Key considerations for modelling the long-term costs and benefits of treatments for ANCA-associated vasculitis.

OBJECTIVES: Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) is a group of severe and chronic autoimmune diseases. Patients undergo two treatment phases: inducing remission and maintaining remission to prevent organ damage. Immunosuppressants, including glucocorticoids (GCs) are used as first-line treatment, but long-term GC use is associated with toxic effects. Novel treatments reduce or replace the need for long-term GC, and therefore can reduce GC-related toxicity. The evolving treatment landscape has presented new challenges for health technology assessment (HTA) of new treatments in AAV and long-term modelling of costs and outcomes in this disease. METHODS: Using the appraisal of avacopan in England (NICE) as a case study, this paper aims to identify the key challenges involved in the economic evaluation of new treatments for AAV, with a particular focus on the long-term modelling of the treatment costs and benefits for the purpose of HTA. The outcome of this study is a set of recommendations for modelling the cost-effectiveness of new treatments for AAV from the HTA perspective. RESULTS: The discussion focuses on the appropriate model structure, approach to modelling end-stage renal disease (ESRD) as a key determinant of costeffectiveness, capturing the impact of GC-related adverse events, and estimation of short and long-term costs of AAV. CONCLUSIONS: Economic evaluation of new treatments for AAV needs to capture all relevant downstream effects. ESRD is a key driver of cost-effectiveness but is associated with major uncertainty. Future observational studies need to offer sufficient detail to allow for differentiation in event rates across treatment options.

Supported Intervention Versus Intervention Alone for Management of Fecal Incontinence in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Multicenter Mixed-Methods Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to test a noninvasive self-management intervention supported by specialist nurses versus intervention alone in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experiencing fecal incontinence and to conduct a qualitative evaluation of the trial. DESIGN: Multicenter, parallel-group, open-label, mixed-methods randomized controlled trial (RCT). SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised patients from a preceding case-finding study who reported fecal incontinence and met study requirements; the RCT was delivered via IBD outpatient clinics in 6 hospitals (5 in major UK cities, 1 rural) between September 2015 and August 2017. Sixteen participants and 11 staff members were interviewed for qualitative evaluation. METHODS: Adults with IBD completed the study activities over a 3-month period following randomization. Each participant received either four 30-minute structured sessions with an IBD clinical nurse specialist and a self-management booklet or the booklet alone. Low retention numbers precluded statistical analysis; individual face-to-face or telephone interviews, recorded digitally and transcribed professionally, were conducted to evaluate the RCT. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using an inductive method. RESULTS: Sixty-seven participants (36%) of the targeted 186 participants were recruited. The groups comprised 32 participants (17% of targeted participants) allocated to the nurse + booklet intervention and 35 (18.8% of targeted participants) allocated to the booklet alone. Less than one-third (n = 21, 31.3%) completed the study. Given the low recruitment and high attrition, statistical analysis of quantitative data was considered futile. Participant interviews were conducted concerning study participation and 4 themes emerged that described experiences of patients and staff. These data provided insights into reasons for low recruitment and high attrition, as well as challenges of delivering resource-heavy studies in busy health service environments. CONCLUSIONS: Alternative approaches to trials of nurse-led interventions in hospital settings are needed as many interfering factors may prevent successful completion.

Estimated societal costs of stroke in the UK based on a discrete event simulation.

BACKGROUND: there are around 100,000 new stroke cases and over a million people living with its consequences annually in the UK. This has large impacts on health and social care, unpaid carers and lost productivity. We aimed to estimate associated costs. METHODS: we estimated 2014/2015 annual mean cost per person and aggregate UK cost of stroke for individuals aged ≥40 from a societal perspective. Health and social care costs in the first and subsequent years after stroke were estimated from discrete event simulation modelling, with probability of progression and length of receipt of different health and social care services obtained from routine registry and audit data. Unpaid care hours and lost productivity were obtained from trial data. UK unit costs were applied to estimate mean costs. Epidemiological estimates of stroke incidence and prevalence were then applied to estimate aggregate costs for the UK. RESULTS: mean cost of new-onset stroke is £45,409 (95% CI 42,054-48,763) in the first year after stroke and £24,778 (20,234-29,322) in subsequent years. Aggregate societal cost of stroke is £26 billion per year, including £8.6 billion for NHS and social care. The largest component of total cost was unpaid care (61%) and, given high survival, £20.6 billion related to ongoing care. CONCLUSION: the estimated aggregate cost of stroke substantially exceeds previous UK estimates. Since most of the cost is attributed to unpaid care, interventions aimed at rehabilitation and reducing new and recurrent stroke are likely to yield substantial benefits to carers and cost savings to society.

