The Cost-Effectiveness of Hepatitis C Virus Screening Strategies among Recently Arrived Migrants in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening strategies among recently arrived migrants in the Netherlands. METHODS: A Markov model was used to estimate the health effects and costs of HCV screening from the healthcare perspective. A cohort of 50,000 recently arrived migrants was used. In this cohort, three HCV screening strategies were evaluated: (i) no screening, (ii) screening of migrants from HCV-endemic countries and (iii) screening of all migrants. RESULTS: Strategy (ii) screening of migrants from HCV-endemic countries compared to strategy (i) no screening, yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €971 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Strategy (iii) screening of all migrants compared with strategy (ii) screening of migrants from HCV-endemic countries yielded an ICER of €1005 per QALY gained. The budget impact of strategy (ii) screening of migrants from HCV-endemic countries and strategy (iii) screening of all migrants was €13,752,039 and €20,786,683, respectively. CONCLUSION: HCV screening is cost-effective. However, the budget impact may have a strong influence on decision making

Cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands in different age groups

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands. METHODS: A Markov model was used to evaluate the health effects and costs of lung cancer screening from the healthcare perspective. The effects and costs of ten screening scenarios with different start and stop ages of screening were examined across a lifetime horizon in a cohort of 100,000 smokers and ex- smokers 50 years and older. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years, 50-70 years, and 50 years and older are below the cost-effectiveness threshold of € 20,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Screening 50-60-year-old smokers and ex-smokers was the most cost-effective scenario with an ICER of € 14,094 per QALY gained. However, screening smokers and ex-smokers 50 years and older yielded the highest QALYs and resulted in an ICER of € 16,594 per QALY, which is below the threshold of € 20,000 per QALY. All screening scenarios compared to no screening resulted in CERs between the € 14,000 and € 16,000 per QALY gained. The efficiency frontier showed that screening smokers and ex-smokers in the age groups 70 years and older, 60-70 years, 60 years and older are excluded by extended dominance by no screening, screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years and 50-70 years. CONCLUSION: This study showed that lung cancer screening is cost-effective in the Netherlands

Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus screening, and subsequent monitoring or treatment among pregnant women in the Netherlands

Background The prevalence of diagnosed chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among pregnant women in the Netherlands is 0.26%, yet many cases remain undiagnosed. HCV screening and treatment of pregnant HCV carriers could reduce the burden of disease and limit vertical transmission from mother to child. We assessed the impact of HCV screening and subsequent treatment with new direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) among pregnant women in the Netherlands. Methods An HCV natural history Markov transition state model was developed, to evaluate the public-health and economic impact of HCV screening and treatment. Besides all 179,000 pregnant women in the Netherlands (cohort 1), we modelled 3 further cohorts: all 79,000 first-time pregnant women (cohort 2), 33,000 pregnant migrant women (cohort 3) and 16,000 first-time pregnant migrant women (cohort 4). Each cohort was analyzed in various scenarios:i no intervention, i.e., the current practice,ii screen-and-treat, i.e., the most extensive approach involving treatment of all individuals found HCV-positive, andiii screen-and-treat/monitor, i.e., a strategy involving treatment of symptomatic (F1-F4) patients and follow-up of asymptomatic (F0) HCV carriers with subsequent treatment only at progression. Results For all cohorts, comparison betweenscenarios(ii) and (i) resulted in ICERs between euro9,306 and euro10,173 per QALY gained and 5 year budget impacts varying between euro6,283,830 and euro19,220,405. For all cohorts, comparison betweenscenarios(iii) and (i) resulted in ICERs between euro1,739 and euro2,749 per QALY gained and budget impacts varying between euro1,468,670 and euro5,607,556. For all cohorts, the ICERs (scenario iiiversusii) involved in delayed treatment of asymptomatic (F0) HCV carriers varied between euro56,607 and euro56,892, well above the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of euro20,000 per QALY gained and even above a threshold of euro50,000 per QALY gained. Conclusion Universal screening for HCV among all pregnant women in the Netherlands is cost-effective. However, it would be reasonable to consider smaller risk groups in view of the budget impact of the intervention

Cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands in different age groups

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands. METHODS: A Markov model was used to evaluate the health effects and costs of lung cancer screening from the healthcare perspective. The effects and costs of ten screening scenarios with different start and stop ages of screening were examined across a lifetime horizon in a cohort of 100,000 smokers and ex- smokers 50 years and older. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years, 50-70 years, and 50 years and older are below the cost-effectiveness threshold of € 20,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Screening 50-60-year-old smokers and ex-smokers was the most cost-effective scenario with an ICER of € 14,094 per QALY gained. However, screening smokers and ex-smokers 50 years and older yielded the highest QALYs and resulted in an ICER of € 16,594 per QALY, which is below the threshold of € 20,000 per QALY. All screening scenarios compared to no screening resulted in CERs between the € 14,000 and € 16,000 per QALY gained. The efficiency frontier showed that screening smokers and ex-smokers in the age groups 70 years and older, 60-70 years, 60 years and older are excluded by extended dominance by no screening, screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years and 50-70 years. CONCLUSION: This study showed that lung cancer screening is cost-effective in the Netherlands

Role of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE: To perform a scoping review on the use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in randomized trials on systemic therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) between 2010 and 2021. METHODS: First, a search on clinicaltrials.gov was performed, looking for randomized trials in mCRC. The use of PROMs was analyzed quantitatively. Subsequently, we assessed the completeness of PROM reporting based on the CONSORT PRO extension in publications related to the selected trials acquired using Embase and PubMed. RESULTS: A total of 46/176 trials were registered on clinicaltrials.gov used PROMs. All these trials used validated PROM instruments. The EORTC QLQ-C30 was most frequently used (37 times), followed by the EQ-5D (21 times) and the EORTC QLQ-CR29 (six times). A total of 56/176 registered trials were published. In 35% ( n = 20), the results of the PROMs were available. Overall, 7/20 (35%) trials documented all items of the CONSORT PRO extension and quality of reporting according to the CONSORT PRO extension was higher than in the period 2004-2012. In 3/20 (15%) of the published trials, the results of PROMs were not discussed nor included in the positioning of the new treatment compared to the reference treatment. CONCLUSION: When PROMs are used, the quality of reporting on patient-reported outcomes is improving, but this must continue in order to optimize the translation of trial results to individual patient values

Cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands in different age groups

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of screening smokers and ex-smokers for lung cancer in the Netherlands. METHODS: A Markov model was used to evaluate the health effects and costs of lung cancer screening from the healthcare perspective. The effects and costs of ten screening scenarios with different start and stop ages of screening were examined across a lifetime horizon in a cohort of 100,000 smokers and ex- smokers 50 years and older. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years, 50-70 years, and 50 years and older are below the cost-effectiveness threshold of € 20,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Screening 50-60-year-old smokers and ex-smokers was the most cost-effective scenario with an ICER of € 14,094 per QALY gained. However, screening smokers and ex-smokers 50 years and older yielded the highest QALYs and resulted in an ICER of € 16,594 per QALY, which is below the threshold of € 20,000 per QALY. All screening scenarios compared to no screening resulted in CERs between the € 14,000 and € 16,000 per QALY gained. The efficiency frontier showed that screening smokers and ex-smokers in the age groups 70 years and older, 60-70 years, 60 years and older are excluded by extended dominance by no screening, screening smokers and ex-smokers aged 50-60 years and 50-70 years. CONCLUSION: This study showed that lung cancer screening is cost-effective in the Netherlands