A systematic review of health economic models of opioid agonist therapies in maintenance treatment of non-prescription opioid dependence

Background: Opioid dependence is a chronic condition with substantial health, economic and social costs. The study objective was to conduct a systematic review of published health-economic models of opioid agonist therapy for non-prescription opioid dependence, to review the different modelling approaches identified, and to inform future modelling studies. Methods: Literature searches were conducted in March 2015 in eight electronic databases, supplemented by hand-searching reference lists and searches on six National Health Technology Assessment Agency websites. Studies were included if they: investigated populations that were dependent on non-prescription opioids and were receiving opioid agonist or maintenance therapy; compared any pharmacological maintenance intervention with any other maintenance regimen (including placebo or no treatment); and were health-economic models of any type. Results: A total of 18 unique models were included. These used a range of modelling approaches, including Markov models (n = 4), decision tree with Monte Carlo simulations (n = 3), decision analysis (n = 3), dynamic transmission models (n = 3), decision tree (n = 1), cohort simulation (n = 1), Bayesian (n = 1), and Monte Carlo simulations (n = 2). Time horizons ranged from 6 months to lifetime. The most common evaluation was cost-utility analysis reporting cost per quality-adjusted life-year (n = 11), followed by cost-effectiveness analysis (n = 4), budget-impact analysis/cost comparison (n = 2) and cost-benefit analysis (n = 1). Most studies took the healthcare provider’s perspective. Only a few models included some wider societal costs, such as productivity loss or costs of drug-related crime, disorder and antisocial behaviour. Costs to individuals and impacts on family and social networks were not included in any model. Conclusion: A relatively small number of studies of varying quality were found. Strengths and weaknesses relating to model structure, inputs and approach were identified across all the studies. There was no indication of a single standard emerging as a preferred approach. Most studies omitted societal costs, an important issue since the implications of drug abuse extend widely beyond healthcare services. Nevertheless, elements from previous models could together form a framework for future economic evaluations in opioid agonist therapy including all relevant costs and outcomes. This could more adequately support decision-making and policy development for treatment of non-prescription opioid dependence

Single-inhaler triple therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease:a systematic review

Abstract Background Guidelines recommend that treatment with a long-acting β2 agonist (LABA), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), i.e. triple therapy, is reserved for a select group of symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who continue to exacerbate despite treatment with dual therapy (LABA/LAMA). A number of single-inhaler triple therapies are now available and important clinical questions remain over their role in the patient pathway. We compared the efficacy and safety of single-inhaler triple therapy to assess the magnitude of benefit and to identify patients with the best risk-benefit profile for treatment. We also evaluated and compared study designs and population characteristics to assess the strength of the evidence base. Methods We conducted a systematic search, from inception to December 2018, of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of single-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD. The primary outcome was the annual rate of moderate and severe exacerbations. Results We identified 523 records, of which 15 reports/abstracts from six RCTs were included. Triple therapy resulted in the reduction of the annual rate of moderate or severe exacerbations in the range of 15–52% compared with LAMA/LABA, 15–35% compared to LABA/ICS and 20% compared to LAMA. The patient-based number needed to treat for the moderate or severe exacerbation outcome ranged between approximately 25–50 (preventing one patient from having an event) and the event-based number needed to treat of around 3–11 (preventing one event). The absolute benefit appeared to be greater in patients with higher eosinophil counts or historical frequency of exacerbations and ex-smokers. In the largest study, there was a significantly higher incidence of pneumonia in the triple therapy arm. There were important differences in study designs and populations impacting the interpretation of the results and indicating there would be significant heterogeneity in cross-trial comparisons. Conclusion The decision to prescribe triple therapy should consider patient phenotype, magnitude of benefit and increased risk of adverse events. Future research on specific patient phenotype thresholds that can support treatment and funding decisions is now required from well-designed, robust, clinical trials. Trial registration PROSPERO #CRD42018102125 .https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/152151/1/12931_2019_Article_1213.pd

