From complexity to clarity:how directed acyclic graphs enhance the study design of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

While frameworks to systematically assess bias in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) and frameworks on causal inference are well established, they are less frequently integrated beyond the data analysis stages. This paper proposes the use of Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) in the design stage of SRMAs. We hypothesize that DAGs created and registered a priori can offer a useful approach to more effective and efficient evidence synthesis. DAGs provide a visual representation of the complex assumed relationships between variables within and beyond individual studies prior to data analysis, facilitating discussion among researchers, guiding data analysis, and may lead to more targeted inclusion criteria or set of data extraction items. We illustrate this argument through both experimental and observational case examples.</p

The effect of mindfulness-based interventions on reducing stress in future health professionals:A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Students in health professions often face high levels of stress due to demanding academic schedules, heavy workloads, disrupted work–life balance, and sleep deprivation. Addressing stress during their education can prevent negative consequences for their mental health and the well-being of their future patients. Previous reviews on the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) focused on working health professionals or included a wide range of intervention types and durations. This study aims to investigate the effect of 6- to 12-week MBIs with 1- to 2-h weekly sessions on stress in future health professionals. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published in English by searching Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO. We used post-intervention stress levels and standard deviations to assess the ability of MBIs to reduce stress, summarized by the standardized mean difference (SMD). This review is reported according to the PRISMA checklist (2020). We identified 2932 studies, of which 11 were included in the systematic review and 10 had sufficient data for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The overall effect of MBIs on reducing stress was a SMD of 0.60 (95% CI [0.27, 0.94]). Our study provides evidence that MBIs have a moderate reducing effect on stress in students in health professions; however, given the high risk of bias, these findings should be interpreted with caution, and further high-quality studies are needed.</p

Medical Imaging Decision And Support (MIDAS):Study protocol for a multi-centre cluster randomized trial evaluating the ESR iGuide

Objectives: Medical imaging plays an essential role in healthcare. As a diagnostic test, imaging is prone to substantial overuse and potential overdiagnosis, with dire consequences to patient outcomes and health care costs. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) were developed to guide referring physicians in making appropriate imaging decisions. This study will evaluate the effect of implementing a CDSS (ESR iGuide) with versus without active decision support in a physician order entry on the appropriate use of imaging tests and ordering behaviour. Methods: A protocol for a multi-center cluster-randomized trial with departments acting as clusters, combined with a before-after-revert design. Four university hospitals with eight participating departments each for a total of thirty-two clusters will be included in the study. All departments start in control condition with structured data entry of the clinical indication and tracking of the imaging exams requested. Initially, the CDSS is implemented and all physicians remain blinded to appropriateness scores based on the ESR imaging referral guidelines. After randomization, half of the clusters switch to the active intervention of decision support. Physicians in the active condition are made aware of the categorization of their requests as appropriate, under certain conditions appropriate, or inappropriate, and appropriate exams are suggested. Physicians may change their requests in response to feedback. In the revert condition, active decision support is removed to study the educational effect. Results/conclusions: The main outcome is the proportion of inappropriate diagnostic imaging exams requested per cluster. Secondary outcomes are the absolute number of imaging exams, radiation from diagnostic imaging, and medical costs. Trial registration number: Approval from the Medical Ethics Review Committee was obtained under protocol numbers 20–069 (Augsburg), B 238/21 (Kiel), 20–318 (Lübeck) and 2020–15,125 (Mainz). The trial is registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov</p

Developing a programmatic approach to faculty development and scholarship using the ASPIRE criteria:AMEE Guide No. 165

Faculty Development (FD) has become essential in shaping design, delivery and quality assurance of health professions education. The growth of FD worldwide has led to a heightened expectation for quality and organizational integrity in the delivery of FD programmes. To address this, AMEE, An International Association for Health Professions Education, developed quality standards for FD through the development of the AMEE ASPIRE to Excellence criteria. This guide uses the ASPIRE criteria as a framework for health professions educators who wish to establish or expand approaches to FD delivery and scholarship within their institutions.</p

Emerging Therapies for COVID-19: The Value of Information From More Clinical Trials

