A review of HTA guidelines on societal and novel value elements.

OBJECTIVES: Health technology assessment (HTA) organizations vary in terms of how they conduct assessments. We assess whether and to what extent HTA bodies have adopted societal and novel elements of value in their economic evaluations. METHODS: After categorizing "societal" and "novel" elements of value, we reviewed fifty-three HTA guidelines. We collected data on whether each guideline mentioned each societal or novel element of value, and if so, whether the guideline recommended the element's inclusion in the base case, sensitivity analysis, or qualitative discussion in the HTA. RESULTS: The HTA guidelines mention on average 5.9 of the twenty-one societal and novel value elements we identified (range 0-16), including 2.3 of the ten societal elements and 3.3 of the eleven novel value elements. Only four value elements (productivity, family spillover, equity, and transportation) appear in over half of the HTA guidelines, whereas thirteen value elements are mentioned in fewer than one-sixth of the guidelines, and two elements receive no mention. Most guidelines do not recommend value element inclusion in the base case, sensitivity analysis, or qualitative discussion in the HTA. CONCLUSIONS: Ideally, more HTA organizations will adopt guidelines for measuring societal and novel value elements, including analytic considerations. Importantly, simply recommending in guidelines that HTA bodies consider novel elements may not lead to their incorporation into assessments or ultimate decision making.

Doing Well by Doing Right

Richard Locke, Ben Armstrong, Samantha Schaab-Rozbicki, and Geordie Young speculate that COVID-related challenges might lead firms to shift their assumptions about workers in ways that open up new political-economic possibilities, with benefits for workers in safety, compensation, and voice. I am skeptical about the idea of such COVID-induced learning. Drawing on an analysis of the costs of high turnover in the electronics supply chain, however, I argue that more generous assumptions about workers appear to have operational benefits. Understanding those operational benefits might lead firms to be less resistant to demands from workers for the kinds of jobs that Locke and his coauthors celebrate.

Methamphetamine use and adoption of preventive behaviors early in the COVID-19 pandemic among men who have sex with men in Los Angeles, California.

Background: Methamphetamine (MA) use increased during COVID-19, with men who have sex with men (MSM) exhibiting 3-fold greater use than heterosexual men. Understanding links between reported MA use and COVID-19 prevention behaviors among MSM can inform current transmission risks for HIV, Monkeypox, and other infectious diseases. Methods: This study assesses relationships between self-reported pattern of MA use (past six months; past two weeks) and reported COVID-19 preventive behaviors, adjusting for participant characteristics (HIV serostatus, race/ethnicity, employment and housing stability), in a cohort of ethnically diverse MSM in Los Angeles, California, between April 1 and September 30, 2020. Results: Compared to those who reported no MA use, MSM who reported weekly or more MA use in the past six months were significantly less likely to use COVID-19 protective behaviors of physical distancing (61.8% vs. 81.6%; AOR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.19, 0.81]), of avoiding public transportation (34.5% vs. 60.3%; AOR = 0.42, 95% CI [0.21, 0.83]) and of avoiding traveling overall (32.7% vs. 62.6%; AOR = 0.32, 95% CI [0.16, 0.63]). Parallel findings were observed in analyses of past two-week reported MA use and COVID-19 protective behaviors. Conclusion: Findings highlight ways in which reported MA use frequency links with avoidance of reported preventive behaviors for COVID-19 in urban diverse MSM. Findings also provide evidence to guide public health interventions in future outbreaks of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases among MSM.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Molnupiravir Versus Best Supportive Care for the Treatment of Outpatient COVID-19 in Adults in the US.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) imposes a substantial and ongoing burden on the US healthcare system and society. Molnupiravir is a new oral antiviral for treating COVID-19 in outpatient settings. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness profile of molnupiravir versus best supportive care in the treatment of adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at risk of progression to severe disease, from a US payer's perspective. METHODS: The model was developed using a decision tree for the short-term acute phase of COVID-19 and a Markov state transition model for the long-term post-acute phase. This model compared molnupiravir with best supportive care as consistent with the MOVe-OUT trial. Costs were reported in 2021 US dollars. Transition probabilities were derived from the phase III MOVe-OUT trial and the TriNetX real-world electronic health records database. Costs were derived from the TriNetX database and utility values from a de novo, vignette-based utility study. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSA/PSA) were conducted. Primary outcomes included proportion hospitalized, proportion who died overall and by highest healthcare setting at the end of the acute phase, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental costs per QALY gained over a lifetime (100 years) horizon, discounted at 3% annually and assessed at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 per QALY. RESULTS: In this model, the use of molnupiravir led to an increase in QALYs (0.210) and decrease in direct total medical costs (-$895) per patient across a lifetime horizon, compared with best supportive care in COVID-19 outpatients. Molnupiravir was the dominant intervention when compared with best supportive care. Patients treated with molnupiravir were less likely to be hospitalized (6.38% vs. 9.20%) and more likely to remain alive (99.88% vs. 98.71%) during the acute phase. Through DSA, molnupiravir treatment effect of hospitalization reduction was identified to be the most influential parameter, and through PSA, molnupiravir remained dominant in 84% of the total simulations and, overall, 100% cost effective. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that molnupiravir is cost effective compared with best supportive care for the treatment of adult outpatients with COVID-19. However, our study was limited by the unavailability of the most recent information on the rapidly evolving pandemic, including new viral variants, patient populations affected, and changes in standards of care. Further research should explore the impact of vaccination on the cost effectiveness of molnupiravir and other therapies, based on real-world data, to account for these changes, including the impact of vaccination and immunity.

