Impact of infectious density-induced additional screening and treatment saturation on COVID-19: Modeling and cost-effective optimal control.

This study introduces a novel SI2HR model, where "I2" denotes two infectious classes representing asymptomatic and symptomatic infections, aiming to investigate and analyze the cost-effective optimal control measures for managing COVID-19. The model incorporates a novel concept of infectious density-induced additional screening (IDIAS) and accounts for treatment saturation. Furthermore, the model considers the possibility of reinfection and the loss of immunity in individuals who have previously recovered. To validate and calibrate the proposed model, real data from November-December 2022 in Hong Kong are utilized. The estimated parameters obtained from this calibration process are valuable for prediction purposes and facilitate further numerical simulations. An analysis of the model reveals that delays in screening, treatment, and quarantine contribute to an increase in the basic reproduction number R0, indicating a tendency towards endemicity. In particular, from the elasticity of R0, we deduce that normalized sensitivity indices of baseline screening rate (θ), quarantine rates (γ, αs), and treatment rate (α) are negative, which shows that delaying any of these may cause huge surge in R0, ultimately increases the disease burden. Further, by the contour plots, we note the two-parameter behavior of the infectives (both symptomatic and asymptomatic). Expanding upon the model analysis, an optimal control problem (OCP) is formulated, incorporating three control measures: precautionary interventions, boosted IDIAS, and boosted treatment. The Pontryagin's maximum principle and the forward-backward sweep method are employed to solve the OCP. The numerical simulations highlight that enhanced screening and treatment, coupled with preventive interventions, can effectively contribute to sustainable disease control. However, the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) conducted in this study suggests that boosting IDIAS alone is the most economically efficient and cost-effective approach compared to other strategies. The CEA results provide valuable insights into identifying specific strategies based on their cost-efficacy ranking, which can be implemented to maximize impact while minimizing costs. Overall, this research offers significant insights for policymakers and healthcare professionals, providing a framework to optimize control efforts for COVID-19 or similar epidemics in the future.

Using Claims Data to Predict Pre-Operative BMI Among Bariatric Surgery Patients: Development of the BMI Before Bariatric Surgery Scoring System (B3S3).

Background: Lack of body mass index (BMI) measurements limits the utility of claims data for bariatric surgery research, but pre-operative BMI may be imputed due to existence of weight-related diagnosis codes and BMI-related reimbursement requirements. We used a machine learning pipeline to create a claims-based scoring system to predict pre-operative BMI, as documented in the electronic health record (EHR), among patients undergoing a new bariatric surgery. Methods: Using the Optum Labs Data Warehouse, containing linked de-identified claims and EHR data for commercial or Medicare Advantage enrollees, we identified adults undergoing a new bariatric surgery between January 2011 and June 2018 with a BMI measurement in linked EHR data ≤30 days before the index surgery (n=3226). We constructed predictors from claims data and applied a machine learning pipeline to create a scoring system for pre-operative BMI, the B3S3. We evaluated the B3S3 and a simple linear regression model (benchmark) in test patients whose index surgery occurred concurrent (2011-2017) or prospective (2018) to the training data. Results: The machine learning pipeline yielded a final scoring system that included weight-related diagnosis codes, age, and number of days hospitalized and distinct drugs dispensed in the past 6 months. In concurrent test data, the B3S3 had excellent performance (R2 0.862, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.815-0.898) and calibration. The benchmark algorithm had good performance (R2 0.750, 95% CI 0.686-0.799) and calibration but both aspects were inferior to the B3S3. Findings in prospective test data were similar. Conclusion: The B3S3 is an accessible tool that researchers can use with claims data to obtain granular and accurate predicted values of pre-operative BMI, which may enhance confounding control and investigation of effect modification by baseline obesity levels in bariatric surgery studies utilizing claims data.

Pre-operative BMI is an important potential confounder in comparative effectiveness studies of bariatric surgeries.Claims data lack clinical measurements, but insurance reimbursement requirements for bariatric surgery often result in pre-operative BMI being coded in claims data.We used a machine learning pipeline to create a model, the B3S3, to predict pre-operative BMI, as documented in the EHR, among bariatric surgery patients based on the presence of certain weight-related diagnosis codes and other patient characteristics derived from claims data.Researchers can easily use the B3S3 with claims data to obtain granular and accurate predicted values of pre-operative BMI among bariatric surgery patients.