The future incidence, prevalence and costs of stroke in the UK.

BACKGROUND: we project incidence and prevalence of stroke in the UK and associated costs to society to 2035. We include future costs of health care, social care, unpaid care and lost productivity, drawing on recent estimates that there are almost 1 million people living with stroke and the current cost of their care is £26 billion. METHODS: we developed a model to produce projections, building on earlier work to estimate the costs of stroke care by age, gender and other characteristics. Our cell-based simulation model uses the 2014-based Office for National Statistics population projections; future trends in incidence and prevalence rates of stroke derived from an expert consultation exercise; and data from the Office for Budget Responsibility on expected future changes in productivity and average earnings. RESULTS: between 2015 and 2035, the number of strokes in the UK per year is projected to increase by 60% and the number of stroke survivors is projected to more than double. Under current patterns of care, the societal cost is projected to almost treble in constant prices over the period. The greatest increase is projected to be in social care costs-both public and private-which we anticipate will rise by as much as 250% between 2015 and 2035. CONCLUSION: the costs of stroke care in the UK are expected to rise rapidly over the next two decades unless measures to prevent strokes and to reduce the disabling effects of strokes can be successfully developed and implemented.

Identifying patient-level health and social care costs for older adults discharged from acute medical units in England.

BACKGROUND: acute medical units allow for those who need admission to be correctly identified, and for those who could be managed in ambulatory settings to be discharged. However, re-admission rates for older people following discharge from acute medical units are high and may be associated with substantial health and social care costs. OBJECTIVE: identifying patient-level health and social care costs for older people discharged from acute medical units in England. DESIGN: a prospective cohort study of health and social care resource use. SETTING: an acute medical unit in Nottingham, England. PARTICIPANTS: four hundred and fifty-six people aged over 70 who were discharged from an acute medical unit within 72 h of admission. METHODS: hospitalisation and social care data were collected for 3 months post-recruitment. In Nottingham, further approvals were gained to obtain data from general practices, ambulance services, intermediate care and mental healthcare. Resource use was combined with national unit costs. RESULTS: costs from all sectors were available for 250 participants. The mean (95% CI, median, range) total cost was £1926 (1579-2383, 659, 0-23,612). Contribution was: secondary care (76.1%), primary care (10.9%), ambulance service (0.7%), intermediate care (0.2%), mental healthcare (2.1%) and social care (10.0%). The costliest 10% of participants accounted for 50% of the cost. CONCLUSIONS: this study highlights the costs accrued by older people discharged from acute medical units (AMUs): they are mainly (76%) in secondary care and half of all costs were incurred by a minority of participants (10%).

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® Test from a US Societal Perspective.

Background and Objectives: The 21-gene assay (the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® test) estimates the 10-year risk of distant recurrence in hormone receptor positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions. The cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene assay compared against standard clinical-pathological risk tools alone for HR+/HER2- early-stage breast cancer was assessed using an economic model informed by evidence from randomized controlled trials. Materials and Methods: A cost-effectiveness model consisted of a decision-tree to stratify patients according to their Recurrence Score (RS) results and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy, followed by a Markov component to estimate the long-term costs and outcomes of the chosen treatment. Distributions of patients and distant recurrence probabilities were derived from the TAILORx (N0) and RxPONDER (N1) trials. The model was evaluated from a healthcare payer and societal perspective. Endocrine therapy and chemotherapy use were informed using clinical expert opinion to reflect US clinical practice and were combined with Medicare drug costs (2021) to estimate the cost of treatment. Societal costs included lost productivity and patient out-of-pocket costs obtained from literature. Results: The Oncotype DX test generated more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (N0: 0.25; N1: 0.08) at a lower cost (N0: -$13,395; N1: -$2526) compared to clinical-pathological risk alone from a societal cost perspective. The overall conclusions from the model did not change when considering a payer perspective. The main cost drivers were avoidance of distant recurrence for N0 (-$12,578), and the cost of adjuvant chemotherapy for N1 (-$2133). Lost productivity had a major impact in the societal perspective analysis (N0: -$4607; N1: -$1586). Conclusion: Adjuvant chemotherapy decisions based on the RS result led to more life year gains and lower healthcare costs (dominant) compared to using clinical-pathological risk factors alone among patients with HR+/HER2- N0 and N1 early-stage breast cancer.

