A Prospective Longitudinal Study of Caregivers of Community Dwelling Persons with Severe Dementia (PISCES): Study Protocol.

Although many persons with severe dementia (PWSDs) are cared for at home by their family caregivers, few studies have assessed end of life (EOL) care experiences of PWSDs. We present the protocol for the PISCES study (Panel study Investigating Status of Cognitively impaired Elderly in Singapore) which aims to describe the clinical course, health care utilization, and expenditures for community-dwelling PWSDs; and perceived burden, coping, resilience, anticipatory and prolonged grief among their caregivers. This ongoing multi-center prospective longitudinal study is recruiting primary informal caregivers of 250 PWSDs from major restructured public hospitals, community hospitals, home care foundations, and hospices in Singapore. Caregivers are surveyed every four months for two years or until the PWSD passes away and then at eight weeks and six months post-death to assess the bereavement of the caregiver. Survey questionnaires included validated tools to assess PWSDs' quality of life, suffering, behaviors, functional status, resource utilization; and caregiver's satisfaction with care, awareness of prognosis, care preferences, resilience, coping, perceived burden, distress, positive aspects of caregiving, anticipatory grief, and bereavement adjustment. We also conduct qualitative in-depth interviews with a sub-sample of caregivers. The survey data is being linked with medical and billing records of PWSDs. The study has been approved by an ethics board. Results from the study will be disseminated through publications and presentations targeting researchers, policy makers and clinicians interested in understanding and improving EOL care for PWSDs and their caregivers.

Cost-consequence analysis for human recombinant growth hormone (r-hGH) treatment administered via different devices in children with growth hormone deficiency in Italy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-consequence of recombinant human growth hormone (r-hGH) administered via the easypod auto-injector (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) versus conventional devices in children with growth hormone deficiency in Italy. METHODS: A patient-level simulation, decision-analytical model was developed to estimate the average height gains and growth hormone treatment costs for a cohort of boys and girls until their bone maturation age. The calculations were performed using listed growth hormone drug prices (base case) and a scenario analysis was also conducted using published tender prices. Costs were discounted at 3%. RESULTS: Due to improved adherence and earlier identification of poor responders, patients receiving somatropin with easypod gained, on average, 3.2 cm more than patients receiving other r-hGH treatments. Somatropin with easypod had the second highest total cost including wastage (€96,710), but had the second lowest cost per cm gained (€7699/cm). In the scenario analysis, somatropin with easypod had the lowest cost per cm gained (€4708/cm) amongst all of the compared treatments. CONCLUSION: Somatropin with easypod can be cost-saving versus all other r-hGH treatments except Omnitrope when listed drug prices are considered and can be cost-saving versus all other r-hGH treatments when tender drug prices are considered. The easypod device also facilitates cost savings in terms of reduced wastage.

Comparative Efficacy of Second- and Subsequent-line Treatments for Metastatic NSCLC: A Fractional Polynomials Network Meta-analysis of Cancer Immunotherapies.

BACKGROUND: Extended onset of treatment effect and longer-term survival with anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)/programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) immunotherapies, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab, have changed the landscape of second- or subsequent-line (2L+) treatments for adults with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This systematic literature review included phase I to IV randomized, controlled trials of 2L+ NSCLC therapies from MEDLINE, Embase, and secondary sources. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies of treatments approved in the European Union or United States had to be in English with ≥ 10 patients per arm. A fractional polynomials network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted because traditional NMA of hazard ratios does not account for delayed onset of clinical effect or long-term survival observed in PD-L1/PD-1 inhibitor trials. Adjusted analyses accounted for treatment switching in the atezolizumab OAK trial. Expected survival time reflected area under the curve over the time horizon. Expected overall survival (OS) was ranked by median ranking with 95% credible intervals and by surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Of 25,115 screened records, 28 studies were included in the quantitative analyses of OS and progression-free survival. RESULTS: PD-L1/PD-1 inhibitors had comparable expected 5-year OS; all performed better than other treatment options. In unadjusted analyses, surface under the cumulative ranking curve ranked nivolumab first (87.9%), followed by atezolizumab (85.8%) and pembrolizumab (82.8%). Analyses adjusted for patients switching from docetaxel to immunotherapy ranked atezolizumab first (89.6%), followed by nivolumab (86.5%) and pembrolizumab (81.9%). CONCLUSION: This NMA applied an appropriate approach for indirect comparisons, including cancer immunotherapies, and supported robustness of PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapies for 2L+ treatment of NSCLC.