Effectiveness and Safety of Anlotinib Combined with PD-1 Blockades in Patients with Previously Immunotherapy Treated Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Exploratory Study.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and tolerability of anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades in patients with previously immunotherapy treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: A total of 67 patients with previously immunotherapy treated advanced NSCLC who received anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades in clinical practice were screened retrospectively. All the PD-1 blockades used in this study were approved in China and consisted of sintilimab, camrelizumab, tislelizumab and pembrolizumab. Effectiveness and safety of anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades were assessed, and all patients were followed up regularly. Clinical significance between response status to previous immune-related treatment regimens and therapeutic outcomes of anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades was further explored. Results: The best overall response among the 67 patients suggested that a partial response was observed in 16 patients, stable disease was noted in 41 patients and progressive disease was found in 10 patients, which yielded an objective response rate of 23.9% (95% CI: 14.3-35.9%) and a disease control rate of 85.1% (95% CI: 74.3-92.6%). Prognostic outcomes indicated that the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.1 months (95% CI: 2.37-9.83) and the median overall survival (OS) was 16.5 months (95% CI: 10.73-22.27). Exploratory analysis highlighted that patients who were intolerant to previous immune-related regimens (17 patients) might have a superior prognosis (median OS: 22.3 months vs 12.5 months, P=0.024). Additionally, adverse reactions with any grades during anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades administration were observed in 62 patients (92.5%), of which 31 patients (46.3%) had ≥grade 3 adverse reactions. Most common adverse reactions were fatigue, hypertension, diarrhea and hepatotoxicity. Conclusion: Anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades demonstrated promising effectiveness and tolerable safety in patients with previously immunotherapy treated advanced NSCLC. Those who were intolerant to previous immune-related regimens might benefit significantly from treatment with anlotinib plus PD-1 blockades. This conclusion should be confirmed in future studies.

Tislelizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Objective: The goal of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab and sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China. Methods: A comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken within the framework of a partitioned survival model to accurately gage the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of tislelizumab compared to sorafenib. The model incorporated relevant clinical data and all survival rates were from RATIONALE-301 trials. The stability of the partitioned survival model was assessed by performing one-way and two-way sensitivity analyses. Results: The total cost incurred for the tislelizumab treatment was $16181.24, whereas the sorafenib was $14306.87. The tislelizumab regimen resulted in a significant increase of 0.18 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and an extra cost of $1874.37 as compared to chemotherapy. The ICER was $10413.17 per QALY, which was found to be below the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $37304.34/QALY. The results of the sensitivity analysis found that no fluctuations in any of the factors affected our results, even when these parameters fluctuated. Conclusion: Tislelizumab appears to be a cost-effective first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma when compared to sorafenib in China. These findings can inform decision-making processes regarding the selection of the most cost-effective treatment option for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Identification of cost-effective biosecurity measures to reduce Salmonella along the pork production chain.

The continued occurrence of salmonellosis cases in Europe attributed to the consumption of pork products highlights the importance of identifying cost-effective interventions. Certain biosecurity measures (BSMs) may be effective in reducing the prevalence of specific pathogens along the pork production chain and their presence in food products. The objective of this study was to identify pathogen-specific, cost-effective BSMs to reduce Salmonella at different stages of the pork production chain in two European countries - Austria (AT) and the United Kingdom (UK). For this purpose, a cost-benefit analysis was conducted based on the epidemiological output of an established quantitative microbiological risk assessment that simulated the implementation effect of the BSMs based on their risk ratios. For each of the BSMs, the associated costs and benefits were assessed individually and country-specifically. For both AT and UK, nine different BSMs were evaluated assuming a countrywide implementation rate of 100%. The results showed that four BSMs were cost-effective (benefit-cost ratio > 1) for AT and five for the UK. The uncertainty regarding the cost-effectiveness of the BSMs resulted from the variability of individual risk ratios, and the variability of benefits associated with the implementation of the BSMs. The low number of cost-effective BSMs highlights the need for holistic risk-based models and economic assessments. To increase the willingness to implement BSMs and maximize the benefits for stakeholders, who carry the majority of the implementation costs, epidemiological assessments of BSM effectiveness should consider the impact on several relevant pathogens simultaneously.

