The need for and provision of intrathecal baclofen therapy for the management of spasticity in England : an assessment of the Hospital Episode Statistics database

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in the uptake of intrathecal baclofen (ITB) following commissioning of this therapy by the National Health Service (NHS) England in April 2013. The specific objectives of this study were: (i) to explore the gap between the need for and the actual provision of ITB services; and (ii) to compare England figures with other European countries with comparable data available. SETTING: Data for ITB -related procedures were obtained from the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database from 2009/2010 to 2013/2014. PARTICIPANTS: Patients receiving ITB for the management of spasticity. RESULTS: The available data for implantation of ITB from 2009/2010 to 2013/2014 for the treatment of spasticity due to varied aetiologies show that there has not been an increase in uptake of this therapy. The estimated need for this treatment based on the incidence and prevalence of conditions susceptible to ITB therapy is between 4.6 and 5.7 per million population. Our analysis of the data available from the HES database showed that the actual number of implants is around 3.0 per million population. The same period 2009–2014 has seen an increase in the delivery of other neuromodulation techniques including spinal cord stimulation, deep brain stimulation and sacral nerve stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: There is a considerable gap between the need for and provision of ITB figures nationally. Additionally, within the same area, we have observed important differences in the ITB service delivery between the various trusts. The reasons for this can be multifactorial, including individual experience and opinions, organisational structures, resource and financial limitations. Further research analysing the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of this treatment in the UK might inform the development of Technology Appraisal Guidance for ITB, potentially leading to an improvement in service provision

[11C]flumazenil Binding Is Increased in a Dose-Dependent Manner with Tiagabine-Induced Elevations in GABA Levels

Evidence indicates that synchronization of cortical activity at gamma-band frequencies, mediated through GABA-A receptors, is important for perceptual/cognitive processes. To study GABA signaling in vivo, we recently used a novel positron emission tomography (PET) paradigm measuring the change in binding of the benzodiazepine (BDZ) site radiotracer [11C]flumazenil associated with increases in extracellular GABA induced via GABA membrane transporter (GAT1) blockade with tiagabine. GAT1 blockade resulted in significant increases in [11C]flumazenil binding potential (BPND) over baseline in the major functional domains of the cortex, consistent with preclinical studies showing that increased GABA levels enhance the affinity of GABA-A receptors for BDZ ligands. In the current study we sought to replicate our previous results and to further validate this approach by demonstrating that the magnitude of increase in [11C]flumazenil binding observed with PET is directly correlated with tiagabine dose. [11C]flumazenil distribution volume (VT) was measured in 18 healthy volunteers before and after GAT1 blockade with tiagabine. Two dose groups were studied (n = 9 per group; Group I: tiagabine 0.15 mg/kg; Group II: tiagabine 0.25 mg/kg). GAT1 blockade resulted in increases in mean (± SD) [11C]flumazenil VT in Group II in association cortices (6.8±0.8 mL g−1 vs. 7.3±0.4 mL g−1;p = 0.03), sensory cortices (6.7±0.8 mL g−1 vs. 7.3±0.5 mL g−1;p = 0.02) and limbic regions (5.2±0.6 mL g−1 vs. 5.7±0.3 mL g−1;p = 0.03). No change was observed at the low dose (Group I). Increased orbital frontal cortex binding of [11C]flumazenil in Group II correlated with the ability to entrain cortical networks (r = 0.67, p = 0.05) measured via EEG during a cognitive control task. These data provide a replication of our previous study demonstrating the ability to measure in vivo, with PET, acute shifts in extracellular GABA