Disease severity, flares and treatment patterns in adults with systemic lupus erythematosus in the UK: a real-world observational retrospective cohort analysis

Objectives The aim was to characterize disease severity, clinical manifestations, treatment patterns and flares in a longitudinal cohort of adults with SLE in the UK. Methods Adults with SLE were identified in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink–Hospital Episode Statistics database (1 January 2005–31 December 2017). Patients were required to have ≥12 months of data before and after the index date (earliest SLE diagnosis date available). SLE disease severity and flares were classified using adapted claims-based algorithms, which are based on SLE-related conditions, medications and health-service use. Results Of 802 patients, 369 had mild, 345 moderate and 88 severe SLE at baseline. A total of 692 initiated treatment in the first year after diagnosis. Five hundred and fifty-seven received antimalarials, 203 immunosuppressants and 416 oral CSs. Information on biologic use in hospitals was unavailable. The mean (S.d.) time to initiating any medication was 177 (385.3) days. The median time to first flare was 63 days (95% CI: 57, 71). At least one flare was experienced by 750 of 802 patients during follow-up; the first flare was mild for 549 of 750, moderate for 116 of 750 and severe for 85 of 750. The mean (S.d.) annual overall flare rate (year 1) was 3.5 (2.5). A shorter median time to first flare was significantly associated with moderate/severe disease (P < 0.001) and clinical manifestations (P < 0.001). Conclusion Our findings suggest some delay in the initiation of SLE treatment. Most patients experience a flare within 2 months of diagnosis. Early treatment might delay or reduce the severity of the first SLE flare and might translate to slower disease progression, lower accrual of organ damage and better outcomes

Health-care utilization and costs in adults with systemic lupus erythematosus in the United Kingdom: a real-world observational retrospective cohort analysis

Abstract Objective The aim was to describe direct health-care costs for adults with SLE in the UK over time and by disease severity and encounter type. Methods Patients aged ≥18 years with SLE were identified using the linked Clinical Practice Research Datalink–Hospital Episode Statistics database from January 2005 to December 2017. Patients were classified as having mild, moderate or severe disease using an adapted claims-based algorithm based on prescriptions and co-morbid conditions. We estimated all-cause health-care costs and incremental costs associated with each year of follow-up compared with a baseline year, adjusting for age, sex, disease severity and co-morbid conditions (2017 UK pounds). Results We identified 802 patients; 369 (46.0%) with mild, 345 (43.0%) moderate and 88 (11.0%) severe disease. The mean all-cause cost increased in the 3 years before diagnosis, peaked in the first year after diagnosis and remained high. The adjusted total mean annual increase in costs per patient was £4476 (95% CI: £3809, £5143) greater in the year of diagnosis compared with the baseline year (P &amp;lt; 0.0001). The increase in costs per year was 4.7- and 1.6-fold higher among patients with severe SLE compared with those with mild and moderate SLE, respectively. Primary care utilization was the leading component of costs during the first year after diagnosis. Conclusion The health-care costs for patients with SLE in the UK are substantial, remain high after diagnosis and increase with increasing severity. Future research should assess whether earlier diagnosis and treatment might reduce disease severity and associated high health-care costs. </jats:sec

Systemic lupus erythematosus; stroke and myocardial infarction risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of stroke and myocardial infarction (MI) in adult patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to May 2020 to identify observational studies (cohort and cross-sectional) that evaluated risk of stroke and MI in adult patients with SLE compared with the general population or healthy controls. Studies were included if they reported effect-size estimates that could be used for calculating pooled-effect estimates. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs for stroke and MI. Heterogeneity quantified by the I2 test and sensitivity analyses assessed bias. RESULTS: In total, 26 studies were included in this meta-analysis: 14, 5 and 7 studies on stroke, MI and both stroke and MI, respectively. The pooled RR for ischaemic stroke was 2.18 (95% CI 1.78 to 2.67; I2 75%), intracerebral haemorrhage 1.84 (95% CI 1.16 to 2.90; I2 67%), subarachnoid haemorrhage 1.95 (95% CI 0.69 to 5.52; I2 94%), composite stroke 2.13 (95% CI 1.73 to 2.61; I2 88%) and MI 2.99 (95% CI 2.34 to 3.82; I2 85%). There was no evidence for publication bias, and sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patients with SLE were identified to have a twofold to threefold higher risk of stroke and MI. Future research on the interaction between known SLE-specific modifiable risk factors and risk of stroke and MI to support development of prevention and treatment strategies are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018098690

