在大流行情况下对 COVID-19 药物治疗进行基于模型的经济评估的经验教训:系统回顾的结果。

IF 4.4 3区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS PharmacoEconomics Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-10 DOI:10.1007/s40273-024-01375-x
Clazinus Veijer, Marinus H van Hulst, Benjamin Friedrichson, Maarten J Postma, Antoinette D I van Asselt
{"title":"在大流行情况下对 COVID-19 药物治疗进行基于模型的经济评估的经验教训:系统回顾的结果。","authors":"Clazinus Veijer, Marinus H van Hulst, Benjamin Friedrichson, Maarten J Postma, Antoinette D I van Asselt","doi":"10.1007/s40273-024-01375-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Following clinical research of potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments, numerous decision-analytic models have been developed. Due to pandemic circumstances, clinical evidence was limited and modelling choices were made under great uncertainty. This study aimed to analyse key methodological characteristics of model-based economic evaluations of COVID-19 drug treatments, and specifically focused on modelling choices which pertain to disease severity levels during hospitalisation, model structure, sources of effectiveness and quality of life and long-term sequelae.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic literature review and searched key databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus) for original articles on model-based full economic evaluations of COVID-19 drug treatments. Studies focussing on vaccines, diagnostic techniques and non-pharmaceutical interventions were excluded. The search was last rerun on 22 July 2023. Results were narratively synthesised in tabular form. Several aspects were categorised into rubrics to enable comparison across studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1047 records identified, 27 were included, and 23 studies (85.2%) differentiated patients by disease severity in the hospitalisation phase. Patients were differentiated by type of respiratory support, level of care management, a combination of both or symptoms. A Markov model was applied in 16 studies (59.3%), whether or not preceded by a decision tree or an epidemiological model. Most cost-utility analyses lacked the incorporation of COVID-19-specific health utility values. Of ten studies with a lifetime horizon, seven adjusted general population estimates to account for long-term sequelae (i.e. mortality, quality of life and costs), lasting for 1 year, 5 years, or a patient's lifetime. The most often reported parameter influencing the outcome of the analysis was related to treatment effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results illustrate the variety in modelling approaches of COVID-19 drug treatments and address the need for a more standardized approach in model-based economic evaluations of infectious diseases such as COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Trial registry: </strong>Protocol registered in PROSPERO under CRD42023407646.</p>","PeriodicalId":19807,"journal":{"name":"PharmacoEconomics","volume":" ","pages":"633-647"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11126513/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lessons Learned from Model-based Economic Evaluations of COVID-19 Drug Treatments Under Pandemic Circumstances: Results from a Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Clazinus Veijer, Marinus H van Hulst, Benjamin Friedrichson, Maarten J Postma, Antoinette D I van Asselt\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40273-024-01375-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Following clinical research of potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments, numerous decision-analytic models have been developed. Due to pandemic circumstances, clinical evidence was limited and modelling choices were made under great uncertainty. This study aimed to analyse key methodological characteristics of model-based economic evaluations of COVID-19 drug treatments, and specifically focused on modelling choices which pertain to disease severity levels during hospitalisation, model structure, sources of effectiveness and quality of life and long-term sequelae.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic literature review and searched key databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus) for original articles on model-based full economic evaluations of COVID-19 drug treatments. Studies focussing on vaccines, diagnostic techniques and non-pharmaceutical interventions were excluded. The search was last rerun on 22 July 2023. Results were narratively synthesised in tabular form. Several aspects were categorised into rubrics to enable comparison across studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 1047 records identified, 27 were included, and 23 studies (85.2%) differentiated patients by disease severity in the hospitalisation phase. Patients were differentiated by type of respiratory support, level of care management, a combination of both or symptoms. A Markov model was applied in 16 studies (59.3%), whether or not preceded by a decision tree or an epidemiological model. Most cost-utility analyses lacked the incorporation of COVID-19-specific health utility values. Of ten studies with a lifetime horizon, seven adjusted general population estimates to account for long-term sequelae (i.e. mortality, quality of life and costs), lasting for 1 year, 5 years, or a patient's lifetime. The most often reported parameter influencing the outcome of the analysis was related to treatment effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results illustrate the variety in modelling approaches of COVID-19 drug treatments and address the need for a more standardized approach in model-based economic evaluations of infectious diseases such as COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Trial registry: </strong>Protocol registered in PROSPERO under CRD42023407646.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19807,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"633-647\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11126513/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-024-01375-x\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PharmacoEconomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-024-01375-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在对 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的潜在治疗方法进行临床研究之后,开发了许多决策分析模型。由于大流行的情况,临床证据有限,模型选择具有很大的不确定性。本研究旨在分析基于模型的 COVID-19 药物治疗经济评价的主要方法学特征,并特别关注与住院期间疾病严重程度、模型结构、有效性来源以及生活质量和长期后遗症有关的建模选择:我们进行了系统的文献综述,并在主要数据库(包括 MEDLINE、EMBASE、Web of Science、Scopus)中检索了有关 COVID-19 药物治疗基于模型的全面经济评估的原创文章。以疫苗、诊断技术和非药物干预为重点的研究被排除在外。最后一次重新搜索是在 2023 年 7 月 22 日。搜索结果以表格形式进行了叙述性综合。为便于对不同研究进行比较,还将几个方面归类为评分标准:在确定的 1047 份记录中,有 27 份被纳入,23 项研究(85.2%)在住院阶段根据疾病严重程度对患者进行了区分。根据呼吸支持类型、护理管理水平、两者的组合或症状对患者进行了区分。有 16 项研究(59.3%)采用了马尔可夫模型,无论之前是否有决策树或流行病学模型。大多数成本效用分析未纳入 COVID-19 特异性健康效用值。在 10 项以终生为视角的研究中,有 7 项研究调整了普通人群的估计值,以考虑长期后遗症(即死亡率、生活质量和成本),持续时间为 1 年、5 年或患者终生。最常报告的影响分析结果的参数与治疗效果有关:结果表明,COVID-19 药物治疗的建模方法多种多样,因此在对 COVID-19 等传染病进行基于模型的经济评估时,需要采用更加标准化的方法:试验方案已在 PROSPERO 登记,编号为 CRD42023407646。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Lessons Learned from Model-based Economic Evaluations of COVID-19 Drug Treatments Under Pandemic Circumstances: Results from a Systematic Review.