Economic evaluation of shortened, bedaquiline-containing treatment regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (STREAM stage 2): a within-trial analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The STREAM stage 2 trial assessed two bedaquiline-containing regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis: a 9-month all-oral regimen and a 6-month regimen containing an injectable drug for the first 2 months. We did a within-trial economic evaluation of these regimens. METHODS: STREAM stage 2 was an international, phase 3, non-inferiority randomised trial in which participants with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis were randomly assigned (1:2:2:2) to the 2011 WHO regimen (terminated early), a 9-month injectable-containing regimen (control regimen), a 9-month all-oral regimen with bedaquiline (oral regimen), or a 6-month regimen with bedaquiline and an injectable for the first 2 months (6-month regimen). We prospectively collected direct and indirect costs and health-related quality of life data from trial participants until week 76 of follow-up. Cost-effectiveness of the oral and 6-month regimens versus control was estimated in four countries (oral regimen) and two countries (6-month regimen), using health-related quality of life for cost-utility analysis and trial efficacy for cost-effectiveness analysis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN18148631. FINDINGS: 300 participants were included in the economic analyses (Ethiopia, 61; India, 142; Moldova, 51; Uganda, 46). In the cost-utility analysis, the oral regimen was not cost-effective in Ethiopia, India, Moldova, and Uganda from either a provider or societal perspective. In Moldova, the oral regimen was dominant from a societal perspective. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the oral regimen was likely to be cost-effective from a provider perspective at willingness-to-pay thresholds per additional favourable outcome of more than US$4500 in Ethiopia,$1900 in India, $3950 in Moldova, and$7900 in Uganda, and from a societal perspective at thresholds of more than $15 900 in Ethiopia,$3150 in India, and $4350 in Uganda, while in Moldova the oral regimen was dominant. In Ethiopia and India, the 6-month regimen would cost tuberculosis programmes and participants less than the control regimen and was highly likely to be cost-effective in both cost-utility analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Reducing the bedaquiline price from$1·81 to $1·00 per tablet made the oral regimen cost-effective in the provider-perspective cost-utility analysis in India and Moldova and dominate over the control regimen in the provider-perspective cost-effectiveness analysis in India. INTERPRETATION: At current costs, the oral bedaquiline-containing regimen for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis is unlikely to be cost-effective in many low-income and middle-income countries. The 6-month regimen represents a cost-effective alternative if injectable use for 2 months is acceptable. FUNDING: USAID and Janssen Research & Development

Economic evaluation of shortened, bedaquiline-containing treatment regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (STREAM stage 2): a within-trial analysis of a randomised controlled trial

Background The STREAM stage 2 trial assessed two bedaquiline-containing regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis: a 9-month all-oral regimen and a 6-month regimen containing an injectable drug for the first 2 months. We did a within-trial economic evaluation of these regimens. Methods STREAM stage 2 was an international, phase 3, non-inferiority randomised trial in which participants with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis were randomly assigned (1:2:2:2) to the 2011 WHO regimen (terminated early), a 9-month injectable-containing regimen (control regimen), a 9-month all-oral regimen with bedaquiline (oral regimen), or a 6-month regimen with bedaquiline and an injectable for the first 2 months (6-month regimen). We prospectively collected direct and indirect costs and health-related quality of life data from trial participants until week 76 of follow-up. Cost-effectiveness of the oral and 6-month regimens versus control was estimated in four countries (oral regimen) and two countries (6-month regimen), using health-related quality of life for cost-utility analysis and trial efficacy for cost-effectiveness analysis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN18148631. Findings 300 participants were included in the economic analyses (Ethiopia, 61; India, 142; Moldova, 51; Uganda, 46). In the cost-utility analysis, the oral regimen was not cost-effective in Ethiopia, India, Moldova, and Uganda from either a provider or societal perspective. In Moldova, the oral regimen was dominant from a societal perspective. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the oral regimen was likely to be cost-effective from a provider perspective at willingness-to-pay thresholds per additional favourable outcome of more than US$4500 in Ethiopia,$1900 in India, $3950 in Moldova, and$7900 in Uganda, and from a societal perspective at thresholds of more than $15 900 in Ethiopia,$3150 in India, and $4350 in Uganda, while in Moldova the oral regimen was dominant. In Ethiopia and India, the 6-month regimen would cost tuberculosis programmes and participants less than the control regimen and was highly likely to be cost-effective in both cost-utility analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Reducing the bedaquiline price from$1·81 to $1·00 per tablet made the oral regimen cost-effective in the provider-perspective cost-utility analysis in India and Moldova and dominate over the control regimen in the provider-perspective cost-effectiveness analysis in India. Interpretation At current costs, the oral bedaquiline-containing regimen for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis is unlikely to be cost-effective in many low-income and middle-income countries. The 6-month regimen represents a cost-effective alternative if injectable use for 2 months is acceptable

Prefrontal response and frontostriatal functional connectivity to monetary reward in abstinent alcohol-dependent young adults

Although altered function in neural reward circuitry is widely proposed in models of addiction, more recent conceptual views have emphasized the role of disrupted response in prefrontal regions. Changes in regions such as the orbitofrontal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex are postulated to contribute to the compulsivity, impulsivity, and altered executive function that are central to addiction. In addition, few studies have examined function in these regions during young adulthood, when exposure is less chronic than in typical samples of alcohol-dependent adults. To address these issues, we examined neural response and functional connectivity during monetary reward in 24 adults with alcohol dependence and 24 psychiatrically healthy adults. Adults with alcohol dependence exhibited less response to the receipt of monetary reward in a set of prefrontal regions including the medial prefrontal cortex, lateral orbitofrontal cortex, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Adults with alcohol dependence also exhibited greater negative correlation between function in each of these regions and that in the nucleus accumbens. Within the alcohol-dependent group, those with family history of alcohol dependence exhibited lower mPFC response, and those with more frequent drinking exhibited greater negative functional connectivity between the mPFC and the nucleus accumbens. These findings indicate that alcohol dependence is associated with less engagement of prefrontal cortical regions, suggesting weak or disrupted regulation of ventral striatal response. This pattern of prefrontal response and frontostriatal connectivity has consequences for the behavior patterns typical of addiction. Furthermore, brain-behavior findings indicate that the potential mechanisms of disruption in frontostriatal circuitry in alcohol dependence include family liability to alcohol use problems and more frequent use of alcohol. In all, these findings build on the extant literature on reward-circuit function in addiction and suggest mechanisms for disrupted function in alcohol dependence. © 2014 Forbes et al

