Cost-effectiveness evidence on approved cancer drugs in Ireland: the limits of data availability and implications for public accountability

Background: We surveyed evidence published by Ireland’s National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics (NCPE) on the cost-effectiveness of cancer drugs approved for funding within the Irish public healthcare system. The purpose is threefold: to assess the completeness and clarity of publicly available cost-effectiveness data of such therapies; to provide summary estimates of that data; to consider the implications of constraints on data availability for accountability regarding healthcare resource allocation. Methods: The National Cancer Control Programme lists 91 drug-indication pairs approved between June 2012 and July 2020. Records were retrieved from the NCPE website for each drug-indication pair, including, where available, health technology assessment (HTA) summary reports. We assessed what cost-effectiveness data regarding approved interventions is available, aggregated it and considered the consequences of reporting constraints. Results: Among the 91 drug-indication pairs 61 were reimbursed following full HTA, 22 after a rapid review process and 8 have no corresponding NCPE record. Of the 61 where an HTA report was available, 41 presented costs and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) estimates of the interventions compared. Cost estimates and corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are based on prices on application for reimbursement. Reimbursed prices are not published. Aggregating over the drug-indication pairs for which data is available, we find a mean incremental health gain of 0.85 QALY and an aggregate ICER of €100,295/QALY, which exceeds Ireland’s cost-effectiveness threshold of €45,000/QALY. Conclusion: Reimbursement applications by pharmaceutical manufacturers for cancer drugs typically exceed Ireland’s cost-effectiveness threshold, often by a considerable margin. On aggregate, the additional total net cost of new drugs relative to current treatments needs to be more than halved for the prices sought on application to be justified for reimbursement. Commercial confidentiality regarding prices and cost-effectiveness upon reimbursement compromises accountability regarding the fair and efficient allocation of scarce healthcare resources.Health Research BoardOpen Access funding provided by the IReL Consortiu

What do non-ophthalmic health professionals know about retinoblastoma: a survey in Saudi Arabia

Background: The aim of the study is to estimate the level of knowledge about retinoblastoma (Rb) and its determinants among non-ophthalmic health professionals of Qassim region of Saudi Arabia.Methods: This cross-sectional survey was held in 2016 in primary health centres (PHC) and general hospitals in the study area. In addition to demography like age, gender, education, place of work, participants replied to five questions related to Rb with close-ended questions to respond. They were matched to the expert group's answers to estimate the level of knowledge.Results: One hundred and fifty-two non-ophthalmic doctors participated in the survey. The excellent grade of knowledge of Rb was in 66 [43.3% (95% confidence interval 35.5-51.3)] of participants. Very poor level of knowledge was noted in 13 [8.6% (95% CI 4.1-13.0)] participants. Male gender (P = 0.02) and physician category (P = 0.02) were significantly associated with the excellent grade of Rb related knowledge. The participant’s response by type of questions varied significantly (P<0.001).Conclusions: More than half of the non-ophthalmic health professionals had less than desired knowledge about Rb. Health education about Rb to health professionals could be gender sensitive and based on the type of profession. Increasing the awareness about retinoblastoma among non-ophthalmic health professional is important

The association between different blood group systems and susceptibility to COVID-19: a single center cross-sectional study from Saudi Arabia

Background: Since the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic, many associated factors have been investigated to clarify the susceptibility and severity among the affected individuals. Biological markers can play an important role in identification of individual susceptibility to such pandemic. Growing evidence suggest the influence of different blood group systems on susceptibility to COVID-19 virus, with a particular blood type conferring selection advantage. Objectives: The study aimed to determine the association of ABO, Rhesus (D) and P1 blood groups with COVID-19 susceptibility in Taif city, Western Saudi Arabia. Methods: ABO, D and P1 blood antigens were determined in 104 blood samples of COVID-19 patients versus 100 control samples using either automated immunohematology analyser or test tube method. Statistical differences between patients and control samples were calculated based on p-value where results of ≤ 0.05 were considered significant. Results: O+ve blood group constituted the predominant type among the studied samples. Determination of P1 antigen showed significant association where Anti-P1 was positive in 76.9% of patients compared to 61.0% of controls with a P value of 0.01 conferring the susceptibility of P1+ve patients to COVID-19. Conclusion: Although our study showed no significant association between ABO and D, and susceptibility to COVID-19, there was a significant association between P1+ve and COVID-19. P1+ve participants were 2.131 times more associated with the risk of COVID-19 infection than those with Anti P1-ve. Thus, P1 antigen can be used as a biological marker for identification of individuals susceptibility to COVID-19. It is strongly advised that such individuals should consider extra protective measures.Further studies on other contributing factors should also be considered for more scientific clarity. Keywords: ABO Blood group; Rh(D); P1 antigen, COVID-19

Exome-wide association study to identify rare variants influencing COVID-19 outcomes : Results from the Host Genetics Initiative

Publisher Copyright: Copyright: © 2022 Butler-Laporte et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Host genetics is a key determinant of COVID-19 outcomes. Previously, the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative genome-wide association study used common variants to identify multiple loci associated with COVID-19 outcomes. However, variants with the largest impact on COVID-19 outcomes are expected to be rare in the population. Hence, studying rare variants may provide additional insights into disease susceptibility and pathogenesis, thereby informing therapeutics development. Here, we combined whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing from 21 cohorts across 12 countries and performed rare variant exome-wide burden analyses for COVID-19 outcomes. In an analysis of 5,085 severe disease cases and 571,737 controls, we observed that carrying a rare deleterious variant in the SARS-CoV-2 sensor toll-like receptor TLR7 (on chromosome X) was associated with a 5.3-fold increase in severe disease (95% CI: 2.75–10.05, p = 5.41x10-7). This association was consistent across sexes. These results further support TLR7 as a genetic determinant of severe disease and suggest that larger studies on rare variants influencing COVID-19 outcomes could provide additional insights.Peer reviewe

SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and COVID-19 disease severity are associated with genetic variants affecting gene expression in a variety of tissues

Variability in SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and COVID-19 disease severity between individuals is partly due to genetic factors. Here, we identify 4 genomic loci with suggestive associations for SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and 19 for COVID-19 disease severity. Four of these 23 loci likely have an ethnicity-specific component. Genome-wide association study (GWAS) signals in 11 loci colocalize with expression quantitative trait loci (eQTLs) associated with the expression of 20 genes in 62 tissues/cell types (range: 1:43 tissues/gene), including lung, brain, heart, muscle, and skin as well as the digestive system and immune system. We perform genetic fine mapping to compute 99% credible SNP sets, which identify 10 GWAS loci that have eight or fewer SNPs in the credible set, including three loci with one single likely causal SNP. Our study suggests that the diverse symptoms and disease severity of COVID-19 observed between individuals is associated with variants across the genome, affecting gene expression levels in a wide variety of tissue types

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

A first update on mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19

peer reviewe