Self-assessment questions

BRIEF OF APPELLEE APPEAL FROM A CONVICTION FOR POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE IN VIOLATION OF UTAH CODE ANN. § 58-37-8 AND FOR FAILURE TO PAY A DRUG TAX IN VIOLATION OF UTAH CODE ANN. § 59-19-106 IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, THE HON. MICHAEL J. GLASMANN PRESIDIN

Economic evaluations of calcineurin inhibitors in renal transplantation: a literature review.

People receiving a renal transplant require long-term treatment with immunosuppressant drugs. Contemporary regimens usually include a calcineurin inhibitor (CI), either ciclosporin or tacrolimus, in conjunction with at least one other drug. The aim of this study was to review the economic literature relating to the choice of CIs in patients following renal transplantation, with the specific intention of highlighting the challenges in estimating their cost effectiveness.A systematic literature search and narrative analysis was carried out, and 12 studies of varying quality and complexity were reviewed. All of the studies compared ciclosporin, azathioprine and a corticosteroid (CAS) with tacrolimus, azathioprine and a corticosteroid (TAS) but only three also evaluated the costs and effects of other possible treatment regimens. A variety of different evaluative frameworks were employed, from single randomised controlled trial-based studies over relatively short-time periods (6 months) to more complex Bayesian modelling techniques.The studies were broadly consistent in concluding that TAS was more effective than CAS in terms of reducing the rate of acute rejection episodes. Of the studies that undertook decision modelling, all but one estimated that TAS was associated with better graft-related outcomes such as rejection-free life-years, patient-survival and QALYs. Six of the studies concluded that the healthcare costs associated with TAS were lower than those for CAS. A seventh study suggested that TAS was the least costly option if costs were considered over a relatively long time period (14 years). Only one study clearly concluded that CAS was more cost effective than TAS.Clinical evidence clearly shows that TAS is more effective than CAS in terms of reducing the incidence of acute rejection following renal transplantation. The majority of published economic evaluations suggest that TAS is also the more cost-effective option. However, the economic evaluations contained a number of methodological limitations, undermining the confidence that can be attached to their results. Future economic evaluations of the CIs, and immunosuppressants in general, should address these issues in order to produce more robust cost-effectiveness estimates. Most importantly, they should evaluate a wider range of potential treatment options

Optimising Exome Prenatal Sequencing Services (EXPRESS): a study protocol to evaluate rapid prenatal exome sequencing in the NHS Genomic Medicine Service [version 2; peer review: 2 approved].

BACKGROUND: Prenatal exome sequencing (ES) for the diagnosis of fetal anomalies was implemented nationally in England in October 2020 by the NHS Genomic Medicine Service (GMS). The GMS is based around seven regional Genomic Laboratory Hubs (GLHs). Prenatal ES has the potential to significantly improve NHS prenatal diagnostic services by increasing genetic diagnoses and informing prenatal decision-making. Prenatal ES has not previously been offered routinely in a national healthcare system and there are gaps in knowledge and guidance. METHODS: Our mixed-methods evaluation commenced in October 2020, aligning with the start date of the NHS prenatal ES service. Study design draws on a framework developed in previous studies of major system innovation. There are five interrelated workstreams. Workstream-1 will use interviews and surveys with professionals, non-participant observations and documentary analysis to produce indepth case studies across all GLHs. Data collection at multiple time points will track changes over time. In Workstream-2 qualitative interviews with parents offered prenatal ES will explore experiences and establish information and support needs. Workstream-3 will analyse data from all prenatal ES tests for nine-months to establish service outcomes (e.g. diagnostic yield, referral rates, referral sources). Comparisons between GLHs will identify factors (individual or service-related) associated with any variation in outcomes. Workstream-4 will identify and analyse practical ethical problems. Requirements for an effective ethics framework for an optimal and equitable service will be determined. Workstream-5 will assess costs and cost-effectiveness of prenatal ES versus standard tests and evaluate costs of implementing an optimal prenatal ES care pathway. Integration of findings will determine key features of an optimal care pathway from a service delivery, parent and professional perspective. DISCUSSION: The proposed formative and summative evaluation will inform the evolving prenatal ES service to ensure equity of access, high standards of care and benefits for parents across England