Evaluation of two short standardised regimens for the treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (STREAM stage 2): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

The STREAM stage 1 trial showed that a 9-month regimen for the treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis was non-inferior to the 20-month 2011 WHO-recommended regimen. In STREAM stage 2, we aimed to compare two bedaquiline-containing regimens with the 9-month STREAM stage 1 regimen. We did a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial in 13 hospital clinics in seven countries, in individuals aged 15 years or older with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis without fluoroquinolone or aminoglycoside resistance. Participants were randomly assigned 1:2:2:2 to the 2011 WHO regimen (terminated early), a 9-month control regimen, a 9-month oral regimen with bedaquiline (primary comparison), or a 6-month regimen with bedaquiline and 8 weeks of second-line injectable. Randomisations were stratified by site, HIV status, and CD4 count. Participants and clinicians were aware of treatment-group assignments, but laboratory staff were masked. The primary outcome was favourable status (negative cultures for Mycobacterium tuberculosis without a preceding unfavourable outcome) at 76 weeks; any death, bacteriological failure or recurrence, and major treatment change were considered unfavourable outcomes. All comparisons used groups of participants randomly assigned concurrently. For non-inferiority to be shown, the upper boundary of the 95% CI should be less than 10% in both modified intention-to-treat (mITT) and per-protocol analyses, with prespecified tests for superiority done if non-inferiority was shown. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN18148631. Between March 28, 2016, and Jan 28, 2020, 1436 participants were screened and 588 were randomly assigned. Of 517 participants in the mITT population, 133 (71%) of 187 on the control regimen and 162 (83%) of 196 on the oral regimen had a favourable outcome: a difference of 11·0% (95% CI 2·9-19·0), adjusted for HIV status and randomisation protocol (p<0·0001 for non-inferiority). By 76 weeks, 108 (53%) of 202 participants on the control regimen and 106 (50%) of 211 allocated to the oral regimen had an adverse event of grade 3 or 4; five (2%) participants on the control regimen and seven (3%) on the oral regimen had died. Hearing loss (Brock grade 3 or 4) was more frequent in participants on the control regimen than in those on the oral regimen (18 [9%] vs four [2%], p=0·0015). Of 134 participants in the mITT population who were allocated to the 6-month regimen, 122 (91%) had a favourable outcome compared with 87 (69%) of 127 participants randomly assigned concurrently to the control regimen (adjusted difference 22·2%, 95% CI 13·1-31·2); six (4%) of 143 participants on the 6-month regimen had grade 3 or 4 hearing loss. Both bedaquiline-containing regimens, a 9-month oral regimen and a 6-month regimen with 8 weeks of second-line injectable, had superior efficacy compared with a 9-month injectable-containing regimen, with fewer cases of hearing loss. USAID and Janssen Research & Development

Economic evaluation protocol of a short, all-oral bedaquiline-containing regimen for the treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis from the STREAM trial

Introduction: A December 2019 WHO rapid communication recommended the use of 9-month all-oral regimens for treating multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). Besides the clinical benefits, they are thought to be less costly than the injectable-containing regimens, for both the patient and the health system. STREAM is the first randomised controlled trial with an economical evaluation to compare all-oral and injectable-containing 9–11-month MDR-TB treatment regimens. Methods and analysis: Health system costs of delivering a 9-month injectable-containing regimen and a 9-month all-oral bedaquiline-containing regimen will be collected in Ethiopia, India, Moldova and Uganda, using ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ costing approaches. Patient costs will be collected using questionnaires that have been developed based on the STOP-TB questionnaire. The primary objective of the study is to estimate the cost utility of the two regimens, from a health system perspective. Secondary objectives include estimating the cost utility from a societal perspective as well as evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the regimens, using both health system and societal perspectives. The effect measure for the cost–utility analysis will be the quality-adjusted life years (QALY), while the effect measure for the cost-effectiveness analysis will be the efficacy outcome from the clinical trial. Ethics and dissemination: The study has been evaluated and approved by the Ethics Advisory Group of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease and also approved by ethics committees in all participating countries. All participants have provided written informed consent. The results of the economic evaluation will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Trial registration number: ISRCTN18148631