The Identification of Seniors at Risk (ISAR) score to predict clinical outcomes and health service costs in older people discharged from UK acute medical units.

BACKGROUND: tools are required to identify high-risk older people in acute emergency settings so that appropriate services can be directed towards them. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate whether the Identification of Seniors At Risk (ISAR) predicts the clinical outcomes and health and social services costs of older people discharged from acute medical units. DESIGN: an observational cohort study using receiver-operator curve analysis to compare baseline ISAR to an adverse clinical outcome at 90 days (where an adverse outcome was any of death, institutionalisation, hospital readmission, increased dependency in activities of daily living (decrease of 2 or more points on the Barthel ADL Index), reduced mental well-being (increase of 2 or more points on the 12-point General Health Questionnaire) or reduced quality of life (reduction in the EuroQol-5D) and high health and social services costs over 90 days estimated from routine electronic service records. SETTING: two acute medical units in the East Midlands, UK. PARTICIPANTS: a total of 667 patients aged ≥70 discharged from acute medical units. RESULTS: an adverse outcome at 90 days was observed in 76% of participants. The ISAR was poor at predicting adverse outcomes (AUC: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.54-0.65) and fair for health and social care costs (AUC: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.59-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: adverse outcomes are common in older people discharged from acute medical units in the UK; the poor predictive ability of the ISAR in older people discharged from acute medical units makes it unsuitable as a sole tool in clinical decision-making.

The budget impact of utilizing the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test from a US healthcare payer perspective.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test is used to estimate distant recurrence risk of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer and inform decisions on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. A model-based budget impact analysis compared the Oncotype DX test in combination with clinical-pathological risk against using clinical-pathological risk alone for HR+/HER2- node-negative (N0) and node-positive (N1; 1-3 axillary lymph nodes) early-stage breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Test and medical costs associated with treatment of breast cancer were assessed through a US healthcare payer perspective. Distributions of patients by Recurrence Score result and distant recurrence probabilities with chemo-endocrine and endocrine therapy were derived from the TAILORx (N0) and RxPONDER (N1) trials. Changes in budget impact were evaluated over a 5-year horizon for a 1,000,000-member hypothetical health plan. RESULTS: With the Oncotype DX test, there was an incremental budget impact of $261,067 (per member per month (PMPM): $0.004), in the N0 population, and $56,143 (PMPM: $0.001) in the N1 population over the 5-year period. The largest budget impact reduction in the N0 population was attributed to reduced breast cancer recurrence costs (incremental: -$633,457, PMPM: -$0.011), while chemotherapy sparing reduced costs in the N1 population (incremental: -$94,884, PMPM: -$0.002). CONCLUSION: The clinical benefit of using the Oncotype DX test to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions has been shown in multiple randomized controlled trials. This analysis demonstrated that while using the Oncotype DX test to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions may slightly increase US healthcare costs over an initial 5-year time horizon (driven by a cost increase in the first year with cost savings reflected in remaining 4 years), there is significant scope for cost savings when assessing beyond this period due to avoided downstream costs of distant recurrence and long-term chemotherapy adverse events. PMPM costs also remain low across all populations examined, demonstrating a close-to-neutral budget impact.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® Test in Node-Negative Early Breast Cancer.

Background: The 21-gene assay (the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® test) is a validated multigene assay which produces the Recurrence Score® result (RS) to inform decisions on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-), hormone receptor positive (HR+) early invasive breast cancer. A model-based economic evaluation estimated the cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene assay against the use of clinical risk tools alone based on the latest evidence from prospective studies. Methods: The proportion of patients assigned to chemotherapy conditional on their RS result was obtained from retrospective data from the Clalit registry. The probability of distant recurrence with endocrine and chemo-endocrine therapy conditional on RS result was obtained from TAILORx and NSABP B-20 trials. The cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene assay compared to using clinical risk tools alone was estimated in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) over a lifetime horizon. Results: The 21-gene assay was more effective (0.17 more quality-adjusted life years) at a lower cost (-£519) over a lifetime compared to clinical risk alone. The model results were sensitive to assumptions around the magnitude of benefit of chemotherapy in the high RS result subgroup. Other assumptions underpinning the model, such as the proportion of patients assigned to chemotherapy in the low and mid-range RS result subgroups and long-term distant recurrence probabilities, had a smaller impact on the results. Conclusion: The analysis showed that the cost-effectiveness of the 21-gene assay is sensitive to assumptions for chemotherapy sparing for patients with RS 0-25 whose outcomes with endocrine therapy are no worse compared to chemotherapy-assigned patients, and a chemotherapy benefit in the RS 26-100 group. Future studies need to incorporate a wider set of tumour profiling tests other than the 21-gene assay to allow a direct comparison of their cost-effectiveness.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test in node-positive early breast cancer.