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitates time-sensitive policy and implementation decisions regarding new therapies in the face of uncertainty. This study aimed to quantify consequences of approving therapies or pursuing further research: immediate approval, use only in research, approval with research (eg, emergency use authorization), or reject. Methods: Using a cohort state-transition model for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we estimated quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs associated with the following interventions: hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, casirivimab-imdevimab, dexamethasone, baricitinib-remdesivir, tocilizumab, lopinavir-ritonavir, interferon beta-1a, and usual care. We used the model outcomes to conduct cost-effectiveness and value of information analyses from a US healthcare perspective and a lifetime horizon. Results: Assuming a $100 000-per-QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, only remdesivir, casirivimab-imdevimab, dexamethasone, baricitinib-remdesivir, and tocilizumab were (cost-) effective (incremental net health benefit 0.252, 0.164, 0.545, 0.668, and 0.524 QALYs and incremental net monetary benefit$25 249, $16 375,$54 526, $66 826, and$52 378). Our value of information analyses suggest that most value can be obtained if these 5 therapies are approved for immediate use rather than requiring additional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (net value $20.6 billion,$13.4 billion, $7.4 billion,$54.6 billion, and $7.1 billion), hydroxychloroquine (net value$198 million) is only used in further RCTs if seeking to demonstrate decremental cost-effectiveness and otherwise rejected, and interferon beta-1a and lopinavir-ritonavir are rejected (ie, neither approved nor additional RCTs). Conclusions: Estimating the real-time value of collecting additional evidence during the pandemic can inform policy makers and clinicians about the optimal moment to implement therapies and whether to perform further research

Second-Line Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma:A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Background: First-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) achieves durable remission in approximately 60% of patients. In relapsed or refractory disease, only about 20% achieve durable remission with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The ZUMA-7 (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel]) and TRANSFORM (lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel]) trials demonstrated superior event-free survival (and, in ZUMA-7, overall survival) in primary-refractory or early-relapsed (high-risk) DLBCL with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) compared with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT; however, list prices for CAR-T exceed $400000 per infusion. Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of second-line CAR-T versus salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT. Design: State-transition microsimulation model. Data Sources: ZUMA-7, TRANSFORM, other trials, and observational data. Target Population: “High-risk” patients with DLBCL. Time Horizon: Lifetime. Perspective: Health care sector. Intervention: Axi-cel or liso-cel versus ASCT. Outcome Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) in 2022 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of$200 000 per QALY. Results of Base-Case Analysis: The increase in median overall survival was 4 months for axi-cel and 1 month for liso-cel. For axi-cel, the ICER was $684 225 per QALY and the iNMB was -$107 642. For liso-cel, the ICER was $1 171 909 per QALY and the iNMB was -$102 477. Results of Sensitivity Analysis: To be cost-effective with a WTP of $200 000, the cost of CAR-T would have to be reduced to$321 123 for axi-cel and $313 730 for liso-cel. Implementation in high-risk patients would increase U.S. health care spending by approximately$6.8 billion over a 5-year period. Limitation: Differences in preinfusion bridging therapies precluded cross-trial comparisons. Conclusion: Neither second-line axi-cel nor liso-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $200 000 per QALY. Clinical outcomes improved incrementally, but costs of CAR-T must be lowered substantially to enable cost-effectiveness. Primary Funding Source: No research-specific funding.</p

Making Drug Approval Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty:Cumulative Evidence versus Value of Information

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the criticality and complexity of decision making for novel treatment approval and further research. Our study aims to assess potential decision-making methodologies, an evaluation vital for refining future public health crisis responses. METHODS: We compared 4 decision-making approaches to drug approval and research: the Food and Drug Administration's policy decisions, cumulative meta-analysis, a prospective value-of-information (VOI) approach (using information available at the time of decision), and a reference standard (retrospective VOI analysis using information available in hindsight). Possible decisions were to reject, accept, provide emergency use authorization, or allow access to new therapies only in research settings. We used monoclonal antibodies provided to hospitalized COVID-19 patients as a case study, examining the evidence from September 2020 to December 2021 and focusing on each method's capacity to optimize health outcomes and resource allocation. RESULTS: Our findings indicate a notable discrepancy between policy decisions and the reference standard retrospective VOI approach with expected losses up to $269 billion USD, suggesting suboptimal resource use during the wait for emergency use authorization. Relying solely on cumulative meta-analysis for decision making results in the largest expected loss, while the policy approach showed a loss up to$16 billion and the prospective VOI approach presented the least loss (up to $2 billion). CONCLUSION: Our research suggests that incorporating VOI analysis may be particularly useful for research prioritization and treatment implementation decisions during pandemics. While the prospective VOI approach was favored in this case study, further studies should validate the ideal decision-making method across various contexts. This study's findings not only enhance our understanding of decision-making strategies during a health crisis but also provide a potential framework for future pandemic responses. HIGHLIGHTS: This study reviews discrepancies between a reference standard (retrospective VOI, using hindsight information) and 3 conceivable real-time approaches to research-treatment decisions during a pandemic, suggesting suboptimal use of resources.Of all prospective decision-making approaches considered, VOI closely mirrored the reference standard, yielding the least expected value loss across our study timeline.This study illustrates the possible benefit of VOI results and the need for evidence accumulation accompanied by modeling in health technology assessment for emerging therapies