Cost per response for abatacept versus adalimumab in patients with seropositive, erosive early rheumatoid arthritis in the US, Germany, Spain, and Canada.

BACKGROUND: Effective treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with biologic DMARDs poses a significant economic burden. The AMPLE (Abatacept versus adaliMumab comParison in bioLogic-naïvE RA subjects with background methotrexate) trial was a head-to-head, randomized study comparing abatacept with adalimumab. A post hoc analysis showed improved efficacy for abatacept in patients with versus without seropositive, erosive early RA. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the cost per response (ACR20/50/70/90 and HAQ-DI) and patient in remission (DAS28-CRP, CDAI, and SDAI) for abatacept relative to adalimumab, in patients with seropositive, erosive early RA in the US, Germany, Spain, and Canada. METHODS: A previously published model was used to compare abatacept and adalimumab in a cohort of 1000 patients over 2 years. Clinical inputs were updated based on two subpopulations from the AMPLE trial. Cohort 1 included patients with early RA (disease duration ≤ 6 months), RF and/or ACPA seropositivity, and > 1 radiographic erosion. Cohort 2 included patients with RA in whom at least one of these criteria was absent. RESULTS: For cohort 1, all incremental costs per additional health gain (patient response or patient in remission) favoured abatacept in all countries, except for DAS28-CRP remission in Canada. Cost savings versus adalimumab were greater when more stringent response criteria were applied and also in cohort 1 patient (versus cohort 2 patients). CONCLUSION: The cost per responder and patient in remission favoured abatacept in patients with seropositive, erosive early RA across all the countries. In this patient population, the use of abatacept instead of adalimumab can lead to lower costs in the US, Germany, Spain, and Canada.

Comparing ceftolozane/tazobactam versus piperacillin/tazobactam as empiric therapy for complicated urinary tract infection in Taiwan: A cost-utility model focusing on gram-negative bacteria.

BACKGROUND: Complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) is often associated with drug-resistant pathogens and requires therapy with broad-spectrum antibiotics. Choice of empiric therapy should be based on an evaluation of clinical efficacy and medical costs. We used a cost-utility model to compare the empiric use of a new antibiotic, ceftolozane/tazobactam with piperacillin/tazobactam in patients with cUTI. METHODS: The analysis was conducted using a decision tree and patient-level simulation approach. Patients in the model received empiric antibiotic treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam or piperacillin/tazobactam. Outcomes included mortality, medical costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Parameters related to pathogen distribution, length of hospital stay and medical costs, were estimated based on a cohort of patients with cUTI admitted during July 1st, 2015 to August 31st, 2016 to the National Taiwan University Hospital, a teaching hospital in Taiwan. Isolates used for the patient-level simulation to determine susceptibility to either drug were taken from the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trend database. RESULTS: The analysis was performed on a simulation of 1000 patients. Empiric use of ceftolozane/tazobactam leads to higher total medical costs (USD 4199.01 per patient versus USD 3594.76, respectively) but also more discounted QALYs (4.80 versus 4.78, respectively). The additional cost per discounted QALY gained associated with empiric ceftolozane/tazobactam was 32,521.08 USD (956,282 NTD). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that empiric use of ceftolozane/tazobactam for the treatment of cUTI could be a cost-effective choice in Taiwan.

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of US-approved LAMA/LABA therapies versus tiotropium in moderate-to-severe COPD.