AIMS: Given the high rate of adverse events and high cost of adjuvant chemotherapy, it is optimal to avoid its use when endocrine therapy is equally effective at preventing distant recurrence of early breast cancer. The Oncotype DX test is a predictive and prognostic multigene assay used to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in early breast cancer based on a Recurrence Score (RS) result. A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis compared the Oncotype DX test to clinical risk tools alone for HR+/HER2- node-positive (1-3 axillary lymph nodes) early breast cancer patients based on results from the RxPONDER trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision-tree and Markov model was developed in Microsoft Excel. Distributions of patients and distant recurrence probabilities with endocrine and chemo-endocrine therapy were derived from the RxPONDER trial, TransATAC and SWOG-8814. Chemotherapy assignment data were obtained from the Clalit registry. The cost of adjuvant chemotherapy was based on the distribution of treatments used in the UK combined with published drug unit costs in the UK. The cost of distant recurrence and health state utility values were obtained from literature. RESULTS: The Oncotype DX test was found to be more effective (with an estimated 0.02 additional QALYs) at a lower estimated cost (-£989) compared to clinical risk tools alone. The results did not substantially change with more conservative clinical and cost scenarios. The RxPONDER trial was restricted to RS 0-25, and data synthesis with other studies was required to inform the analysis, which increased uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: The Oncotype DX test is highly likely to be cost-effective in node-positive early breast cancer. The results were driven by reduction in the use of chemotherapy with consequence avoidance of the costs and harmful effects of chemotherapy. Targeted treatment of a minority (11%) of women with RS 26-100 who benefit from chemotherapy reduced cost and improved survival.

Intravenous or oral antibiotic treatment in adults and children with cystic fibrosis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection: the TORPEDO-CF RCT.