Cost-effectiveness of romosozumab for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture in Belgium.

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment with romosozumab-to-alendronate compared to alendronate monotherapy and teriparatide-to-alendronate, in postmenopausal osteoporotic women from a Belgian healthcare perspective. Romosozumab-to-alendronate was found to be cost-effective compared to alendronate monotherapy and dominant compared to teriparatide-to-alendronate for osteoporotic women at high risk of fracture in Belgium. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment with romosozumab followed by alendronate compared to alendronate monotherapy and teriparatide followed by alendronate, in postmenopausal osteoporotic women at high risk of fracture, from a Belgian healthcare perspective. Romosozumab is reimbursed in Belgium since December 2021. METHODS: A Markov microsimulation model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of romosozumab-to-alendronate compared to alendronate monotherapy and to teriparatide-to-alendronate over a lifetime horizon. Patients transition between five different health states every 6 months based on fracture risks or death. The model was populated with Belgium-specific epidemiological and cost data, where available. The fracture risk reduction of romosozumab treatment was collated from the ARCH study, and from a published network meta-analysis. Costs were included from a healthcare perspective (NIHDI). Cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), reported in Euro (€) 2022. Deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed. RESULTS: Romosozumab-to-alendronate was associated with 0.12 additional QALYs at an additional cost of €2314 compared to alendronate monotherapy, resulting in an ICER of €19,978. Compared to teriparatide-to-alendronate, romosozumab-to-alendronate was found to be dominant, with higher QALYs and lower costs. The base-case results were robust to uncertainty in the input parameters when conducting the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: Sequential treatment with romosozumab followed by alendronate was found to be cost-effective compared to alendronate monotherapy and dominant compared to teriparatide followed by alendronate for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture in Belgium.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of metformin versus insulin in the treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: Although there have been many studies on gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) treatment, there is still a knowledge gap regarding the comparative cost-effectiveness of metformin and insulin in the treatment phase. Existing studies have focused on treatment efficacy and drug safety, but relatively little has been explored regarding cost-effectiveness analysis. In particular, no comprehensive study has evaluated the cost-effectiveness of metformin and insulin for GDM treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to fill this knowledge gap by conducting a cost-effectiveness analysis of these two treatments for GDM. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of metformin and insulin in China. Probabilities, costs, and utilities were derived from the literature. The cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated using the roll-back method. The strategy was considered cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was below the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥242,938 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted to assess the robustness of the results. RESULTS: The roll-back analysis indicated that insulin was not cost-effective compared to metformin, resulting in increased costs and decreased QALYs, with a negative ICER. These findings suggested that metformin is a cost-effective option than insulin. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis showed that the model was robust. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with insulin, metformin is a cost-effective treatment option for GDM.

Cost-effectiveness of remote haemodynamic monitoring by an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitoring sensor (CardioMEMS-HF system) in chronic heart failure in the Netherlands.

AIMS: Remote haemodynamic monitoring with an implantable pulmonary artery (PA) sensor has been shown to reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and improve quality of life. Cost-effectiveness analyses studying the value of remote haemodynamic monitoring in a European healthcare system with a contemporary standard care group are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of PA-guided therapy compared to the standard of care based upon patient-level data of the MONITOR-HF trial performed in the Netherlands in patients with chronic HF (New York Heart Association class III and at least one previous HF hospitalization). Cost-effectiveness was measured as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the Dutch societal perspective with a lifetime horizon which encompasses a wide variety of costs including costs of hospitalizations, monitoring time, telephone contacts, laboratory assessments, and drug changes in both treatment groups. In the base-case analysis, PA-guided therapy increased costs compared to standard of care by €12 121. The QALYs per patient for PA-guided therapy and standard of care was 4.07 and 3.481, respectively, reflecting a gain of 0.58 QALYs. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €20 753 per QALY, which is below the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €50 000 per QALY gained for HF. CONCLUSIONS: The current cost-effectiveness study suggests that remote haemodynamic monitoring with PA-guided therapy on top of standard care is likely to be cost-effective for patients with symptomatic moderate-to-severe HF in the Netherlands.

