable time, although uptake requires personal contact. Preventive medication uptake in women newly identified at high risk is high and could improve the cost-effectiveness of risk stratification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04359420).

Capturing the Impact of Constraints on the Cost-Effectiveness of Cell and Gene Therapies: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Decision-makers need to resolve constraints on delivering cell and gene therapies to patients as these treatments move into routine care. This study aimed to investigate if, and how, constraints that affect the expected cost and health consequences of cell and gene therapies have been included in published examples of cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). METHOD: A systematic review identified CEAs of cell and gene therapies. Studies were identified from previous systematic reviews and by searching Medline and Embase until 21 January 2022. Constraints described qualitatively were categorised by theme and summarised by a narrative synthesis. Constraints evaluated in quantitative scenario analyses were appraised by whether they changed the decision to recommend treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-two CEAs of cell (n = 20) and gene therapies (n = 12) were included. Twenty-one studies described constraints qualitatively (70% cell therapy CEAs; 58% gene therapy CEAs). Qualitative constraints were categorised by four themes: single payment models; long-term affordability; delivery by providers; manufacturing capability. Thirteen studies assessed constraints quantitatively (60% cell therapy CEAs; 8% gene therapy CEAs). Two types of constraint were assessed quantitatively across four jurisdictions (USA, Canada, Singapore, The Netherlands): alternatives to single payment models (n = 9 scenario analyses); improving manufacturing (n = 12 scenario analyses). The impact on decision-making was determined by whether the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios crossed a relevant cost-effectiveness threshold for each jurisdiction (outcome-based payment models: n = 25 threshold comparisons made, 28% decisions changed; improving manufacturing: n = 24 threshold comparisons made, 4% decisions changed). CONCLUSION: The net health impact of constraints is vital evidence to help decision-makers scale up the delivery of cell and gene therapies as patient volume increases and more advanced therapy medicinal products are launched. CEAs will be essential to quantify how constraints affect the cost-effectiveness of care, prioritise constraints to be resolved, and establish the value of strategies to implement cell and gene therapies by accounting for their health opportunity cost.

Illustrating Emerging Good Practices for Quantitative Benefit-Risk Assessment: A Hypothetical Case Study of Systemic Biologic Treatments for Plaque Psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES: Quantitative benefit-risk assessment (qBRA) is a structured process to evaluate the benefit-risk balance of treatment options to support decision making. The ISPOR qBRA Task Force was recently established to provide recommendations for the design, conduct, and reporting of qBRA. This report presents a hypothetical case study illustrating how to apply the Task Force's recommendations toward a qBRA to inform the benefit-risk assessment of brodalumab at the time of initial marketing approval. The qBRA evaluated 2 dosing regimens of brodalumab (210 mg or 140 mg twice weekly) compared with weight-based dosing of ustekinumab and placebo. METHODS: We followed the 5 steps recommended by the Task Force. Attributes included treatment response (≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index), suicidal ideation and behavior, and infections. Performance data were drawn from pivotal clinical trials of brodalumab. The qBRA used multicriteria decision analysis and preference weights from a hypothetical discrete choice experiment. Sensitivity analyses examined the robustness of benefit-risk ranking to uncertainty in clinical effect and preference estimates, consideration of a subgroup (nail psoriasis), and the maintenance phase of treatment (52 weeks instead of 12). RESULTS: Results from this hypothetical qBRA suggest that brodalumab 210 mg had a more favorable benefit-risk profile compared with ustekinumab and placebo. Ranking of brodalumab compared with ustekinumab was dependent on brodalumab's dose. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated robustness of benefit-risk ranking to uncertainty in clinical effect and preference estimates, as well as choice of attributes and length of follow-up. CONCLUSION: This case study demonstrates how to implement the ISPOR Task Force's good practice recommendations on qBRA.

EULAR points to consider for therapeutic drug monitoring of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

OBJECTIVE: To develop EULAR points-to-consider for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). METHODS: The points-to-consider were developed in accordance with EULAR standardised operation procedures by a multidisciplinary task force from eight European countries, based on a systematic literature review and expert consensus. Level of evidence and strength of the points-to-consider were determined, and mean levels of agreement among the task force were calculated using a 10-point rating scale. RESULTS: Six overarching principles and 13 points-to-consider were formulated. The level of agreement among the task force for the overarching principles and points-to-consider ranged from 8.4 to 9.9.The overarching principles define TDM and its subtypes, and reinforce the underlying pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic principles, which are relevant to all biopharmaceutical classes. The points-to-consider highlight the clinical utility of the measurement and interpretation of biopharmaceutical blood concentrations and antidrug antibodies in specific clinical scenarios, including factors that influence these parameters. In general, proactive use of TDM is not recommended but reactive TDM could be considered in certain clinical situations. An important factor limiting wider adoption of TDM is the lack of both high quality trials addressing effectiveness and safety of TDM and robust economic evaluation in patients with RMDs. Future research should focus on providing this evidence, as well as on further understanding of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of biopharmaceuticals. CONCLUSION: These points-to-consider are evidence-based and consensus-based statements for the use of TDM of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory RMDs, addressing the clinical utility of TDM.