BACKGROUND: People with cystic fibrosis are susceptible to pulmonary infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. This may become chronic and lead to increased mortality and morbidity. If treatment is commenced promptly, infection may be eradicated through prolonged antibiotic treatment. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of two eradication regimens. DESIGN: This was a Phase IV, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Seventy UK and two Italian cystic fibrosis centres. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were individuals with cystic fibrosis aged > 28 days old who had never had a P. aeruginosa infection or who had been infection free for 1 year. INTERVENTIONS: Fourteen days of intravenous ceftazidime and tobramycin or 3 months of oral ciprofloxacin. Inhaled colistimethate sodium was included in both regimens over 3 months. Consenting patients were randomly allocated to either treatment arm in a 1 : 1 ratio using simple block randomisation with random variable block length. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was eradication of P. aeruginosa at 3 months and remaining free of infection to 15 months. Secondary outcomes included time to reoccurrence, spirometry, anthropometrics, pulmonary exacerbations and hospitalisations. Primary analysis used intention to treat (powered for superiority). Safety analysis included patients who had received at least one dose of any of the study drugs. Cost-effectiveness analysis explored the cost per successful eradication and the cost per quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: Between 5 October 2010 and 27 January 2017, 286 patients were randomised: 137 patients to intravenous antibiotics and 149 patients to oral antibiotics. The numbers of participants achieving the primary outcome were 55 out of 125 (44%) in the intravenous group and 68 out of 130 (52%) in the oral group. Participants randomised to the intravenous group were less likely to achieve the primary outcome; although the difference between groups was not statistically significant, the clinically important difference that the trial aimed to detect was not contained within the confidence interval (relative risk 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.09; p = 0.184). Significantly fewer patients in the intravenous group (40/129, 31%) than in the oral group (61/136, 44.9%) were hospitalised in the 12 months following eradication treatment (relative risk 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 0.95; p = 0.02). There were no clinically important differences in other secondary outcomes. There were 32 serious adverse events in 24 participants [intravenous: 10/126 (7.9%); oral: 14/146 (9.6%)]. Oral therapy led to reductions in costs compared with intravenous therapy (-£5938.50, 95% confidence interval -£7190.30 to -£4686.70). Intravenous therapy usually necessitated hospital admission, which accounted for a large part of this cost. LIMITATIONS: Only 15 out of the 286 participants recruited were adults - partly because of the smaller number of adult centres participating in the trial. The possibility that the trial participants may be different from the rest of the cystic fibrosis population and may have had a better clinical status, and so be more likely to agree to the uncertainty of trial participation, cannot be ruled out. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous antibiotics did not achieve sustained eradication of P. aeruginosa in a greater proportion of cystic fibrosis patients. Although there were fewer hospitalisations in the intravenous group during follow-up, this confers no advantage over the oral therapy group, as intravenous eradication frequently requires hospitalisation. These results do not support the use of intravenous antibiotics to eradicate P. aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis. FUTURE WORK: Future research studies should combine long-term follow-up with regimens to reduce reoccurrence after eradication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN02734162 and EudraCT 2009-012575-10. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 65. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cystic fibrosis is a genetic condition that affects mucous glands, causing sticky mucus in the lungs and digestive system. People with cystic fibrosis are prone to lung infection with a bacterium called Pseudomonas aeruginosa, which can lead to serious long-term complications and death. It is possible to eradicate P. aeruginosa if antibiotics are started promptly and taken for several months. The Trial of Optimal TheRapy for Pseudomonas EraDicatiOn in Cystic Fibrosis (TORPEDO-CF) was designed to find out if intravenous ceftazidime and tobramycin were better at eradicating P. aeruginosa than oral ciprofloxacin. A total of 286 children, young people and adults with cystic fibrosis joined the study from 70 UK and two Italian centres. Approximately half of the participants received treatment with intravenous antibiotics and half with oral antibiotics. All participants received inhaled colistin for 3 months and were followed up for a minimum of 15 months. We studied whether or not either treatment eradicated P. aeruginosa, and if reinfection happened during follow-up. We also collected data on lung function, other chest infections and hospital admissions, and examined whether or not one treatment was more cost-effective than the other. In total, 15 adults joined TORPEDO-CF, so the study population may not totally match the wider cystic fibrosis population; however, in TORPEDO-CF, we found that intravenous antibiotics did not achieve persistent eradication of P. aeruginosa in a greater proportion of cystic fibrosis patients. We also found that oral antibiotics were more cost-effective than intravenous antibiotics. The intravenous antibiotics group had fewer hospital admissions during follow-up, but, as they were usually admitted for their initial treatment, this was not considered an advantage over the oral antibiotics group. The TORPEDO-CF results do not support the use of intravenous antibiotics to eradicate P. aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis and, when the findings of this trial are applied in routine clinical practice in the NHS, patients will most likely receive oral treatment as an outpatient, avoiding the need for hospital admission.

Optimisation of Perioperative Cardiovascular Management to Improve Surgical Outcome II (OPTIMISE II) trial: study protocol for a multicentre international trial of cardiac output-guided fluid therapy with low-dose inotrope infusion compared with usual care in patients undergoing major elective gastrointestinal surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative morbidity and mortality in older patients with comorbidities undergoing gastrointestinal surgery are a major burden on healthcare systems. Infections after surgery are common in such patients, prolonging hospitalisation and reducing postoperative short-term and long-term survival. Optimal management of perioperative intravenous fluids and inotropic drugs may reduce infection rates and improve outcomes from surgery. Previous small trials of cardiac-output-guided haemodynamic therapy algorithms suggested a modest reduction in postoperative morbidity. A large definitive trial is needed to confirm or refute this and inform widespread clinical practice. METHODS: The Optimisation of Perioperative Cardiovascular Management to Improve Surgical Outcome II (OPTIMISE II) trial is a multicentre, international, parallel group, open, randomised controlled trial. 2502 high-risk patients undergoing major elective gastrointestinal surgery will be randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio using minimisation to minimally invasive cardiac output monitoring to guide protocolised administration of intravenous fluid combined with low-dose inotrope infusion, or usual care. The trial intervention will be carried out during and for 4 hours after surgery. The primary outcome is postoperative infection of Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher within 30 days of randomisation. Participants and those delivering the intervention will not be blinded to treatment allocation; however, outcome assessors will be blinded when feasible. Participant recruitment started in January 2017 and is scheduled to last 3 years, within 50 hospitals worldwide. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION: The OPTIMISE II trial has been approved by the UK National Research Ethics Service and has been approved by responsible ethics committees in all participating countries. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a widely accessible peer-reviewed scientific journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN39653756.

