Bayesian approaches to technology assessment and decision making

Until the mid-1980s, most economic analyses of healthcare technologies were based on decision theory and used decision-analytic models. The goal was to synthesize all relevant clinical and economic evidence for the purpose of assisting decision makers to efficiently allocate society's scarce resources. This was true of virtually all the early cost-effectiveness evaluations sponsored and/or published by the U.S. Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) (15), Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute, other elements of the U.S. Public Health Service, and of healthcare technology assessors in Europe and elsewhere around the world. Methodologists routinely espoused, or at minimum assumed, that these economic analyses were based on decision theory (8;24;25). Since decision theory is rooted in—in fact, an informal application of—Bayesian statistical theory, these analysts were conducting studies to assist healthcare decision making by appealing to a Bayesian rather than a classical, or frequentist, inference approach. But their efforts were not so labeled. Oddly, the statistical training of these decision analysts was invariably classical, not Bayesian. Many were not—and still are not—conversant with Bayesian statistical approaches

Orphan drugs and the NHS: Should we value rarity

Cost effectiveness plays an important part in current decisions about the funding of health technologies. Drugs for rare disease (orphan drugs) are often expensive to produce and, by definition, will benefit only small numbers of patients. Several countries have put measures in place to safeguard research and development of orphan drugs, but few get close to meeting the cost effectiveness criteria for funding by healthcare providers. We examine the justifications for special status for rare diseases and ask whether the cost effectiveness of drugs for rare or very rare diseases should be treated differently from that of other drugs and interventions

Drugs for exceptionally rare diseases: a commentary on Hughes et al

Recently in this journal, Hughes and colleagues discussed special funding status to ultra-orphan drugs. They concluded that there should be a uniform policy for the provision of orphan drugs across Europe; that complete restriction was impractical, and that UK policy should aspire to the values of the EU directive on orphan drugs. We critically assess these arguments, demonstrating that they failed to justify special status for treatments for rare diseases

Pre-operative optimisation employing dopexamine or adrenaline for patients undergoing major elective surgery: a cost-effectiveness analysis

<b>Objective</b>: To compare the cost and cost-effectiveness of a policy of pre-operative optimisation of oxygen delivery (using either adrenaline or dopexamine) to reduce the risk associated with major elective surgery, in high-risk patients. <b>Methods</b>: A cost-effectiveness analysis using data from a randomised controlled trial (RCT). In the RCT 138 patients undergoing major elective surgery were allocated to receive pre-operative optimisation employing either adrenaline or dopexamine (assigned randomly), or to receive routine peri-operative care. Differential health service costs were based on trial data on the number and cause of hospital in-patient days and the utilisation of health care resources. These were costed using unit costs from a UK hospital. The cost-effectiveness analysis related differential costs to differential life-years during a 2 year trial follow-up. <b>Results</b>: The mean number of in-patient days was 16 in the pre-optimised groups (19 adrenaline; 13 dopexamine) and 22 in the standard care group. The number (%) of deaths, over a 2 year follow-up, was 24 (26%) in the pre-optimised groups and 15 (33%) in the standard care group. The mean total costs were EUR 11,310 in the pre-optimised groups and EUR 16,965 in the standard care group. Life-years were 1.68 in the pre-optimised groups and 1.46 in the standard care group. The probability that pre-operative optimisation is less costly than standard care is 98%. The probability that it dominates standard care is 93%. Conclusions: Based on resource use and effectiveness data collected in the trial, pre-operative optimisation of high-risk surgical patients undergoing major elective surgery is cost-effective compared with standard treatment

Bayesian value-of-infomation analysis: an application to a policy model of Alzheimer's disease