Reasons for using indoor tanning devices: A systematic review of qualitative evidence.

PURPOSE: Despite the established causal links to skin cancer, skin ageing and eye inflammation, people continue to use indoor tanning devices (hereafter 'sunbeds'). Understanding the reasons underlying the use of sunbeds is essential for developing effective interventions. The purpose of this study was to collate all existing evidence from qualitative papers published to date that had assessed motivations for using sunbeds. METHODS: Six databases were searched from inception to February 2020 for qualitative studies that explored adults' experiences of using sunbeds. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, and a narrative evidence synthesis was used to collate findings from each primary study. RESULTS: Users of sunbeds were motivated primarily by aesthetic concerns but also by perceived psychological benefits (well-being, confidence and 'fitting in') and physical benefits (improvement in skin conditions such as acne, acquiring vitamin D and preventing sunburn). People also chose indoor tanning over alternatives such as fake tans because they considered the alternatives unacceptable and did not consider indoor tanning a serious health risk. To date, no studies have explored alternatives to meeting non-aesthetic needs related to the use of sunbeds. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive explanation for the practice of indoor tanning provides the basis for development of complex interventions to reduce the harm caused by using sunbeds. Effective interventions should include promotion of alternatives, such as different methods of relaxing, to satisfy underlying motivations, changing social norms and correcting misperceptions about health benefits.

Economics and Precision Medicine.

Introducing precision medicine strategies into routine practice will require robust economic evidence. Decision-makers need to understand the value of a precision medicine strategy compared with alternative ways to treat patients. This chapter describes health economic analysis techniques that are needed to generate this evidence. The value of any precision medicine strategy can be demonstrated early to inform evidence generation and improve the likelihood of translation into routine practice. Advances in health economic analysis techniques are also explained and their relevance to precision medicine is highlighted. Ensuring that constraints on delivery are resolved to increase uptake and implementation will improve the value of a new precision medicine strategy. Empirical methods to quantify stakeholders' preferences can be effective to inform the design of a precision medicine intervention or service delivery model. A range of techniques to generate relevant economic evidence are now available to support the development and translation of precision medicine into routine practice. This economic evidence is essential to inform resource allocation decisions and will enable patients to benefit from cost-effective precision medicine strategies in the future.

Valuing Health Gain from Composite Response Endpoints for Multisystem Diseases.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to demonstrate how to estimate the value of health gain after patients with a multisystem disease achieve a condition-specific composite response endpoint. METHODS: Data from patients treated in routine practice with an exemplar multisystem disease (systemic lupus erythematosus) were extracted from a national register (British Isles Lupus Assessment Group Biologics Register). Two bespoke composite response endpoints (Major Clinical Response and Improvement) were developed in advance of this study. Difference-in-differences regression compared health utility values (3-level version of EQ-5D; UK tariff) over 6 months for responders and nonresponders. Bootstrapped regression estimated the incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), probability of QALY gain after achieving the response criteria, and population monetary benefit of response. RESULTS: Within the sample (n = 171), 18.2% achieved Major Clinical Response and 49.1% achieved Improvement at 6 months. Incremental health utility values were 0.0923 for Major Clinical Response and 0.0454 for Improvement. Expected incremental QALY gain at 6 months was 0.020 for Major Clinical Response and 0.012 for Improvement. Probability of QALY gain after achieving the response criteria was 77.6% for Major Clinical Response and 72.7% for Improvement. Population monetary benefit of response was £1 106 458 for Major Clinical Response and £649 134 for Improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Bespoke composite response endpoints are becoming more common to measure treatment response for multisystem diseases in trials and observational studies. Health technology assessment agencies face a growing challenge to establish whether these endpoints correspond with improved health gain. Health utility values can generate this evidence to enhance the usefulness of composite response endpoints for health technology assessment, decision making, and economic evaluation.

Implementing Risk-Stratified Breast Screening in England: An Agenda Setting Meeting.

It is now possible to accurately assess breast cancer risk at routine NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) appointments, provide risk feedback and offer risk management strategies to women at higher risk. These strategies include National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) approved additional breast screening and risk-reducing medication. However, the NHSBSP invites nearly all women three-yearly, regardless of risk. In March 2022, a one-day agenda setting meeting took place in Manchester to discuss the feasibility and desirability of implementation of risk-stratified screening in the NHSBSP. Fifty-eight individuals participated (38 face-to-face, 20 virtual) with relevant expertise from academic, clinical and/or policy-making perspectives. Key findings were presented from the PROCAS2 NIHR programme grant regarding feasibility of risk-stratified screening in the NHSBSP. Participants discussed key uncertainties in seven groups, followed by a plenary session. Discussions were audio-recorded and thematically analysed to produce descriptive themes. Five themes were developed: (i) risk and health economic modelling; (ii) health inequalities and communication with women; (iii); extending screening intervals for low-risk women; (iv) integration with existing NHSBSP; and (v) potential new service models. Most attendees expected some form of risk-stratified breast screening to be implemented in England and collectively identified key issues to be resolved to facilitate this.