Estimating the cost-effectiveness of fluticasone propionate for treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the presence of missing data

Objectives: To explore the cost-effectiveness of fluticasone propionate (FP) for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), we estimated costs and qualityadjusted life-years (QALYs) over 3 years, based on an economic appraisal of a previously reported clinical trial (Inhaled Steroids in Obstructive Lung Disease in Europe [ISOLDE]). Methods: Seven hundred forty-two patients enrolled in the ISOLDE trial who received either FP or placebo had data available on health-care costs and quality of life over the period of the study. The SF-36-based utility scores for quality of life were used to calculate QALYs. A combined imputation and bootstrapping procedure was employed to handle missing data and to estimate statistical uncertainty in the estimated cumulative costs and QALYs over the study period. The imputation approach was based on propensity scoring and nesting this approach within the bootstrap ensured that multiple imputations were performed such that statistical estimates included imputation uncertainty. Results: Complete data were available on mortality within the follow-up period of the study and a nonsignificant trend toward improved survival of 0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] –0.01 to 0.15) life-years was observed. In an analysis based on a propensity scoring approach to missing data we estimated the incremental costs of FP versus placebo to be £1021 (95% CI £619–1338) with an additional effect of 0.11 QALYs (CI 0.04–0.20). Cost-effectiveness estimates for the within-trial period of £17,700 per life-year gained (£6900 to ∞) and £9500 per QALY gained (CI £4300–26,500) were generated that include uncertainty due to the imputation process. An alternative imputation approach did not materially affect these estimates. Conclusions: Previous analyses of the ISOLDE study showed significant improvement on disease-specific health status measures and a trend toward a survival advantage for treatment with FP. This analysis shows that joint considerations of quality of life and survival result in a substantial increase in QALYs favoring treatment with FP. Based on these data, the inhaled corticosteroid FP appears costeffective for the treatment of COPD. Confirmation or refutation of this result may be achieved once the Towards a Revolution in COPD Health (TORCH) study reports, a large randomized controlled trial powered to detect mortality changes associated with the use of FP alone, or in combination with salmeterol, which is also collecting resource use and utility data suitable for estimating cost-effectiveness

Evaluation of health in pregnancy grants in Scotland: A protocol for a natural experiment

Introduction: A substantial proportion of low birth weight is attributable to the mother's cultural and socioeconomic circumstances. Early childhood programmes have been widely developed to improve child outcomes. In the UK, the Health in Pregnancy (HiP) grant, a universal conditional cash transfer of £190, was introduced for women reaching the 25th week of pregnancy with a due date on/or after 6 April 2009 and subsequently withdrawn for women reaching the 25th week of pregnancy on/or after 1 January 2011. The current study focuses on the evaluation of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the HiP grant.<p></p> Methods and analysis: The population under study will be all singleton births in Scotland over the periods of January 2004 to March 2009 (preintervention), April 2009 to April 2011 (intervention) and May 2011 to December 2013 (postintervention). Data will be extracted from the Scottish maternity and neonatal database. The analysis period 2004–2013 should yield over 585 000 births. The primary outcome will be birth weight among singleton births. Other secondary outcomes will include gestation at booking, booking before 25 weeks; measures of size and stage; gestational age at delivery; weight-for-dates, term at birth; birth outcomes and maternal smoking. The main statistical method we will use is interrupted time series. Outcomes will be measured on individual births nested within mothers, with mothers themselves clustered within data zones. Multilevel regression models will be used to determine whether the outcomes changed during the period in which the HiP grants was in effect. Subgroup analyses will be conducted for those groups most likely to benefit from the payments.<p></p> Ethics and dissemination: Approval for data collection, storage and release for research purpose has been given (6 May 2014, PAC38A/13) by the Privacy Advisory Committee. The results of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications in journals, national and international conferences

Facilitating return to work through early specialist health-based interventions (FRESH): protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial

Background Over one million people sustain traumatic brain injury each year in the UK and more than 10 % of these are moderate or severe injuries, resulting in cognitive and psychological problems that affect the ability to work. Returning to work is a primary rehabilitation goal but fewer than half of traumatic brain injury survivors achieve this. Work is a recognised health service outcome, yet UK service provision varies widely and there is little robust evidence to inform rehabilitation practice. A single-centre cohort comparison suggested better work outcomes may be achieved through early occupational therapy targeted at job retention. This study aims to determine whether this intervention can be delivered in three new trauma centres and to conduct a feasibility, randomised controlled trial to determine whether its effects and cost effectiveness can be measured to inform a definitive trial. Methods/design Mixed methods study, including feasibility randomised controlled trial, embedded qualitative studies and feasibility economic evaluation will recruit 102 people with traumatic brain injury and their nominated carers from three English UK National Health Service (NHS) trauma centres. Participants will be randomised to receive either usual NHS rehabilitation or usual rehabilitation plus early specialist traumatic brain injury vocational rehabilitation delivered by an occupational therapist. The primary objective is to assess the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial; secondary objectives include measurement of protocol integrity (inclusion/exclusion criteria, intervention adherence, reasons for non-adherence) recruitment rate, the proportion of eligible patients recruited, reasons for non-recruitment, spectrum of TBI severity, proportion of and reasons for loss to follow-up, completeness of data collection, gains in face-to-face Vs postal data collection and the most appropriate methods of measuring primary outcomes (return to work, retention) to determine the sample size for a larger trial. Discussion To our knowledge, this is the first feasibility randomised controlled trial of a vocational rehabilitation health intervention specific to traumatic brain injury. The results will inform the design of a definitive trial