Background: Following clinical research of potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments, numerous decision-analytic models have been developed. Due to pandemic circumstances, clinical evidence was limited and modelling choices were made under great uncertainty. This study aimed to analyse key methodological characteristics of model-based economic evaluations of COVID-19 drug treatments, and specifically focused on modelling choices which pertain to disease severity levels during hospitalisation, model structure, sources of effectiveness and quality of life and long-term sequelae.

Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review and searched key databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus) for original articles on model-based full economic evaluations of COVID-19 drug treatments. Studies focussing on vaccines, diagnostic techniques and non-pharmaceutical interventions were excluded. The search was last rerun on 22 July 2023. Results were narratively synthesised in tabular form. Several aspects were categorised into rubrics to enable comparison across studies.

Results: Of the 1047 records identified, 27 were included, and 23 studies (85.2%) differentiated patients by disease severity in the hospitalisation phase. Patients were differentiated by type of respiratory support, level of care management, a combination of both or symptoms. A Markov model was applied in 16 studies (59.3%), whether or not preceded by a decision tree or an epidemiological model. Most cost-utility analyses lacked the incorporation of COVID-19-specific health utility values. Of ten studies with a lifetime horizon, seven adjusted general population estimates to account for long-term sequelae (i.e. mortality, quality of life and costs), lasting for 1 year, 5 years, or a patient's lifetime. The most often reported parameter influencing the outcome of the analysis was related to treatment effectiveness.

Conclusion: The results illustrate the variety in modelling approaches of COVID-19 drug treatments and address the need for a more standardized approach in model-based economic evaluations of infectious diseases such as COVID-19.

Trial registry: Protocol registered in PROSPERO under CRD42023407646.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PharmacoEconomics
PharmacoEconomics 医学-药学
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
85
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: PharmacoEconomics is the benchmark journal for peer-reviewed, authoritative and practical articles on the application of pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life assessment to optimum drug therapy and health outcomes. An invaluable source of applied pharmacoeconomic original research and educational material for the healthcare decision maker. PharmacoEconomics is dedicated to the clear communication of complex pharmacoeconomic issues related to patient care and drug utilization. PharmacoEconomics offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by a Key Points summary, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article.
期刊最新文献
Cost and Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Psoriatic Arthritis: An Updated Systematic Literature Review. Effects and Costs of Hepatitis C Virus Elimination for the Whole Population in China: A Modelling Study. MPES-R: Multi-Parameter Evidence Synthesis in R for Survival Extrapolation-A Tutorial. Different Models, Same Results: Considerations When Choosing Between Approaches to Model Cost Effectiveness of Chimeric-Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy Versus Standard of Care. Evidence Following Conditional NICE Technology Appraisal Recommendations: A Critical Analysis of Methods, Quality and Risk of Bias.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1