Meta-analysis of the quantitative effectiveness of risk management measures (RMM) in the workplace.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This paper describes an evaluation and analysis of an updated version of ECEL v3.0-an integrated risk management measure (RMM) library developed as part of a CEFIC LRI initiative. The occupational module contains extensive data on the quantitative effectiveness of RMMs to control inhalation and dermal exposure in the workplace. The objective was to investigate the effectiveness and variability in effectiveness of RMM and to explore the difference between optimal and non-optimal RMM applications in the workplace. METHODS: A new database structure and interface were developed and the content of the database was updated with a systematic literature review and integration with other databases (totalling 3373 records from 548 studies). To analyse the data, Bayesian linear mixed models were constructed with the study as a random effect and various study characteristics and RMM categories as fixed effects individually in separate models. A multivariate mixed model was used on a stratified dataset to test (amongst others) the conditions of RMM use. RESULTS: Analyses of the data indicated effectiveness values for each RMM category (for example ~87% for technical emission controls compared with ~60% for technical dispersion controls). Substantial variability in effectiveness was observed within and between different types of RMM. Seven study characteristics (covariables) were included in the analyses, which indicated a pronounced difference in as-built (optimal/experimental) and as-used (workplace) conditions of RMM use (93.3% and 74.6%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This library provides a reliable evidence base to derive base estimates of RMM effectiveness-beneficial for both registrant and downstream users. It stresses the importance of optimal use of RMMs in the workplace (technical design/functioning, use, and maintenance). Various challenges are foreseen to further update ECEL to improve guidance, for deriving improved estimates and ensure user-friendliness of the library.

Real-world cost- effectiveness analysis: Tumor Treating Fields for newly diagnosed glioblastoma in China.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma (GBM) stands as the most aggressive and prevalent primary brain malignancy. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields), an innovative therapy complementing chemotherapy for GBM treatment, which can significantly enhance overall survival, disease progression-free survival, and patient's quality of life. However, there is a dearth of health economics evaluation on TTFields therapy both domestically and internationally. OBJECTIVE: The study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of TTFields + temozolomide (TMZ) in comparison to TMZ alone for newly diagnosed GBM patients. The intent is to provide robust economic evidence to serve as a foundation for policymaking and decision-making processes in GBM treatment. METHODS: We estimated outcomes for newly diagnosed GBM patients over a lifetime horizon using a partitioned survival model with three states: Progression-Free Survival, Progression Disease, and Death. The survival model was derived from a real-world study in China, with long-term survival data drawn from GBM epidemiology literature. Adverse event rates were sourced from the EF-14 trial data. Cost data, validated by expert consultation, was obtained from public literature and databases. Utility values were extracted from published literature. Using Microsoft Excel, we calculated expected costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over 15 years from a health system perspective. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at three times the Chinese per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2022, amounting to CN¥242,928 (US$37,655) /QALY. A 5% discount rate was applied to costs and utilities. Results underwent analysis through single factor and probability sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: TTFields + TMZ demonstrated a mean increase in cost by CN¥389,326 (US$57,859) and an increase of 2.46 QALYs compared to TMZ alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was CN¥157,979 (US$23,474) per QALY gained. The model exhibited heightened sensitivity to changes in the discount rate. Probability sensitivity analysis indicates that, under the existing threshold, the probability of TTFields + TMZ being economical is 95.60%. CONCLUSIONS: This cost-effectiveness analysis affirms that incorporating TTFields into TMZ treatment proves to be cost-effective, given a threshold three times the Chinese per capita GDP.

The long-term cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide versus sitagliptin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in China.