Spot protein-creatinine ratio and spot albumin-creatinine ratio in the assessment of pre-eclampsia: a diagnostic accuracy study with decision-analytic model-based economic evaluation and acceptability analysis.

BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines highlighted the need for 'large, high-quality prospective studies comparing the various methods of measuring proteinuria in women with new-onset hypertensive disorders during pregnancy'. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to evaluate quantitative assessments of spot protein-creatinine ratio (SPCR) and spot albumin-creatinine ratio (SACR) in predicting severe pre-eclampsia (PE) compared with 24-hour urine protein measurement. The secondary objectives were to investigate interlaboratory assay variation, to evaluate SPCR and SACR thresholds in predicting adverse maternal and fetal outcomes and to assess the cost-effectiveness of these models. DESIGN: This was a prospective diagnostic accuracy cohort study, with decision-analytic modelling and a cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: The setting was 36 obstetric units in England, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women (aged ≥ 16 years), who were at > 20 weeks' gestation with confirmed gestational hypertension and trace or more proteinuria on an automated dipstick urinalysis. INTERVENTIONS: Women provided a spot urine sample for protein analysis (the recruitment sample) and were asked to collect a 24-hour urine sample, which was stored for secondary analysis. A further spot sample of urine was taken immediately before delivery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome data were collected from hospital records. There were four index tests on a spot sample of urine: (1) SPCR test (conducted at the local laboratory); (2) SPCR test [conducted at the central laboratory using the benzethonium chloride (BZC) assay]; (3) SPCR test [conducted at the central laboratory using the pyrogallol red (PGR) assay]; and (4) SACR test (conducted at the central laboratory using an automated chemistry analyser). The comparator tests on 24-hour urine collection were a central test using the BZC assay and a central test using the PGR assay. The primary reference standard was the NICE definition of severe PE. Secondary reference standards were a clinician diagnosis of severe PE, which is defined as treatment with magnesium sulphate or with severe PE protocol; adverse perinatal outcome; one or more of perinatal or infant mortality, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotising enterocolitis or grade III/IV intraventricular haemorrhage; and economic cost and outcomes. Health service data on service use and costs followed published economic models. RESULTS: In total, 959 women were available for primary analysis and 417 of them had severe PE. The diagnostic accuracy of the four assays on spot urine samples against the reference standards was similar. The three SPCR tests had sensitivities in excess of 90% at prespecified thresholds, with poor specificities and negative likelihood ratios of ≥ 0.1. The SACR test had a significantly higher sensitivity of 99% (confidence interval 98% to 100%) and lower specificity. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were similar (area under ROC curve between 0.87 and 0.89); the area under the central laboratory's SACR curve was significantly higher (p = 0.004). The central laboratory's SACR test was the most cost-effective option, generating an additional 0.03 quality-adjusted life-years at an additional cost of £45.07 compared with the local laboratory's SPCR test. The probabilistic analysis showed it to have a 100% probability of being cost-effective at the standard willingness-to-pay threshold recommended by NICE. LIMITATIONS: Implementation of NICE guidelines has led to an increased intervention rate in the study population that affected recruitment rates and led to revised sample size calculations. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from this clinical study does not support the recommendation of 24-hour urine sample collection in hypertensive pregnant women. The SACR test had better diagnostic performance when predicting severe pre-eclampsia. All four tests could potentially be used as rule-out tests for the NICE definition of severe PE. FUTURE WORK: Testing SACR at a threshold of 8 mg/mmol should be studied as a 'rule-out' test of proteinuria. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN82607486. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 61. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Economic evaluation of a community-based diagnostic pathway to stratify adults for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a Markov model informed by a feasibility study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of a risk stratification pathway, compared with standard care, for detecting non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in primary care. SETTING: Primary care general practices in England. PARTICIPANTS: Adults who have been identified in primary care to have a risk factor for developing NAFLD, that is, type 2 diabetes without a history of excessive alcohol use. INTERVENTION: A community-based pathway, which uses transient elastography and hepatologists to stratify patients at risk of NAFLD, has been implemented and demonstrated to be feasible (NCT02037867). Earlier identification could mean earlier treatments, referral to specialist and enrolment into surveillance programmes. DESIGN: The impact of earlier detection and treatment with the risk stratification pathway on progression to later stages of liver disease was examined using decision modelling with Markov chains to estimate lifetime health and economic effects of the two comparators. DATA SOURCES: Data from a prospective cross-sectional feasibility study indicating risk stratification pathway and standard care diagnostic accuracies were combined with a Markov model that comprised the following states: no/mild liver disease, significant liver disease, compensated cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplant and death. The model data were chosen from up-to-date UK sources, published literature and an expert panel. OUTCOME MEASURE: An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) indicating cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of the risk stratification pathway compared with standard care was estimated. RESULTS: The risk stratification pathway was more effective than standard care and costs £2138 per QALY gained. The ICER was most sensitive to estimates of the rate of fibrosis progression and the effect of treatment on reducing this, and ranged from -£1895 to £7032/QALY. The risk stratification pathway demonstrated an 85% probability of cost-effectiveness at the UK willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a community-based risk stratification pathway is likely to be cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02037867, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Economic Evaluation of a General Hospital Unit for Older People with Delirium and Dementia (TEAM Randomised Controlled Trial).