Economic evaluation of shortened, bedaquiline-containing treatment regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (STREAM stage 2) : a within-trial analysis of a randomised controlled trial

Background: The STREAM stage 2 trial assessed two bedaquiline-containing regimens for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis: a 9-month all-oral regimen and a 6-month regimen containing an injectable drug for the first 2 months. We did a within-trial economic evaluation of these regimens. Methods: STREAM stage 2 was an international, phase 3, non-inferiority randomised trial in which participants with rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis were randomly assigned (1:2:2:2) to the 2011 WHO regimen (terminated early), a 9-month injectable-containing regimen (control regimen), a 9-month all-oral regimen with bedaquiline (oral regimen), or a 6-month regimen with bedaquiline and an injectable for the first 2 months (6-month regimen). We prospectively collected direct and indirect costs and health-related quality of life data from trial participants until week 76 of follow-up. Cost-effectiveness of the oral and 6-month regimens versus control was estimated in four countries (oral regimen) and two countries (6-month regimen), using health-related quality of life for cost-utility analysis and trial efficacy for cost-effectiveness analysis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN18148631. Findings: 300 participants were included in the economic analyses (Ethiopia, 61; India, 142; Moldova, 51; Uganda, 46). In the cost-utility analysis, the oral regimen was not cost-effective in Ethiopia, India, Moldova, and Uganda from either a provider or societal perspective. In Moldova, the oral regimen was dominant from a societal perspective. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the oral regimen was likely to be cost-effective from a provider perspective at willingness-to-pay thresholds per additional favourable outcome of more than US$4500 in Ethiopia,$1900 in India, $3950 in Moldova, and$7900 in Uganda, and from a societal perspective at thresholds of more than $15 900 in Ethiopia,$3150 in India, and $4350 in Uganda, while in Moldova the oral regimen was dominant. In Ethiopia and India, the 6-month regimen would cost tuberculosis programmes and participants less than the control regimen and was highly likely to be cost-effective in both cost-utility analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Reducing the bedaquiline price from$1·81 to $1·00 per tablet made the oral regimen cost-effective in the provider-perspective cost-utility analysis in India and Moldova and dominate over the control regimen in the provider-perspective cost-effectiveness analysis in India. Interpretation: At current costs, the oral bedaquiline-containing regimen for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis is unlikely to be cost-effective in many low-income and middle-income countries. The 6-month regimen represents a cost-effective alternative if injectable use for 2 months is acceptable. Funding: USAID and Janssen Research & Development

Prevalence of optic disc haemorrhages in an elderly UK Caucasian population and possible association with reticular pseudodrusen—the Bridlington Eye Assessment Project (BEAP): a cross-sectional study (2002–2006)

Aims: To determine disc haemorrhages (DH) prevalence in an elderly UK population-the Bridlington Eye Assessment Project (BEAP).Methods: Thirty-degree (30°) fundus photographs (3549 participants ≥65 years) were graded for DH/macula changes. Glaucoma evaluation included Goldmann tonometry, 26-point suprathreshold visual-fields and mydriatic slit-lamp assessment for glaucomatous optic neuropathy.Results: 3548 participants with photographs in at least one eye. DH were present in 53 subjects (1.49%), increasing from 1.17% (65-69-year age-group) to 2.19% (80-84-year age53 group), p=0.06. DH was found in 9/96 (9.38%) right eyes (RE) with open angle glaucoma (OAG). Two of twelve RE (16.67%) with normal tension glaucoma (NTG) had DH. Prevalence in eyes without glaucoma was lower (32/3452, [0.93%]). Reticular pseudodrusen (RPD) occurred in 170/3212 (5.29%) subjects without DH, and 8/131 subjects (6.11%) with OAG. Twenty (20) eyes had normal tension glaucoma (NTG), 2 of whom had RPD (10%) (p=0.264). Within a logistic regression model, DH was associated with glaucoma (OR 10.2, 95% CI 5.32 - 19.72) and increasing age (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.00-1.10, p=0.03). DH was associated with RPD (p=0.05) with univariate analysis but this was not statistically significant in the final adjusted model. There was no significant association with gender, diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension treatment or AMD grade.Conclusion: DH prevalence is 1.5% in those over 65 years old and significantly associated with glaucoma and increasing age. There appears to be increased RPD prevalence in eyes with DH and NTG with age acting as a confounding factor. Larger studies are required to fully assess the relationship and investigate a possible shared aetiology of choroidal ischaemia