BACKGROUND: To estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide versus sitagliptin as an add-on therapy for type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled on metformin in China, to better inform healthcare decision making. METHODS: The Cardiff diabetes model which is a Monte Carlo micro-simulation model was used to project short-term effects of once-weekly semaglutide versus sitagliptin into long-term outcomes. Short-term data of patient profiles and treatment effects were derived from the 30-week SUSTAIN China trial, in which 868 type 2 diabetes patients with a mean age of 53.1 years inadequately controlled on metformin were randomized to receive once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg, once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg, or sitagliptin 100 mg. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated from a healthcare system perspective at a discount rate of 5%. Univariate sensitivity analysis, scenario analysis, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to test the uncertainty. RESULTS: Over patients' lifetime projections, patients in both once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1 mg arms predicted less incidences of most vascular complications, mortality, and hypoglycemia, and lower total costs compared with those in sitagliptin arm. For an individual patient, compared with sitagliptin, once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg conferred a small QALY improvement of 0.08 and a lower cost of $5173, while once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg generated an incremental QALY benefit of 0.12 and a lower cost of $7142, as an add-on to metformin. Therefore, both doses of once-weekly semaglutide were considered dominant versus sitagliptin with more QALY benefits at lower costs. CONCLUSION: Once-weekly semaglutide may represent a cost-effective add-on therapy alternative to sitagliptin for type 2 diabetes patients inadequately controlled on metformin in China.

Early economic evaluation of the digital gait analysis system for fall prevention-Preliminary analysis of the GaitSmart system.

Objective: To develop an early economics evaluation (EEE) to assess the cost-effectiveness of the GS in reducing the RoF and FoF. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) with a return on investment (RoI) estimation was performed. CEA used the most relevant parameters, such as increased gait speed and decreased FoF, to estimate the reduction in the RoF, the impact on health care resources used and financial implications for the National Health System in the United Kingdom. Outcomes were measured as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained based on the reduction of the RoF and FoF. Uncertainties around the main parameters used were evaluated by probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: The CEA results showed that the GS is a dominant strategy over the standard of care to improve the movements of older persons who have suffered a fall or are afraid of falling (incremental QALYs based on FoF = 0.77 and QALYs based on RoF = 1.07, cost of FoF = -£4479.57 and cost of RoF = -£2901.79). By implementing the GS, the ROI results suggest that every pound invested in the GS could result in cost savings of £1.85/patient based on the RoF reduction and £11.16/patient based on the FoF reduction. The probability of being cost saving based on the number of iterations were 79.4 percent (based on FoF) and 100 percent (based on RoF). Conclusion: The EEE supports the main hypothesis that the GS is an effective intervention to avoid falls and is potentially cost saving.

Breaking the Emergency Room Cycle: The Impact of Telemedicine on Emergency Department Utilization.

Background Telemedicine has gained prominence in healthcare, and understanding its impact on diverting non-urgent cases from the emergency room (ER) has become crucial. This study delves into the dynamic relationship between telemedicine utilization and ER visits, seeking to understand the transformative impact of telehealth on breaking the traditional ER cycle. Method To explore the awareness and utilization of telemedicine services in the broader population of Saudi Arabia, we adopted a cross-sectional design utilizing the convenience sampling method. Data collection was facilitated through a self-administered online survey comprising four sections: demographic variables, ER visits, awareness of non-urgent cases, and suggestions. The collected data were entered into IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21 (Released 2012; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States) for descriptive analysis. Results Among the 1140 participants, the majority were females (56.8%), with 43.2% being males. Regarding age distribution, the highest percentage fell within the 18-25 age group (46.8%). Nationality-wise, a substantial proportion identified as Saudi (95.2%). Educational backgrounds varied, with 60.7% holding a bachelor's degree. Notably, 62.6% of the visits were classified as urgent. A significant portion (66.8%) demonstrated awareness of alternative options for non-urgent care, such as outpatient clinics and telemedicine services. Specifically regarding telemedicine, 82.8% of respondents believed that video consultations and prescription refills could effectively address non-urgent conditions. Furthermore, 89.6% of participants agreed that educating patients on self-care and home remedies could help manage symptoms and deter unnecessary ER visits. Conclusions The positive reception of telemedicine, as evidenced by high satisfaction rates among participants, further reinforces its role in reshaping the landscape of healthcare delivery.

