12,457 research outputs found

    Evidence review : liraglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

    Get PDF
    This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of liraglutide in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, based upon the manufacturer’s submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The manufacturer proposed the use of liraglutide as a second or third drug in patients with type 2 diabetes whose glycaemic control was unsatisfactory with metformin, with or without a second oral glucose-lowering drug. The submission included six manufacturer-sponsored trials that compared the efficacy of liraglutide against other glucose-lowering agents. Not all of the trials were relevant to the decision problem. The most relevant were Liraglutide Effects and Actions in Diabetes 5 (LEAD-5) (liraglutide used as part of triple therapy and compared against insulin glargine) and LEAD-6 [liraglutide in triple therapy compared against another glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist, exenatide]. Five of the six trials were published in full and one was then unpublished. Two doses of liraglutide, 1.2 and 1.8 mg, were used in some trials, but in the two comparisons in triple therapy, against glargine and exenatide, only the 1.8-mg dose was used. Liraglutide in both doses was found to be clinically effective in lowering blood glucose concentration [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)], reducing weight (unlike other glucose-lowering agents, such as sulphonylureas, glitazones and insulins, which cause weight gain) and also reducing systolic blood pressure (SBP). Hypoglycaemia was uncommon. The ERG carried out meta-analyses comparing the 1.2- and 1.8-mg doses of liraglutide, which suggested that there was no difference in control of diabetes, and only a slight difference in weight loss, insufficient to justify the extra cost. The cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out using the Center for Outcomes Research model. The health benefit was reported as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The manufacturer estimated the cost-effectiveness to be £15,130 per QALY for liraglutide 1.8 mg compared with glargine, £10,054 per QALY for liraglutide 1.8 mg compared with exenatide, £10,465 per QALY for liraglutide 1.8 mg compared with sitagliptin, and £9851 per QALY for liraglutide 1.2 mg compared with sitagliptin. The ERG conducted additional sensitivity analyses and concluded that the factors that carried most weight were: in the comparison with glargine, the direct utility effects of body mass index (BMI) changes and SBP, with some additional contribution from HbA1c in the comparison with exenatide, HbA1c, with some additional effects from cholesterol and triglycerides in the comparison with sitagliptin, HbA1c and direct utility effects of BMI changes. The European Medicines Agency has approved liraglutide in dual therapy with other oral glucose-lowering agents. NICE guidance recommends the use of liraglutide 1.2 mg in triple therapy when glycaemic control remains or becomes inadequate with a combination of two oral glucose-lowering drugs. The use of liraglutide 1.2 mg in a dual therapy is indicated only in patients who are intolerant of, or have contraindications to, three oral glucose-lowering drugs. The use of liraglutide 1.8 mg was not approved by NICE. The ERG recommends research into the (currently unlicensed) use of liraglutide in combination with long-acting insulin

    Clinical and cost-effectiveness of capecitabine and tegafur with uracil for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: systematic review and economic evaluation

    Get PDF
    Objectives: To evaluate the clinical and costeffectiveness of capecitabine and tegafur with uracil (UFT/LV) as first-line treatments for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, as compared with 5- fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/FA) regimens. Data sources: Electronic databases, reference lists of relevant articles and sponsor submissions were also consulted. Review methods: Systematic searches, selection against criteria and quality assessment were performed to obtain data from relevant studies. Costs were estimated through resource-use data taken from the published trials and the unpublished sponsor submissions. Unit costs were taken from published sources, where available. An economic evaluation was undertaken to compare the cost-effectiveness of capecitabine and UFT/LV with three intravenous 5- FU/LV regimens widely used in the UK: the Mayo, the modified de Gramont regimen and the inpatient de Gramont regimens. Results: The evidence suggests that treatment with capecitabine improves overall response rates and has an improved adverse effect profile in comparison with 5-FU/LV treatment with the Mayo regimen, with the exception of hand–foot syndrome. Time to disease progression or death after treatment with UFT/LV in one study appears to be shorter than after treatment with 5-FU/LV with the Mayo regimen, although it also had an improved adverse effect profile. Neither capecitabine nor UFT/LV appeared to improve healthrelated quality of life. Little information on patient preference was available for UFT/LV, but there was indicated a strong preference for this over 5-FU/LV. The total cost of capecitabine and UFT/LV treatments were estimated at £2111 and £3375, respectively, compared with the total treatment cost for the Mayo regimen of £3579. Cost estimates were also presented for the modified de Gramont and inpatient de Gramont regimens. These were £3684 and £6155, respectively. No survival advantage was shown in the RCTs of the oral drugs against the Mayo regimen. Cost savings of capecitabine and UFT/LV over the Mayo regimen were estimated to be £1461 and £209, respectively. Drug acquisition costs were higher for the oral therapies than for the Mayo regimen, but were offset by lower administration costs. Adverse event treatment costs were similar across the three regimens. It was inferred that there was no survival difference between the oral drugs and the de Gramont regimens. Cost savings of capecitabine and UFT/LV over the modified de Gramont regimen were estimated to be £1353 and £101, respectively, and over the inpatient de Gramont regimen were estimated to be £4123 and £2870, respectively. Conclusions: The results show that there are cost savings associated with the use of oral therapies. No survival difference has been proven between the oral drugs and the Mayo regimen. In addition, no evidence of a survival difference between the Mayo regimen and the de Gramont regimens has been identified. However, improved progression-free survival and an improved adverse event profile have been shown for the de Gramont regimen over the Mayo regimen. Further research is recommended into the following areas: quality of life data should be included in trials of colorectal cancer treatments; the place of effective oral treatments in the treatment of colorectal cancer, the safety mechanisms needed to ensure compliance and the monitoring of adverse effects; the optimum duration of treatment; the measurement of patient preference; and a phase III comparative trial of capecitabine and UFT/LV versus modified de Gramont treatment to determine whether there was any survival advantage and to collate the necessary economic data