Risk of malignancy in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Malignancy is a potential comorbidity in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, risk by malignancy type remains to be fully elucidated. We evaluated the risk of malignancy type in SLE patients in a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to July 2018 to identify observational studies that evaluated malignancy risk in adult SLE patients compared with the general population. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 test. FINDINGS: Forty-one studies reporting on 40 malignancies (one overall, 39 site-specific) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled RR for all malignancies from 3694 events across 80 833 patients was 1.18 (95% CI: 1.00-1.38). The risk of 24 site-specific malignancies (62%) was increased in SLE patients. For malignancies with ≥6 studies, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma risk was increased >3-fold; myeloma and liver >2-fold; cervical, lung, bladder, and thyroid ≥1.5-fold; stomach and brain >1.3-fold. The risk of four malignancies (breast, uterine, melanoma, prostate) was decreased, whereas risk of 11 other malignancies did not differ between SLE patients and the general population. Heterogeneity ranged between 0% and 96%, and 63% were non-significant. INTERPRETATION: The risk of overall and some site-specific malignancies is increased in SLE compared with the general population. However, the risk for some site-specific malignancies is decreased or did not differ. Further examination of risk profiles and SLE patient phenotypes may support guidelines aimed at reducing malignancy risk. FUNDING: AstraZeneca. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO number: CRD42018110433

The risk of infections in adult patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the magnitude of infection risk in patients with SLE and evaluate the effect of general and SLE-related factors on infection risk. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and Embase from inception to July 2018, screening for observational studies that evaluated infection risk in patients with SLE compared with the general population/healthy controls. Outcomes of interest included overall severe infection, herpes zoster infection/reactivation, opportunistic infections, pneumonia and tuberculosis. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) for each type of infection. Sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of removing studies with high risk of bias. RESULTS: Eleven retrospective or prospective cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis: overall severe infection (n = 4), pneumonia (n = 6), tuberculosis (n = 3) and herpes zoster (n = 2). Pooled RRs for overall severe infection significantly increased for patients with SLE compared with the general population/healthy controls [RR 2.96 (95% CI 1.28, 6.83)]. Pooled RRs for pneumonia, herpes zoster and tuberculosis showed significantly increased risk compared with the general population/healthy controls [RR 2.58 (1.80, 3.70), 2.50 (2.36, 2.65) and 6.11 (3.61, 10.33), respectively]. Heterogeneity and evidence of publication bias were present for all analyses, except herpes zoster. Sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness of the results. CONCLUSION: Patients with SLE have significantly higher risk of infection compared with the general population/healthy controls. Efforts to strengthen strategies aimed at preventing infections in SLE are needed. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO number: CRD42018109425

Transparency in decision modelling: What, why, who and how?

Transparency in decision modelling is an evolving concept. Recently, discussion has moved from reporting standards to open source implementation of decision analytic models. However, in the debate about the supposed advantages and disadvantages of greater transparency, there is a lack of definition. The purpose of this article is not to present a case for or against transparency, but rather to provide a more nuanced understanding of what transparency means in the context of decision modelling and how it could be addressed. To this end, we review and summarise the discourse to date, drawing on our collective experience. We outline a taxonomy of the different manifestations of transparency, including reporting standards, reference models, collaboration, model registration, peer review, and open source modelling. Further, we map out the role and incentives for the various stakeholders, including industry, research organisations, publishers, and decision-makers. We outline the anticipated advantages and disadvantages of greater transparency with respect to each manifestation, as well as the perceived barriers and facilitators to greater transparency. These are considered with respect to the different stakeholders and with reference to issues including intellectual property, legality, standards, quality assurance, code integrity, health technology assessment processes, incentives, funding, software, access and deployment options, data protection, and stakeholder engagement. For each manifestation of transparency, we discuss the ‘what’, ‘why’, ‘who’, and ‘how’. Specifically, their meaning, why the community might (or might not) wish to embrace them, whose engagement as stakeholders is required, and how relevant objectives might be realised. We identify current initiatives aimed to improve transparency to exemplify efforts in current practice and for the future