InternationaL cross-sectIonAl and longItudinal assessment on aSthma cONtrol in European adult patients : the LIAISON study protocol

The study is funded by Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A., Parma, ItalyPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Breast Cancer and Pregnancy: Current Concepts in Diagnosis and Treatment

This review evaluates the available data to help guide patients and caregivers when developing treatment plans for women diagnosed with breast cancer during pregnancy

A feasibility study incorporating a pilot randomised controlled trial of oral feeding plus pre-treatment gastrostomy tube versus oral feeding plus as-needed nasogastric tube feeding in patients undergoing chemoradiation for head and neck cancer (TUBE trial): study protocol

Background There are 7000 new cases of head and neck squamous cell cancers (HNSCC) treated by the NHS each year. Stage III and IV HNSCC can be treated non-surgically by radio therapy (RT) or chemoradiation therapy (CRT). CRT can affect eating and drinking through a range of side effects with 90 % of patients undergoing this treatment requiring nutritional support via gastrostomy (G) or nasogastric (NG) tube feeding. Long-term dysphagia following CRT is a primary concern for patients. The effect of enteral feeding routes on swallowing function is not well understood, and the two feeding methods have, to date, not been compared to assess which leads to a better patient outcome. The purpose of this study is to explore the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing these two options with particular emphasis on patient willingness to be randomised and clinician willingness to approach eligible patients. Methods/design This is a mixed methods multicentre study to establish the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial comparing oral feeding plus pre-treatment gastrostomy versus oral feeding plus as required nasogastric tube feeding in patients with HNSCC. A total of 60 participants will be randomised to the two arms of the study (1:1 ratio). The primary outcome of feasibility is a composite of recruitment (willingness to randomise and be randomised) and retention. A qualitative process evaluation investigating patient, family and friends and staff experiences of trial participation will also be conducted alongside an economic modelling exercise to synthesise available evidence and provide estimates of cost-effectiveness and value of information. Participants will be assessed at baseline (pre-randomisation), during CRT weekly, 3 months and 6 months. Discussion Clinicians are in equipoise over the enteral feeding options for patients being treated with CRT. Swallowing outcomes have been identified as a top priority for patients following treatment and this trial would inform a future larger scale RCT in this area to inform best practice

Cost-Effectiveness of Genotypic Antiretroviral Resistance Testing in HIV-Infected Patients with Treatment Failure

BACKGROUND: Genotypic antiretroviral resistance testing (GRT) in HIV infection with drug resistant virus is recommended to optimize antiretroviral therapy, in particular in patients with virological failure. We estimated the clinical effect, cost and cost-effectiveness of using GRT as compared to expert opinion in patients with antiretroviral treatment failure. METHODS: We developed a mathematical model of HIV disease to describe disease progression in HIV-infected patients with treatment failure and compared the incremental impact of GRT versus expert opinion to guide antiretroviral therapy. The analysis was conducted from the health care (discount rate 4%) and societal (discount rate 2%) perspective. Outcome measures included life-expectancy, quality-adjusted life-expectancy, health care costs, productivity costs and cost-effectiveness in US Dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Clinical and economic data were extracted from the large Swiss HIV Cohort Study and clinical trials. RESULTS: Patients whose treatment was optimized with GRT versus expert opinion had an increase in discounted life-expectancy and quality-adjusted life-expectancy of three and two weeks, respectively. Health care costs with and without GRT were $US 421,000 and$US 419,000, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $US 35,000 per QALY gained. In the analysis from the societal perspective, GRT versus expert opinion led to an increase in discounted life-expectancy and quality-adjusted life-expectancy of three and four weeks, respectively. Health care costs with and without GRT were$US 551,000 and $US 549,000, respectively. When productivity changes were included in the analysis, GRT was cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS: GRT for treatment optimization in HIV-infected patients with treatment failure is a cost-effective use of scarce health care resources and beneficial to the society at large

On the probability of cost-effectiveness using data from randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND: Acceptability curves have been proposed for quantifying the probability that a treatment under investigation in a clinical trial is cost-effective. Various definitions and estimation methods have been proposed. Loosely speaking, all the definitions, Bayesian or otherwise, relate to the probability that the treatment under consideration is cost-effective as a function of the value placed on a unit of effectiveness. These definitions are, in fact, expressions of the certainty with which the current evidence would lead us to believe that the treatment under consideration is cost-effective, and are dependent on the amount of evidence (i.e. sample size). METHODS: An alternative for quantifying the probability that the treatment under consideration is cost-effective, which is independent of sample size, is proposed. RESULTS: Non-parametric methods are given for point and interval estimation. In addition, these methods provide a non-parametric estimator and confidence interval for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. An example is provided. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed parameter for quantifying the probability that a new therapy is cost-effective is superior to the acceptability curve because it is not sample size dependent and because it can be interpreted as the proportion of patients who would benefit if given the new therapy. Non-parametric methods are used to estimate the parameter and its variance, providing the appropriate confidence intervals and test of hypothesis