    Acupuncture for chronic neck pain: a pilot for a randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Acupuncture is increasingly being used for many conditions including chronic neck pain. However the evidence remains inconclusive, indicating the need for further well-designed research. The aim of this study was to conduct a pilot randomised controlled parallel arm trial, to establish key features required for the design and implementation of a large-scale trial on acupuncture for chronic neck pain. Methods: Patients whose GPs had diagnosed neck pain were recruited from one general practice, and randomised to receive usual GP care only, or acupuncture ( up to 10 treatments over 3 months) as an adjunctive treatment to usual GP care. The primary outcome measure was the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) at 3 months. The primary analysis was to determine the sample size for the full scale study. Results: Of the 227 patients with neck pain identified from the GP database, 28 (12.3%) consenting patients were eligible to participate in the pilot and 24 (10.5%) were recruited to the trial. Ten patients were randomised to acupuncture, receiving an average of eight treatments from one of four acupuncturists, and 14 were randomised to usual GP care alone. The sample size for the full scale trial was calculated from a clinically meaningful difference of 5% on the NPQ and, from this pilot, an adjusted standard deviation of 15.3%. Assuming 90% power at the 5% significance level, a sample size of 229 would be required in each arm in a large-scale trial when allowing for a loss to follow-up rate of 14%. In order to achieve this sample, one would need to identify patients from databases of GP practices with a total population of 230,000 patients, or approximately 15 GP practices roughly equal in size to the one involved in this study (i.e. 15,694 patients). Conclusion: This pilot study has allowed a number of recommendations to be made to facilitate the design of a large-scale trial, which in turn will help to clarify the existing evidence base on acupuncture for neck pain

    Costs of Adverse Drug Events in German Hospitals—A Microcosting Study

    Get PDF
    AbstractObjectiveIn Germany, only limited data are available to quantify the attributable resource utilization associated with adverse drug events (ADEs). The aim of this study was twofold: first, to calculate the direct treatment costs associated with ADEs leading to hospitalization and, second, to derive the excess costs and extra hospital days attributable to ADEs of inpatient treatments in selected German hospitals.MethodsThis was a retrospective and medical record–based study performed from the hospitals' perspective based on administrative accounting data from three hospitals (49,462 patients) in Germany. Total treatment costs (“analysis 1”) and excess costs (i.e., incremental resource utilization) between patients suffering from an ADE and those without ADEs were calculated by means of a propensity score–based matching algorithm (“analysis 2”).ResultsMean treatment costs (“analysis 1”) of ADEs leading to hospitalization (n = 564) were €1,978 ± 2,036 (range €191–18,147; median €1,446; €843–2,480 [Q1–Q3]). In analysis 2, the mean costs of inpatients suffering from an ADE (n = 1,891) as a concomitant disease or complication (€5,113 ± 10,059; range €179–246,288; median €2,701; €1,636–5,111 [Q1–Q3]) were significantly higher (€970; P < 0.0001) than those of non-ADE inpatients (€4,143 ± 6,968; range €154–148,479; median €2,387; €1,432–4,701 [Q1–Q3]). Mean inpatient length of stay of ADE patients (12.7 ± 17.2 days) and non-ADE patients (9.8 ± 11.6 days) differed by 2.9 days (P < 0.0001). A nationwide extrapolation resulted in annual total treatment costs of €1.058 billion.ConclusionsThis is one of the first administrative data–based analyses calculating the economic consequences of ADEs in Germany. Further efforts are necessary to improve pharmacotherapy and relieve health care payers of preventable treatment costs

