Journal of medical economics
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Within trial cost-utility analysis of disease management program for patients hospitalized with atrial fibrillation: results from the SAFETY trial.
Background: The potential impact of disease management to optimize quality of care, health outcomes, and total healthcare costs across a range of cardiac disease states is unknown. Methods: A trial-based cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial of 335 patients with chronic, non-valvular AF (without heart failure; the SAFETY Trial) discharged to home from three tertiary referral hospitals in Australia. A home-based disease management intervention (the SAFETY intervention) that involved community-based AF care including home visits was compared to routine primary healthcare and hospital outpatient follow-up (standard management). ⋯ The estimated value of perfect information in Australia (the monetized value of removing uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results) was A$51 million, thus demonstrating the high potential gain from further research. Conclusions: Compared with standard management, the SAFETY intervention is potentially a dominant strategy for those with chronic, non-valvular AF. However, there would be substantial value in reducing the uncertainty in these estimates from further research.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
An economic evaluation of perioperative enteral nutrition in patients undergoing colorectal surgery (SANICS II study).
The objective of this (trial based) economic evaluation was to assess, from a societal perspective, the cost-effectiveness of perioperative enteral nutrition compared with standard care in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. ⋯ This study suggests that perioperative nutrition is not beneficial for the patients in terms of quality-of-life and is not cost-effective.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin plus chemotherapy as frontline treatment of stage III or IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma.
The ECHELON-1 trial demonstrated efficacy and safety of brentuximab vedotin plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A + AVD) vs doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) as frontline therapy for stage III/IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma. This analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of A + AVD from a US healthcare payer perspective. ⋯ The ICER for A + AVD vs ABVD based on ECHELON-1 is within the range of threshold values for cost-effectiveness in the US. A + AVD is, therefore, likely to be a cost-effective frontline therapy for patients with stage III/IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma from a US healthcare payer perspective.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Cost-effectiveness of obinutuzumab plus bendamustine followed by obinutuzumab monotherapy for the treatment of follicular lymphoma patients who relapse after or are refractory to a rituximab-containing regimen in the US.
Obinutuzumab (GA101, G) was approved in February 2016 by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat follicular lymphoma (FL) patients who relapsed after, or are refractory to (R/R), a rituximab-containing regimen (R/R-rituximab). In the GADOLIN trial, R/R-rituximab patients who received G plus bendamustine (B) followed by G-monotherapy (G + B) for up to 2 years had significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared to patients receiving B-monotherapy. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of G + B vs B-monotherapy for R/R-rituximab FL patients from a US payer perspective. ⋯ This US-based analysis suggests that treatment with G + B compared to B-monotherapy is likely cost-effective in R/R-rituximab FL patients. Modeling a R/R-rituximab population based on a synthesis of GADOLIN and the National LymphoCare Study data introduces uncertainty in the analysis. However, the findings were robust to sensitivity analyses.
-
This prospective, epidemiologic study was designed to translate the original Spanish Bone Metastases Quality-of-Life-10 (BOMET-QoL-10) questionnaire and undertake a validation of the translated German version of BOMET-QoL-10 in Germany to assess health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) in patients with bone metastases (BM). ⋯ The German version of BOMET-QoL-10 is a valid, reliable, brief, and clear instrument able to measure HRQoL in patients with BM.