BACKGROUND: One in three hospital acute medical admissions is of an older person with cognitive impairment. Their outcomes are poor and the quality of their care in hospital has been criticised. A specialist unit to care for older people with delirium and dementia (the Medical and Mental Health Unit, MMHU) was developed and then tested in a randomised controlled trial where it delivered significantly higher quality of, and satisfaction with, care, but no significant benefits in terms of health status outcomes at three months. OBJECTIVE: To examine the cost-effectiveness of the MMHU for older people with delirium and dementia in general hospitals, compared with standard care. METHODS: Six hundred participants aged over 65 admitted for acute medical care, identified on admission as cognitively impaired, were randomised to the MMHU or to standard care on acute geriatric or general medical wards. Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, at 3-month follow-up, was assessed in trial-based economic evaluation (599/600 participants, intervention: 309). Multiple imputation and complete-case sample analyses were employed to deal with missing QALY data (55%). RESULTS: The total adjusted health and social care costs, including direct costs of the intervention, at 3 months was £7714 and £7862 for MMHU and standard care groups, respectively (difference -£149 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -298, 4)). The difference in QALYs gained was 0.001 (95% CI: -0.006, 0.008). The probability that the intervention was dominant was 58%, and the probability that it was cost-saving with QALY loss was 39%. At £20,000/QALY threshold, the probability of cost-effectiveness was 94%, falling to 59% when cost-saving QALY loss cases were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: The MMHU was strongly cost-effective using usual criteria, although considerably less so when the less acceptable situation with QALY loss and cost savings were excluded. Nevertheless, this model of care is worthy of further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01136148.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Specialist Geriatric Medical Intervention for Frail Older People Discharged from Acute Medical Units: Economic Evaluation in a Two-Centre Randomised Controlled Trial (AMIGOS).

BACKGROUND: Poor outcomes and high resource-use are observed for frail older people discharged from acute medical units. A specialist geriatric medical intervention, to facilitate Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, was developed to reduce the incidence of adverse outcomes and associated high resource-use in this group in the post-discharge period. OBJECTIVE: To examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of a specialist geriatric medical intervention for frail older people in the 90 days following discharge from an acute medical unit, compared with standard care. METHODS: Economic evaluation was conducted alongside a two-centre randomised controlled trial (AMIGOS). 433 patients (aged 70 or over) at risk of future health problems, discharged from acute medical units within 72 hours of attending hospital, were recruited in two general hospitals in Nottingham and Leicester, UK. Participants were randomised to the intervention, comprising geriatrician assessment in acute units and further specialist management, or to control where patients received no additional intervention over and above standard care. Primary outcome was incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: We undertook cost-effectiveness analysis for 417 patients (intervention: 205). The difference in mean adjusted QALYs gained between groups at 3 months was -0.001 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.009, 0.007). Total adjusted secondary and social care costs, including direct costs of the intervention, at 3 months were £4412 (€5624, $6878) and £4110 (€5239, $6408) for the intervention and standard care groups, the incremental cost was £302 (95% CI: 193, 410) [€385, $471]. The intervention was dominated by standard care with probability of 62%, and with 0% probability of cost-effectiveness (at £20,000/QALY threshold). CONCLUSIONS: The specialist geriatric medical intervention for frail older people discharged from acute medical unit was not cost-effective. Further research on designing effective and cost-effective specialist service for frail older people discharged from acute medical units is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN21800480 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN21800480.