    Representation of probabilistic scientific knowledge

    Get PDF
    This article is available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund. Copyright © 2013 Soldatova et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.The theory of probability is widely used in biomedical research for data analysis and modelling. In previous work the probabilities of the research hypotheses have been recorded as experimental metadata. The ontology HELO is designed to support probabilistic reasoning, and provides semantic descriptors for reporting on research that involves operations with probabilities. HELO explicitly links research statements such as hypotheses, models, laws, conclusions, etc. to the associated probabilities of these statements being true. HELO enables the explicit semantic representation and accurate recording of probabilities in hypotheses, as well as the inference methods used to generate and update those hypotheses. We demonstrate the utility of HELO on three worked examples: changes in the probability of the hypothesis that sirtuins regulate human life span; changes in the probability of hypotheses about gene functions in the S. cerevisiae aromatic amino acid pathway; and the use of active learning in drug design (quantitative structure activity relation learning), where a strategy for the selection of compounds with the highest probability of improving on the best known compound was used. HELO is open source and available at https://github.com/larisa-soldatova/HELO.This work was partially supported by grant BB/F008228/1 from the UK Biotechnology & Biological Sciences Research Council, from the European Commission under the FP7 Collaborative Programme, UNICELLSYS, KU Leuven GOA/08/008 and ERC Starting Grant 240186

    Risk Perception and Drug Safety Evaluation

    Get PDF
    The authors present a Risk communication framework based on a survey of empirical research concerning public Risk perceptions. They also apply it to the area of pharmaceutical regulation to suggest more effective regulatory strategies

    Effectiveness of enhanced diabetes care to patients of South Asian ethnicity : the United Kingdom Asian Diabetes Study (UKADS) : a cluster randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Delivering high quality and evidence based healthcare to deprived sectors of the community is a major goal for society. We investigated the effectiveness of a culturally sensitive enhanced care package in UK general practice in improving cardiovascular risk factors in South Asian patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: 21 inner city practices were randomised to intervention (enhanced practice nurse time, link worker and diabetes specialist nurse support) (n=868) or control (standard care) (n=618) groups. Prescribing algorithms with clearly defined targets were provided for all practices. Main outcome measures comprised changes in blood pressure, total cholesterol and glycaemic control (HbA1c) after 2 years. Findings: At baseline, groups were similar with respect to age, sex and cardiovascular risk factors. Comparing treatment groups, after adjustment for confounders, and clustering, differences in diastolic blood pressure (1.91mmHg, P=0.0001) and mean arterial pressure (1.36mmHg, P=0.0180) were significant. There were no significant differences between groups for total cholesterol or HbA1c. Economic analysis indicates the nurse-led intervention was not cost-effective. Across the whole study population systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure and cholesterol decreased significantly by 4.9mmHg, 3.8mmHg and 0.45mmol/L respectively, but there was no change in HbA1c. Interpretation: Additional, although limited, benefits were observed from our culturally enhanced care package over and above the secular changes achieved in the UK in recent years. Stricter targets in general practice and further measures to motivate patients are needed to maximise healthcare outcomes in South Asian patients with diabetes

    Towards the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics in bipolar disorder.

    Get PDF
    BackgroundBipolar disorder (BD) is a psychiatric illness defined by pathological alterations between the mood states of mania and depression, causing disability, imposing healthcare costs and elevating the risk of suicide. Although effective treatments for BD exist, variability in outcomes leads to a large number of treatment failures, typically followed by a trial and error process of medication switches that can take years. Pharmacogenetic testing (PGT), by tailoring drug choice to an individual, may personalize and expedite treatment so as to identify more rapidly medications well suited to individual BD patients.DiscussionA number of associations have been made in BD between medication response phenotypes and specific genetic markers. However, to date clinical adoption of PGT has been limited, often citing questions that must be answered before it can be widely utilized. These include: What are the requirements of supporting evidence? How large is a clinically relevant effect? What degree of specificity and sensitivity are required? Does a given marker influence decision making and have clinical utility? In many cases, the answers to these questions remain unknown, and ultimately, the question of whether PGT is valid and useful must be determined empirically. Towards this aim, we have reviewed the literature and selected drug-genotype associations with the strongest evidence for utility in BD.SummaryBased upon these findings, we propose a preliminary panel for use in PGT, and a method by which the results of a PGT panel can be integrated for clinical interpretation. Finally, we argue that based on the sufficiency of accumulated evidence, PGT implementation studies are now warranted. We propose and discuss the design for a randomized clinical trial to test the use of PGT in the treatment of BD

    Seeking out non-public information : sell-side analysts and the freedom of information act

    Get PDF
    A number of sell-side healthcare analysts gain access to information outside the purview of management through Freedom of Information Act requests to the Food and Drug Administration for records on factory inspections, complaints, and drug and medical device applications. Using a difference-in-differences methodology, we find that buy (sell) recommendations and upgrades (downgrades) earn higher (lower) stock returns over the year following the receipt of FDA records. We also examine the type of information revealed in FDA factory inspection reports, and find that analysts are less likely to downgrade and are less pessimistic in their recommendations than the consensus recommendation when the information contained in the FDA report is not particularly severe. Our findings are consistent with a subset of analysts utilizing non-public information channels independent of management to gain value-relevant information about their covered firms
    corecore