Binary mixture of ionic liquid and span 80 for oil spill remediation: Synthesis and performance evaluation.

The synthesis of new surfactants helps to mitigate the environmental and financial effects of oil spills by providing efficient cleanup options. Herein, this study provides the development of a binary mixture of Span 80 and Choline myristate [Cho][Mys], a surface-active ionic liquid (SAIL) as green dispersant for oil spill remediation. The synergistic interaction at a 60:40 (w/w) ratio significantly lowered the critical micelle concentration (cmc) to 0.029 mM. Dispersion efficiency tests with Arab crude oil showed optimal performance at a 60:40 ratio of Span 80 and [Cho][Mys] (1:25 dispersant to oil ratio, v/v), achieving 81.16 % dispersion effectiveness in the baffled flask test. The binary mixture demonstrated superior emulsion stability (6 h) and the lowest interfacial tension (1.12 mN/m). Acute toxicity experiments revealed the dispersant's practical non-toxicity with an LC50 value of 600 mg/L. Overall, this environmentally benign surfactant combination shows promise as a safe and effective oil spill dispersant.

Association of oral disease-modifying agents and their adherence trajectories with annual relapses in multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Real-world effectiveness can vary across oral disease-modifying agents (DMAs) and their adherence trajectories in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). However, previous studies have not considered longitudinal adherence patterns while evaluating oral DMAs. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the association of oral DMAs and their adherence trajectories with annualized relapse rate (ARR) in patients with MS. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study based on the 2015-2019 MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database involved continuous enrolled adults (18-64 years) with ≥1 MS diagnosis (ICD-9/10-CM:340/G35) and ≥ 1 oral DMA prescription. Patients were grouped into incident fingolimod (FIN), teriflunomide (TER), and dimethyl fumarate (DMF) users based on the index DMA with a one-year washout period. Annual DMA adherence trajectories based on the monthly Proportion of Days Covered (PDC) one year after treatment initiation were identified using Group-Based Trajectory Modeling (GBTM). The validated claims-based ARR was evaluated during the one-year follow-up period using generalized boosted model-based inverse probability treatment weights with negative binomial regression model. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 994 MS patients who initiated with FIN (23.0%), TER (22.3%), and DMF (54.7%) during the study period. GBTM grouped eligible patients into three adherence trajectories: complete adherers (59.2%), slow decliners (23.8%), and rapid decliners (17.0%). The proportion of complete adherers varied across the oral DMAs (FIN: 67.1%, TER: 55.4%, and DMF: 57.4%). The negative binomial regression modeling revealed that, while there was no difference in ARR across the three DMAs, rapid decliners (adjusted incidence rate ratio[aIRR]: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1-2.4) had a higher rate of relapses compared to completely adherent patients. The type of oral DMAs did not moderate the relationship between ARR and the adherence trajectory groups. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence trajectories classified as rapid decliners were associated with a higher ARR than complete adherers after adjusting for their type of oral DMAs. Longitudinal medication adherence patterns are critical in reducing relapse rates in MS.

Antipsychotic drugs in first-episode psychosis: A target trial emulation in the FEP-CAUSAL Collaboration.

Good adherence to antipsychotic therapy helps prevent relapses in First Episode Psychosis (FEP). We used data from the FEP-CAUSAL Collaboration, an international consortium of observational cohorts to emulate a target trial comparing antipsychotics with treatment discontinuation as the primary outcome. Other outcomes included all-cause hospitalization. We benchmarked our results to estimates from EUFEST, a randomized trial conducted in the 2000s. We included 1097 patients with a psychotic disorder and less than 2 years since psychosis onset. Inverse probability weighting was used to control for confounding. The estimated 12-month risks of discontinuation for aripiprazole, first-generation agents, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, and risperidone (95% CI) were: 61.5% (52.5-70.6), 73.5% (60.5-84.9), 76.8% (67.2-85.3), 58.4% (40.4-77.4), 76.5% (62.1-88.5), and 74.4% (67.0-81.2) respectively. Compared with aripiprazole, the 12-month risk differences (95% CI) were -15.3% (-30.0, 0.0) for olanzapine, -12.8% (-25.7, -1.0) for risperidone, and 3.0% (-21.5, 30.8) for paliperidone. The 12-month risks of hospitalization were similar between agents. Our estimates support use of aripiprazole and paliperidone as first-line therapies for FEP. Benchmarking yielded similar results for discontinuation and absolute risks of hospitalization as in the original trial, suggesting that data from the FEP-CAUSAL Collaboration data sufficed to approximately remove confounding for these clinical questions.