Integration and Validation of a Natural Language Processing Machine Learning Suicide Risk Prediction Model Based on Open-Ended Interview Language in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (ED) are an important intercept point for identifying suicide risk and connecting patients to care, however, more innovative, person-centered screening tools are needed. Natural language processing (NLP) -based machine learning (ML) techniques have shown promise to assess suicide risk, although whether NLP models perform well in differing geographic regions, at different time periods, or after large-scale events such as the COVID-19 pandemic is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of an NLP/ML suicide risk prediction model on newly collected language from the Southeastern United States using models previously tested on language collected in the Midwestern US. METHOD: 37 Suicidal and 33 non-suicidal patients from two EDs were interviewed to test a previously developed suicide risk prediction NLP/ML model. Model performance was evaluated with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Brier scores. RESULTS: NLP/ML models performed with an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.71-0.91) and Brier score of 0.23. CONCLUSION: The language-based suicide risk model performed with good discrimination when identifying the language of suicidal patients from a different part of the US and at a later time period than when the model was originally developed and trained.

Faculty and applicant perceptions of virtual interviews on subspecialty fellowship match in obstetrics and gynecology.

BACKGROUND: In response to COVID-19, the AAMC recommended that hospitals conduct interviews in a virtual setting. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether fellowship video conference interviews (VCIs) are an acceptable alternative to in-person interviews from both the applicant and program perspectives. METHODS: Applicants and faculty from a single academic institution with five OBGYN subspecialty fellowship programs were invited to complete surveys regarding their experience using VCIs during the 2020 interview season. Survey responses used a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). Comparative analyses between faculty and applicants responses to survey questions were performed with two-tailed Student's t-tests. RESULTS: 45 faculty members and 131 applicants received the survey. Response rate for faculty members and applicants was 95.6% (n = 43) and 46.6% (n = 61), respectively. Faculty and applicants agreed that the VCIs allowed them to accurately represent themselves (83.7% vs. 88.6%, p = 0.48). Most applicants (62.3%, n = 38) reported a fundamental understanding of the fellowship's culture. The majority of applicants (77.1%, n = 47) and faculty (72.1%, n = 31) agreed that they were able to develop connections during the virtual interview (p = 0.77). Faculty and applicants stated that VCIs assisted them in determining whether the candidate or program, respectively, was a good fit (83.7% vs. 67.2%, p = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The VCI fellowship recruitment process allowed OBGYN fellowship applicants and programs to accurately represent themselves compared to in-person interviews. Most applicants and faculty were able to develop relationships over the virtual platform. Although not explicitly assessed, it is possible that the virtual interviews can achieve a suitable match between applicant and program across all OBGYN subspecialty fellowships. The VCI process may be a long-term resolution to minimize both the financial burden and time commitment presented by traditional in-person interviews. Follow-up studies should assess the performance of the virtually selected fellows compared to those selected in previous years using traditional in-person interviews.