A framework is presented that distinguishes the conceptually separate decisions of which treatment strategy is optimal from the question of whether more information is required to inform this choice in the future. The authors argue that the choice of treatment strategy should be based on expected utility, and the only valid reason to characterize the uncertainty surrounding outcomes of interest is to establish the value of acquiring additional information. A Bayesian decision theoretic approach is demonstrated through a probabilistic analysis of a published policy model of Alzheimer’s disease. The expected value of perfect information is estimated for the decision to adopt a new pharmaceutical for the population of patients with Alzheimer’s disease in the United States. This provides an upper bound on the value of additional research. The value of information is also estimated for each of the model inputs. This analysis can focus future research by identifying those parameters where more precise estimates would be most valuable and indicating whether an experimental design would be required. We also discuss how this type of analysis can also be used to design experimental research efficiently (identifying optimal sample size and optimal sample allocation) based on the marginal cost and marginal benefit of sample information. Value-of-information analysis can provide a measure of the expected payoff from proposed research, which can be used to set priorities in research and development. It can also inform an efficient regulatory framework for new healthcare technologies: an analysis of the value of information would define when a claim for a new technology should be deemed substantiated and when evidence should be considered competent and reliable when it is not cost-effective to gather any more information

Drugs for exceptionally rare diseases: a commentary on Hughes et al

Recently in this journal, Hughes and colleagues discussed special funding status to ultra-orphan drugs. They concluded that there should be a uniform policy for the provision of orphan drugs across Europe; that complete restriction was impractical, and that UK policy should aspire to the values of the EU directive on orphan drugs. We critically assess these arguments, demonstrating that they failed to justify special status for treatments for rare diseases

Priority setting for research in health care: An application of value of information analysis to glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome

The purpose of this study is to explain the rationale for the value of information approach to priority setting for research and to describe the methods intuitively for those familiar with basic decision analytical modeling. A policy-relevant case study is used to show the feasibility of the method and to illustrate the type of output that is generated and how these might be used to frame research recommendations. The case study relates to the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists for the treatment of patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. This is an area that recently has been appraised by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence

Modelling the cost effectiveness of interferon beta and glatiramer acetate in the management of multiple sclerosis

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of four disease modifying treatments (interferon betas and glatiramer acetate) for relapsing remitting and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: Modelling cost effectiveness. SETTING: UK NHS. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per quality adjusted life year gained. RESULTS: The base case cost per quality adjusted life year gained by using any of the four treatments ranged from £42 000 ($66 469; 61 630) to £98 000 based on efficacy information in the public domain. Uncertainty analysis suggests that the probability of any of these treatments having a cost effectiveness better than £20 000 at 20 years is below 20%. The key determinants of cost effectiveness were the time horizon, the progression of patients after stopping treatment, differential discount rates, and the price of the treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Cost effectiveness varied markedly between the interventions. Uncertainty around point estimates was substantial. This uncertainty could be reduced by conducting research on the true magnitude of the effect of these drugs, the progression of patients after stopping treatment, the costs of care, and the quality of life of the patients. Price was the key modifiable determinant of the cost effectiveness of these treatments

Bayesian Value-of-Information Analysis: An Application to a Policy Model of Alzheimer's Disease

A framework is presented which distinguishes the conceptually separate decisions of which treatment strategy is optimal from the question of whether more information is required to inform this choice in the future. The authors argue that the choice of treatment strategy should be based on expected utility and the only valid reason to characterise the uncertainty surrounding outcomes of interest is to establish the value of acquiring additional information. A Bayesian decision theoretic approach is demonstrated though a probabilistic analysis of a published policy model of Alzheimer’s disease. The expected value of perfect information is estimated for the decision to adopt a new pharmaceutical for the population of US Alzheimer’s disease patients. This provides an upper bound on the value of additional research. The value of information is also estimated for each of the model inputs. This analysis can focus future research by identifying those parameters where more precise estimates would be most valuable, and indicating whether an experimental design would be required. We also discuss how this type of analysis can also be used to design experimental research efficiently (identifying optimal sample size and optimal sample allocation) based on the marginal cost and marginal benefit of sample information. Value-of-information analysis can provide a measure of the expected payoff from proposed research, which can be used to set priorities in research and development. It can also inform an efficient regulatory framework for new health care technologies: an analysis of the value of information would define when a claim for a new technology should be deemed “substantiated” and when evidence should be considered “competent and reliable” when it is not cost-effective to gather anymore information.stochastic CEA; Bayesian decision theory; value of information.