ObjectiveTo systematically review the health economic evaluation studies in which externalities of antibacterial drug uses were identified.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect health economic evaluation studies in which externalities of antibacterial drug uses were identified from inception to December 31st, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Descriptive analysis was then performed.ResultsA total of 14 studies were included. Negative externalities and their impacts on costs and/or effectiveness were examined in 13 literature, and positive externalities in terms of an improvement in disease control were included in only one study. No study was found in which both negative and positive externalities were included. The methods used to quantify negative externalities included: only costs associated with drug resistance per prescription or per unit were calculated; both costs and health impacts associated with the second/third line treatments followed a treatment failure (due to drug resistance) were calculated using a decision tree. In one study in which positive externalities were measured, both health gain and cost reduction from an improvement in disease control (as a benefit of antibacterial drug uses) were calculated by constructing a dynamic model at the population level.ConclusionsWe propose that both the positive and negative externalities should be included in health economic evaluation. This can be achieved by measuring the relevant costs and health impacts in a broader perspective, using a disease-transmission dynamic model. In addition, to achieve an improved health utility measurement, disability-adjusted-life years rather than quality-adjusted-life years should be encouraged for use. Finally, both costs and effectiveness should be discounted.
Objective To systematically review the health economic evaluations of using long-term rhythm-control antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) for patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods Databases including PubMed, EMbase, Scopus, CNKI, SinoMed, WanFang Data, and official websites of well-established health technology assessment (HTA) institutions were electronically searched to present the economic evaluations of AAD and the recommendations of HTA institutions based on drug economy from inception to April 23rd, 2022. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data and systematic review was then performed. Results A total of 19 studies were included, including 11 cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analysis studies and 8 official documents from HTA institutions. Only 5 (45.5%) economic evaluations were of relatively high quality, and English language studies were of higher quality than Chinese language studies ones. The included studies lacked elements that CHEERS 2022 concerns, such as health economics analysis plans, equity and distributional effects, engagement with patients and other stakeholders and the impact on the study. Dronedarone and amiodarone were the main focus of the evaluation, and the study results showed that dronedarone was cost-effective compared with other drugs in different study designs and national settings. However, there were differences between the recommendations of HTA agencies and the results of economic evaluation studies. Conclusion The completeness of health economics evaluations needs to be improved, along with the quality of clinical evidence in the field of AF-AAD for Chinese patients. Additionally, the informational value of drugs should be thoroughly investigated through budget impact analysis and distributional cost-effectiveness analysis to provide evidence of high-quality studies for decision-makers in China.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the status of economic evaluation of liver cancer screening in China, so as to provide reference for further studies.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, CBM and VIP databases were searched to collect economic evaluation studies of liver cancer screening in China from inception to December, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and conducted descriptive analysis of basic characteristics, methods of economic evaluation and main results as well as quality and uniformity of reporting.ResultsA total of 5 studies were included. Among them, the starting age of screening were found to be 35 to 45 years old; α-fetoprotein (AFP) testing and ultrasound examination combined procedure and screening interval of every 6 months were mostly evaluated. The quality of the 5 studies was satisfactory, and the uniformity of reporting was relatively acceptable, with a median score of 78% (range: 60% ~ 78%). Two population-based studies reported cost per liver cancer detected (44 thousand and 575 thousand yuan). Three studies reported cost-effectiveness ratio(CER) based on life year saved (LYS) and quality adjusted life year (QALY). Among these results, only 1 study from mainland China reported CER based on LYS (1 775 yuan), and the calculated ratio of CER to local GDP per capita was estimated as 0.1, while 2 studies from Taiwan province reported 4 CERs, and the ratios of CER to local GDP per capita ranged from 1.0 to 2.2.ConclusionsInformation from liver cancer endemic areas such as Taiwan province indicates promising cost-effectiveness to conduct liver cancer screening in local general population, while data from mainland suggests that conducting liver cancer screening combining AFP and ultrasound in high-risk population will be cost-effective, however only supported by 1 regional study. This needs to be verified by further economic evaluations based on randomized controlled trials or cohort studies as well as health economic evaluations.
It is potential for N-of-1 trials to evaluate economics of health care, however, it is still in the exploratory stage. With the advantage of accurate estimation of costs and effects, it is beneficial to promote the application of N-of-1 trials for economic evaluation in the era of precision medicine. In this study, we introduce the necessity, feasibility, selection, calculation of indicators and influence factors of N-of-1 trials for economic evaluation, and in order to provide references for researchers to perform related studies.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the health economic evaluation of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). MethodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, CNKI, WanFang Data and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect the health economic evaluations on NPC from inception to December 18, 2022. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. A descriptive analysis was performed. ResultsA total of 20 studies were included, which contained 14 about different drug combinations, 6 about chemotherapy and the comparison among intensity modulated radiotherapy, conventional radiotherapy and surgery. The results showed that for patients with recurrent, metastatic, or advanced NPC, compared with docetaxel plus cisplatin, fluorouracil plus cisplatin or docetaxel and cisplatin plus fluorouracil, gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) was the most economical, and compared with GP or camrelizumab plus GP, toripalimab plus GP (TGP) was more economical. For early-stage NPC, intensity modulated radiotherapy was not economical compared with conventional radiotherapy and surgery. ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that GP and TGP are economical and can be popularized clinically.