Consideration Of Value-Based Pricing For Treatments And Vaccines Is Important, Even In The COVID-19 Pandemic.

Prices send signals about consumer preferences and thus stimulate producers to make more of what people want. Pricing in a pandemic is complicated and fraught. The policy puzzle involves balancing lower prices to ensure access to essential medications, vaccines, and tests against the need for adequate revenue streams to provide manufacturers with incentives to make the substantial, risky investments needed to develop products in the first place. We review alternative pricing strategies (cost recovery models, monetary prizes, and advance market commitments) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) drugs, vaccines, and diagnostics. Hybrid pricing strategies are undoubtedly needed in a pandemic, but even in a public health crisis, value-based pricing is important. Cost-effectiveness analyses can inform pricing. Ideally, analyses would be conducted from both a health system and a societal perspective. Incorporating the added value of social benefits into cost-effectiveness analyses does not mean that manufacturers should capture the entire societal benefit of a diagnostic, vaccine, or therapy. Such analyses can provide important information and help policy makers consider the full costs and benefits of products and the wide-ranging ramifications of their actions.

Planning for post-pandemic cancer care delivery: Recovery or opportunity for redesign?

The delivery of cancer care has never changed as rapidly and dramatically as we have seen with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. During the early phase of the pandemic, recommendations for the management of oncology patients issued by various professional societies and government agencies did not recognize the significant regional differences in the impact of the pandemic. California initially experienced lower than expected numbers of cases, and the health care system did not experience the same degree of the burden that had been the case in other parts of the country. In light of promising trends in COVID-19 infections and mortality in California, by late April 2020, discussions were initiated for a phased recovery of full-scale cancer services. However, by July 2020, a surge of cases was reported across the nation, including in California. In this review, the authors share the response and recovery planning experience of the University of California (UC) Cancer Consortium in an effort to provide guidance to oncology practices. The UC Cancer Consortium was established in 2017 to bring together 5 UC Comprehensive Cancer Centers: UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, UC Los Angeles Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, UC Irvine Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, and the UC San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. The interventions implemented in each of these cancer centers are highlighted, with a focus on opportunities for a redesign in care delivery models. The authors propose that their experiences gained during this pandemic will enhance pre-pandemic cancer care delivery.

Measuring "Fearonomic Effects" in Valuing Therapies: An Application to COVID-19 in China.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a checklist that helps quantify the economic impact associated with fear of contagion and to illustrate how one might use the checklist by presenting a case study featuring China during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. METHODS: Based on "fearonomic effects," a qualitative framework that conceptualizes the direct and indirect economic effects caused by the fear of contagion, we created a checklist to facilitate empirical estimation. As a case study, we first identified relevant sectors affected by China's lockdown policies implemented just before the Lunar New Year (LNY) week. To quantify the immediate impact, we then estimated the projected spending levels in 2020 in the absence of COVID-19 and compared these projections with actual spending during the LNY week. Data sources used include Chinese and global websites. To characterize uncertainty, we reported upper and lower bound estimates and calculated midpoints for each range. RESULTS: The COVID-19 epidemic is estimated to cost China's economy $283 billion ($196-369 billion), that is, ¥2.0 trillion renminbi (¥1.4-¥2.6 trillion), during the LNY week. Reduced restaurant and movie theater business ($106 [$103-$109] billion, 37.5% [36.4%-38.5%]) and reduced public transportation utilization ($96 [$13-$179] billion dollars, 33.9% [4.6%-63.3%]) explain most of this loss, followed by travel restrictions and the resulting loss of hotel business and tourism ($80.36 billion, 28.4%). CONCLUSION: Our checklist can help quantify the immediate and near-term impact of COVID-19 on a country's economy. It can also help researchers and policy makers consider the broader economic and social consequences when valuing future vaccines and treatments.