Power to the People: Why person-generated health data is important for pharmacoepidemiology.

Person-generated health data (PGHD) are valuable to study outcomes relevant to everyday living, to obtain information not otherwise available, for long-term follow-up and in situations where decisions cannot wait for traditional clinical research to be completed. While there is no dispute that these data are subject to bias, insights gained may be better than an information void, provided the biases are understood and acknowledged. People will share information known uniquely to them about exposures that may affect drug tolerance, safety and effectiveness, e.g., using non-prescription and complementary medications, alcohol, tobacco, illicit drugs, exercise, etc. Patients may be the best source of safety information when long-term follow-up is needed, e.g., the 5-15-year follow-up required for some gene therapies. Validation studies must be performed to evaluate what people can accurately report and when supplementary confirmation information is needed. But PGHD has already proven valuable in quantifying and contrasting COVID-19 vaccine benefits and risks, and for evaluating disease transmission and the accuracy of COVID-19 testing. Going forward, PGHD will be used for patient-measured and patient-relevant outcomes, including regulatory purposes, and will be linked to broader health data networks using tokenization, becoming a mainstay for signals about risks and benefits for diverse populations.

Mirvetuximab soravtansine in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer with high folate receptor-alpha expression: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV), a new antibody-drug conjugate, versus the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (IC) was the first treatment to demonstrate benefits for progression-free and overall survival in platinum-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer (PROC) with high folate receptor-alpha (high-FRα) expression. Efficacy, safety, and economic effectiveness make MIRV the new standard of care for these patients. METHODS: Based on patients and clinical parameters from MIRASOL (GOG 3045/ENGOT-ov55) phase III randomized controlled trials, the Markov model with a 20-year time horizon was established to evaluate the cost and efficacy of MIRV and IC for PROC with high-FRα expression, considering the bevacizumab-pretreated situation from the American healthcare system. Total cost, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and incremental net health benefits were the main outcome indicators and compared with willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Compared with the IC, MIRV was associated with incremental costs of $538,251, $575,674, and $188,248 with the corresponding QALYs (LYs) increased by 0.90 (1.55), 1.09 (1.88), and 0.53 (0.79), leading to ICERs of $596,189/QALY ($347,995/LY), $530,061/QALY ($306,894/LY), and $1,011,310/QALY ($680,025/LY) in the overall, bevacizumab-naïve, and bevacizumab-pretreated patients, respectively. When MIRV is reduced by more than 75%, it may be a cost-effective treatment. CONCLUSION: At the current price, MIRV for PROC with high-FRα expression is not the cost-effective strategy in the US. However, its treatment has higher health benefits in bevacizumab-naïve patients, which is likely to be an alternative.

Efficacy of Laser-Assisted Periodontal Therapy vs Conventional Scaling and Root Planing.

Background: This study compares the effectiveness of laser-assisted periodontal therapy (LAPT) to conventional scaling and root planing (SRP) in the treatment of periodontal disease. Materials and Methods: Patients with periodontal disease were divided into two groups. One group received LAPT, while the other group underwent conventional SRP. The periodontal parameters, including pocket depth (PD) and clinical attachment level (CAL), were measured before and after the treatments. The data were statistically analyzed using appropriate methods. Results: After the treatments, the LAPT group showed a mean reduction in PD of 2.5 mm, while the conventional SRP group had a mean reduction of 2.0 mm. Additionally, the laser group demonstrated a mean improvement in CAL of 1.8 mm, whereas the conventional group showed an improvement of 1.3 mm. These differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that LAPT may be more effective in reducing PD and improving CAL compared with conventional SRP in the treatment of periodontal disease.