Objective To critically appraise and systematically reviewe the economic evaluations of all alternative interventions for hepatitis B in China. Methods We searched MEDLINE and the four largest Chinese electronic databases. The references of eligible studies were also screened. Economic evaluations of any type, which studied interventions for hepatitis B, were eligible for inclusion. A 25-item quality checklist modified from a BMJ checklist was used to appraise the quality of studies. The overall quality score was calculated against 100 points to indicate the risk of bias. Quality appraisal and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. Results Nineteen full economic evaluations and two cost studies were included of which fourteen studies were scored 25-44 points, and seven scored 45-61 points. Most studies adequately documented effectiveness of interventions. However, the costs of interventions were not well reported in over 50% of studies. Many studies inadequately conducted data analysis, particular in sensitivity analysis and discounting. Ten studies compared lamivudine with interferon or conventional therapy for 1-year (or 6-month) effects, which indicated that lamivudine was generally cost-effective. Three evaluations studied 30-year outcomes of interferon compared with conventional therapy, which suggested that interferon usually saved additional costs and years of life. Another three studies compared interferon with less frequently used antiviral agents, however the comparative cost-effectiveness varied. Two cost studies showed the total costs and the percentage of medical costs increased rapidly in proportion to disease severity.Conclusions Of alternative interventions, lamivudine is cost effective for short-term effects. Interferon is superior to conventional therapy for long-term outcomes. However, the long-term economic outcomes cannot be justified by the current evidence. Quality of methods, particularly, that of costing and analytical methods, is a major limitation. There remains a b need to improve the quality of reporting. Careful considerations should be paid before applying the results to decision making.
ObjectiveTo analyze the cost and performance of five methods for detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE), including PCR (method A), Carba NP test (method B), ultraviolet spectrophotometry (method C), modified carbapenem inactivation method (mCIM, method D), and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP, method E).MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data and CBM databases were searched using the computer regarding literature on detection of CPE with the same or similar designs, same objectives, and independent results. The search was limited between May 2009 and May 2019. Data on the cost and detection performance of all five methods were extracted, and the four special indexes for laboratory tests, such as sensitivity, specificity, simplicity, and rapidity in the utility were quantified as specific values; subsequently, the cost-effective analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA), and multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT) in the detection economic analysis were used to conduct health economics evaluation of five detection methods for CPE.ResultsThe cost of methods A, B, C, D and E were 210.00 yuan, 22.00 yuan, 10.50 yuan, 6.00 yuan, and 60.00 yuan, respectively. The C/E of CEA for the above five methods were 210.00, 22.96, 10.66, 6.14, and 60.00, respectively. The C/U of CUA for the above five methods were 302.16, 32.13, 19.30, 11.13, and 80.00, respectively. The MAUT value of the above five methods were 42.56, 5.00, 2.54, 1.63, and 12.56, respectively.ConclusionIn terms of CEA, CUA, and MAUT, the method D was the highest in economic value, which usually can be used as a routine method for detecting CPE, but it needs a long procedure time; thus, the method E can be used for rapid detection when clinical severe infection occurred, which is superior in both cost-effectiveness and rapidity.
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in hospitalized individuals, associated with adverse outcomes and increased cost. Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is used to treat critically ill patients with AKI, of which the cost in acute phase is higher than that of intermittent renal replacement therapy (IRRT). However, if treatment for subsequent chronic kidney disease or dialysis dependency following AKI is also considered, CRRT might be more cost-effective than IRRT. In this editorial, the cost and health economic evaluation of CRRT for critically ill patients is discussed.
Methodological quality and transferability will be important issues for the credibility and usefulness of both published studies and administrative methods for evaluating the socio-economic value of marketed medicines in China. This paper critically examines factors commonly contributing to, or inhibiting, the quality and transferability of socio-economic evidence of the value of medicines, with specific reference to the Chinese community. It discusses appropriate approaches to design, performance, and reporting of published economic evaluation studies, as well as guides on assessment of quality of economic evaluations and recommends two internationally established methods that may be suitable for training in this setting.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the economic evaluation research of anti-novel coronavirus infection drugs at home and abroad, so as to promote clinical rational drug use. MethodsThe PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, Web of Science, INAHTA, SinoMed, WanFang Data, and CNKI databases were systematically searched from January 1, 2020 to March 25, 2023, to collect economic evaluation studies related to anti-novel coronavirus infection drugs. ResultsA total of 22 articles were included, among which 11 studies were conducted from the perspective of health system, and most of the studies performed cost estimation on direct medical costs. The overall compliance rate of the included studies ranged from 42% to 70%, with deficiencies in model setting, incomplete uncertainty analysis, and lack of stakeholder participation. The results showed that immunotherapy drugs (Dexamethasone, Tocilizumab), neutralizing antibody (REGEN-COV antibody), small molecule drugs (Baricitinib, Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir, Molnupiravir, Favipiravir) and statin were cost-effective. There was some variation in the results of the economic evaluation of Remdesivir. ConclusionAt present, there are few studies on the economic evaluation of drug interventions in COVID-19. Existing studies have pointed out that most drug interventions are cost-effective. It is suggested that more standardized pharmacoeconomic evaluation studies based on the actual situation of China epidemic should be carried out in the future.