Large-scale, prospective, observational studies in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: A systematic and critical review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Observational studies, if conducted appropriately, play an important role in the decision-making process providing invaluable information on effectiveness, patient-reported outcomes and costs in a real-world environment. We conducted a systematic review of large-scale, prospective, cohort studies with the aim of (a) summarising design characteristics, the interventions or aspects of the disease studied and the outcomes measured and (b) investigating methodological quality.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We included prospective, cohort studies which included at least 100 adults with psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis. Studies were identified through searches in electronic databases (Pubmed, Medline, Cochrane library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination). Information on study characteristics were extracted and tabulated and quality assessment, using a checklist of 18 questions, was conducted.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Thirty five papers covering 16 cohorts met the inclusion criteria. There were ten treatment-related studies, only two of which provided a comparison between treatments, and six non-treatment studies which examined a number of characteristics of the disease including mortality, morbidity, cost of illness and health-related quality of life. All studies included a clinical outcome measure and 11 included patient-reported outcomes, however only two studies reported information on patient utilities and two on costs. The quality of the assessed studies varied widely. Studies did well on a number of quality assessment questions including having clear objectives, documenting selection criteria, providing a representative sample, defining interventions/characteristics under study, defining and using appropriate outcomes, describing results clearly and using appropriate statistical tests. The quality assessment criteria least adhered to involved questions regarding sample size calculations, describing potential selection bias, defining and adjusting for confounders and losses to follow-up, and defining and describing a comparison group.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The review highlights the need for well designed prospective observational studies on the effectiveness, patient-reported outcomes and economic impact of treatment regimes for patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in a real-world environment.</p

Epidemiological and economic burden of metabolic syndrome and its consequences in patients with hypertension in Germany, Spain and Italy; a prevalence-based model

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The presence of metabolic syndrome in patients with hypertension significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes and mortality. Our aim is to estimate the epidemiological and economic burden to the health service of metabolic syndrome in patients with hypertension in three European countries in 2008 and 2020.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>An age, sex and risk group structured prevalence based cost of illness model was developed using the United States Adult Treatment Panel III of the National Cholesterol Education Program criteria to define metabolic syndrome. Data sources included published information and public use databases on disease prevalence, incidence of cardiovascular events, prevalence of type 2 diabetes, treatment patterns and cost of management in Germany, Spain and Italy.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The prevalence of hypertension with metabolic syndrome in the general population of Germany, Spain and Italy was 36%, 11% and 10% respectively. In subjects with hypertension 61%, 22% and 21% also had metabolic syndrome. Incident cardiovascular events and attributable mortality were around two fold higher in subjects with metabolic syndrome and prevalence of type 2 diabetes was around six-fold higher. The economic burden to the health service of metabolic syndrome in patients with hypertension was been estimated at €24,427, €1,900 and €4,877 million in Germany, Spain and Italy and forecast to rise by 59%, 179% and 157% respectively by 2020. The largest components of costs included the management of prevalent type 2 diabetes and incident cardiovascular events. Mean annual costs per hypertensive patient were around three-fold higher in subjects with metabolic syndrome compared to those without and rose incrementally with the additional number of metabolic syndrome components present.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The presence of metabolic syndrome in patients with hypertension significantly inflates economic burden and costs are likely to increase in the future due to an aging population and an increase in the prevalence of components of metabolic syndrome.</p