Second-Line Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma:A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Background: First-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) achieves durable remission in approximately 60% of patients. In relapsed or refractory disease, only about 20% achieve durable remission with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The ZUMA-7 (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel]) and TRANSFORM (lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel]) trials demonstrated superior event-free survival (and, in ZUMA-7, overall survival) in primary-refractory or early-relapsed (high-risk) DLBCL with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) compared with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT; however, list prices for CAR-T exceed $400000 per infusion. Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of second-line CAR-T versus salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT. Design: State-transition microsimulation model. Data Sources: ZUMA-7, TRANSFORM, other trials, and observational data. Target Population: “High-risk” patients with DLBCL. Time Horizon: Lifetime. Perspective: Health care sector. Intervention: Axi-cel or liso-cel versus ASCT. Outcome Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) in 2022 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of$200 000 per QALY. Results of Base-Case Analysis: The increase in median overall survival was 4 months for axi-cel and 1 month for liso-cel. For axi-cel, the ICER was $684 225 per QALY and the iNMB was -$107 642. For liso-cel, the ICER was $1 171 909 per QALY and the iNMB was -$102 477. Results of Sensitivity Analysis: To be cost-effective with a WTP of $200 000, the cost of CAR-T would have to be reduced to$321 123 for axi-cel and $313 730 for liso-cel. Implementation in high-risk patients would increase U.S. health care spending by approximately$6.8 billion over a 5-year period. Limitation: Differences in preinfusion bridging therapies precluded cross-trial comparisons. Conclusion: Neither second-line axi-cel nor liso-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $200 000 per QALY. Clinical outcomes improved incrementally, but costs of CAR-T must be lowered substantially to enable cost-effectiveness. Primary Funding Source: No research-specific funding.</p

Cost-effectiveness of postoperative imaging surveillance strategies for nonfunctional pituitary adenomas after resection with curative intent

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine an optimal follow-up imaging surveillance strategy in terms of cost-effectiveness after resection of nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas with curative intent. METHODS: An individual-level state-transition microsimulation model was used to simulate costs and outcomes associated with three postoperative imaging strategies over a lifetime time horizon: 1) annual MRI surveillance, 2) tapered MRI surveillance (annual surveillance for 5 years followed by surveillance every 2 years), and 3) personalized surveillance (annual surveillance for 5 years followed by surveillance every 2 years when MRI shows remnant disease/postoperative changes, and surveillance at 7, 10, and 15 years for disease-free MRI). Transition probabilities, utilities, and costs were estimated from recent published data and discounted by 3% annually. Model outcomes included lifetime costs (2022 US dollars), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: Under base case assumptions, annual surveillance yielded higher costs and lower health effects (QALYs) compared with the tapered and personalized surveillance strategies (dominated). Personalized surveillance demonstrated an additional 0.1 QALY at additional cost ($1298) compared with tapered surveillance (7.7 QALYs at a cost of$12,862). The ICER was $11,793/QALY. The optimal decision was most sensitive to the probability of postoperative changes on MRI after surgery and MRI cost. Accounting for parameter uncertainty, personalized surveillance had a higher probability of being a cost-effective surveillance option compared with the alternative strategies at 79$100,000/QALY), personalized surveillance that accounted for remnant disease or postoperative changes on MRI was cost-effective compared with alternative surveillance strategies.</p