Dual bronchodilator maintenance therapy may benefit patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) versus long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) monotherapy. The efficacy and safety of US-approved LAMA/long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) combinations versus tiotropium (TIO), a LAMA, were assessed. This systematic review and meta-analysis (GSK: 206938), conducted in MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-process, and EMBASE following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, identified randomized clinical trials (>8 weeks) in moderate-to-severe COPD (per Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease guidelines), receiving LAMA/LABA or TIO. ENDPOINTS: difference in change from baseline in lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]; trough, peak, area under the curve 0-3 h post-dose (AUC0-3), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) responder rate (≥4-unit improvement), SGRQ total score, and rescue medication use at 12 and 24 weeks. Safety was also assessed. From 5683 citations, the meta-analysis included eight clinical trials. LAMA/LABA significantly improved FEV1 trough (Week 12: 63.0 mL, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 39.2, 86.8; Week 24: 66.1 mL, 95% CI: 40.0, 92.3), peak (Week 12: 91.5 mL, 95% CI: 70.5, 112.4; Week 24: 92.4 mL, 95% CI: 72.9, 111.9), AUC0-3 (Week 12: 126.8 mL, 95% CI: 108.1, 145.4), SGRQ responder rate at Week 12 (risk ratio: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.28), mean SGRQ total score (Week 12: -1.87, 95% CI: -2.72, -1.02; Week 24: -1.05, 95% CI: -2.02, -0.09), and rescue medication use (Week 24: -0.47 puffs/day, 95% CI: -0.64, -0.30) versus TIO (all p ≤ 0.03). The SGRQ responder rate at 24 weeks and adverse events were not significantly different between treatments. US-approved LAMA/LABA therapies improved lung function, SGR,Q and rescue medication use versus TIO, without compromising safety.

Cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole versus piperacillin/tazobactam as initial empiric therapy for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections based on pathogen distributions drawn from national surveillance data in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among gram-negative pathogens in complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) has increased. In the absence of timely information on the infecting pathogens and their susceptibilities, local or regional epidemiology may guide initial empirical therapy and reduce treatment failure, length of stay and mortality. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole compared with piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of hospitalized US patients with cIAI at risk of infection with resistant pathogens. METHODS: We used a decision-analytic Monte Carlo simulation model to compare the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of persons infected with nosocomial gram-negative cIAI treated empirically with either ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole or piperacillin/tazobactam. Pathogen isolates were randomly drawn from the Program to Assess Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Susceptibility (PACTS) database, a surveillance database of non-duplicate bacterial isolates collected from patients with cIAIs in medical centers in the USA from 2011 to 2013. Susceptibility to initial therapy was based on the measured susceptibilities reported in the PACTS database determined using standard broth micro-dilution methods as described by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). RESULTS: Our model results, with baseline resistance levels from the PACTS database, indicated that ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole dominated piperacillin/tazobactam, with lower costs ($44,226/patient vs. $44,811/patient respectively) and higher QALYs (12.85/patient vs. 12.70/patient, respectively). Ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole remained the dominant choice in one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Based on surveillance data, ceftolozane/tazobactam is more likely to be an appropriate empiric therapy for cIAI in the US. Results from a decision-analytic simulation model indicate that use of ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole would result in cost savings and improves QALYs, compared with piperacillin/tazobactam.

Cost per response for abatacept versus adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis by ACPA subgroups in Germany, Italy, Spain, US and Canada.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disorder leading to disability and reduced quality of life. Effective treatment with biologic DMARDs poses a significant economic burden. The Abatacept versus Adalimumab Comparison in Biologic-Naïve RA Subjects with Background Methotrexate (AMPLE) trial was a head-to-head, randomized study comparing abatacept in serum anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive patients, with increasing efficacy across ACPA quartile levels. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost per response accrued using abatacept versus adalimumab in ACPA-positive and ACPA-negative patients with RA from the health care perspective in Germany, Italy, Spain, the US and Canada. A cost-consequence analysis (CCA) was designed to compare the monthly costs per responding patient/patient in remission. Efficacy, safety and resource use inputs were based on the AMPLE trial. A one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis (OWSA) was also performed to assess the impact of model inputs on the results for total incremental costs. Cost per response in ACPA-positive patients favoured abatacept compared with adalimumab (ACR20, ACR90 and HAQ-DI). Subgroup analysis favoured abatacept with increasing stringency of response criteria and serum ACPA levels. Cost per remission (DAS28-CRP) favoured abatacept in ACPA-negative patients, while cost per CDAI and SDAI favoured abatacept in ACPA-positive patients. Abatacept was consistently favoured in ACPA-Q4 patients across all outcomes and countries. Cost savings were greater with abatacept when more stringent response criteria were applied and also with increasing ACPA levels, which could lead to a lower overall health care budget impact with abatacept compared with adalimumab.

Cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole compared with piperacillin/tazobactam as empiric therapy for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections based on the in-vitro surveillance of bacterial isolates in the UK.

AIMS: An increase in the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among gram-negative pathogens has been noted recently. A challenge in empiric treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) is identifying initial appropriate antibiotic therapy, which is associated with reduced length of stay and mortality compared with inappropriate therapy. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole compared with piperacillin/tazobactam (commonly used in this indication) in the treatment of patients with cIAI in UK hospitals. METHODS: A decision-analytic Monte Carlo simulation model was used to compare costs (antibiotic and hospitalization costs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of patients infected with gram-negative cIAI and treated empirically with either ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole or piperacillin/tazobactam. Bacterial isolates were randomly drawn from the Program to Assess Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Susceptibility (PACTS) database, a surveillance database of non-duplicate bacterial isolates collected from patients in the UK infected with gram-negative pathogens. Susceptibility to initial empiric therapy was based on the measured susceptibilities reported in the PACTS database. RESULTS: Ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole was cost-effective when compared with piperacillin/tazobactam, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £4,350/QALY and 0.36 hospitalization days/patient saved. Costs in the ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole arm were £2,576/patient, compared with £2,168/patient in the piperacillin/tazobactam arm. The ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole arm experienced a greater number of QALYs than the piperacillin/tazobactam arm (14.31/patient vs 14.21/patient, respectively). Ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole remained cost-effective in one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Economic models can help to identify the appropriate choice of empiric therapy for the treatment of cIAI. Results indicated that empiric use of ceftolozane/tazobactam + metronidazole is cost-effective vs piperacillin/tazobactam in UK patients with cIAI at risk of resistant infection. This will be valuable to commissioners and clinicians to aid decision-making on the targeting of resources for appropriate antibiotic therapy under the premise of antimicrobial stewardship.

Continuing to Confront COPD International Patient Survey: Economic Impact of COPD in 12 Countries.

BACKGROUND: The Continuing to Confront COPD International Patient Survey estimated the prevalence and burden of COPD across 12 countries. Using data from this survey we evaluated the economic impact of COPD. METHODS: This cross-sectional, population-based survey questioned 4,343 subjects aged 40 years and older, fulfilling a case definition of COPD based on self-reported physician diagnosis or symptomatology. Direct cost measures were based on exacerbations of COPD (treated and those requiring emergency department visits and/or hospitalisation), contacts with healthcare professionals, and COPD medications. Indirect costs were calculated from work loss values using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment scale. Combined direct and indirect costs estimated the total societal costs per patient. RESULTS: The annual direct costs of COPD ranged from $504 (South Korea) to $9,981 (USA), with inpatient hospitalisations (5 countries) and home oxygen therapy (3 countries) being the key drivers of direct costs. The proportion of patients completely prevented from working due to their COPD ranged from 6% (Italy) to 52% (USA and UK) with 8 countries reporting this to be ≥20%. Total societal costs per patient varied widely from $1,721 (Russia) to $30,826 (USA) but a consistent pattern across countries showed greater costs among those with increased burden of COPD (symptoms, health status and more severe disease) and a greater number of comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of COPD is considerable across countries, and requires targeted resources to optimise COPD management encompassing the control of symptoms, prevention of exacerbations and effective treatment of comorbidities. Strategies to allow COPD patients to remain in work are important for addressing the substantial wider societal costs.