评估复发性难治性多发性骨髓瘤治疗方法的建模方法系统回顾:对未来卫生经济模型的批判性回顾和考虑。

IF 4.4 3区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS PharmacoEconomics Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-25 DOI:10.1007/s40273-024-01399-3
Andreas Freitag, Grammati Sarri, An Ta, Laura Gurskyte, Dasha Cherepanov, Luis G Hernandez
{"title":"评估复发性难治性多发性骨髓瘤治疗方法的建模方法系统回顾:对未来卫生经济模型的批判性回顾和考虑。","authors":"Andreas Freitag, Grammati Sarri, An Ta, Laura Gurskyte, Dasha Cherepanov, Luis G Hernandez","doi":"10.1007/s40273-024-01399-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Multiple myeloma is a rare incurable hematological cancer in which most patients relapse or become refractory to treatment. This systematic literature review aimed to critically review the existing economic models used in economic evaluations of systemic treatments for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and to summarize how the models addressed differences in the line of therapy and exposure to prior treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following a pre-approved protocol, literature searches were conducted on 17 February, 2023, in relevant databases for models published since 2014. Additionally, key health technology assessment agency websites were manually searched for models published as part of submission dossiers since 2018. Reported information related to model conceptualization, structure, uncertainty, validation, and transparency were extracted into a pre-defined extraction sheet.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 49 models assessing a wide range of interventions across multiple lines of therapy were included. Only five models specific to heavily pre-treated patients and/or those who were refractory to multiple treatment classes were identified. Most models followed a conventional simple methodology, such as partitioned survival (n = 28) or Markov models (n = 9). All included models evaluated specific interventions rather than the whole treatment sequence. Where subsequent therapies were included in the model, these were generally only considered from a cost and resource use perspective. The models generally used overall and progression-free survival as model inputs, although data were often immature. Sensitivity analyses were frequently reported (n = 41) whereas validation was only considered in less than half (n = 19) of the models.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Published economic models in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma rarely followed an individual patient approach, mainly owing to the higher need for complex data assumptions compared with simpler modeling approaches. As many patients experience disease progression on multiple treatment lines, there is a growing need for modeling complex treatment strategies, leading to more sophisticated approaches in the future. Maintaining transparency, high reporting standards, and thorough analyses of uncertainty are crucial to support these advancements.</p>","PeriodicalId":19807,"journal":{"name":"PharmacoEconomics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11343819/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review of Modeling Approaches to Evaluate Treatments for Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Critical Review and Considerations for Future Health Economic Models.\",\"authors\":\"Andreas Freitag, Grammati Sarri, An Ta, Laura Gurskyte, Dasha Cherepanov, Luis G Hernandez\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40273-024-01399-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Multiple myeloma is a rare incurable hematological cancer in which most patients relapse or become refractory to treatment. This systematic literature review aimed to critically review the existing economic models used in economic evaluations of systemic treatments for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and to summarize how the models addressed differences in the line of therapy and exposure to prior treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following a pre-approved protocol, literature searches were conducted on 17 February, 2023, in relevant databases for models published since 2014. Additionally, key health technology assessment agency websites were manually searched for models published as part of submission dossiers since 2018. Reported information related to model conceptualization, structure, uncertainty, validation, and transparency were extracted into a pre-defined extraction sheet.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 49 models assessing a wide range of interventions across multiple lines of therapy were included. Only five models specific to heavily pre-treated patients and/or those who were refractory to multiple treatment classes were identified. Most models followed a conventional simple methodology, such as partitioned survival (n = 28) or Markov models (n = 9). All included models evaluated specific interventions rather than the whole treatment sequence. Where subsequent therapies were included in the model, these were generally only considered from a cost and resource use perspective. The models generally used overall and progression-free survival as model inputs, although data were often immature. Sensitivity analyses were frequently reported (n = 41) whereas validation was only considered in less than half (n = 19) of the models.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Published economic models in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma rarely followed an individual patient approach, mainly owing to the higher need for complex data assumptions compared with simpler modeling approaches. As many patients experience disease progression on multiple treatment lines, there is a growing need for modeling complex treatment strategies, leading to more sophisticated approaches in the future. Maintaining transparency, high reporting standards, and thorough analyses of uncertainty are crucial to support these advancements.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19807,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11343819/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PharmacoEconomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-024-01399-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/25 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/s40273-024-01399-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:多发性骨髓瘤是一种罕见的无法治愈的血液肿瘤,大多数患者会复发或对治疗产生耐药性。本系统性文献综述旨在对用于复发/难治多发性骨髓瘤系统治疗经济评价的现有经济模型进行批判性审查,并总结这些模型如何处理治疗方法和先前治疗暴露的差异:按照事先批准的方案,于 2023 年 2 月 17 日在相关数据库中对 2014 年以来发表的模型进行了文献检索。此外,还人工搜索了主要卫生技术评估机构的网站,以查找自 2018 年以来作为提交档案的一部分而发表的模型。与模型概念化、结构、不确定性、验证和透明度相关的报告信息被提取到预先定义的提取表中:共纳入了 49 个模型,这些模型评估了多种治疗方法中的各种干预措施。结果:共纳入了 49 个模型,这些模型评估了多种治疗方法的各种干预措施,其中只有 5 个模型专门针对接受过大量预处理的患者和/或对多种治疗方法难治的患者。大多数模型采用传统的简单方法,如分区生存模型(28 个)或马尔可夫模型(9 个)。所有纳入的模型都评估了特定的干预措施,而不是整个治疗序列。如果模型中包含后续疗法,则一般仅从成本和资源使用的角度进行考虑。这些模型通常使用总生存期和无进展生存期作为模型输入,尽管数据往往不成熟。敏感性分析经常被报告(n = 41),而只有不到一半的模型(n = 19)考虑了验证:已发表的复发性/难治性多发性骨髓瘤经济模型很少采用个体患者方法,主要原因是与较简单的建模方法相比,需要更复杂的数据假设。由于许多患者在接受多种治疗后病情都会出现进展,因此越来越需要对复杂的治疗策略进行建模,从而在未来采用更复杂的方法。保持透明度、高报告标准和对不确定性的全面分析对于支持这些进步至关重要。
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
A Systematic Review of Modeling Approaches to Evaluate Treatments for Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Critical Review and Considerations for Future Health Economic Models.

Background and objective: Multiple myeloma is a rare incurable hematological cancer in which most patients relapse or become refractory to treatment. This systematic literature review aimed to critically review the existing economic models used in economic evaluations of systemic treatments for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and to summarize how the models addressed differences in the line of therapy and exposure to prior treatment.

Methods: Following a pre-approved protocol, literature searches were conducted on 17 February, 2023, in relevant databases for models published since 2014. Additionally, key health technology assessment agency websites were manually searched for models published as part of submission dossiers since 2018. Reported information related to model conceptualization, structure, uncertainty, validation, and transparency were extracted into a pre-defined extraction sheet.

Results: In total, 49 models assessing a wide range of interventions across multiple lines of therapy were included. Only five models specific to heavily pre-treated patients and/or those who were refractory to multiple treatment classes were identified. Most models followed a conventional simple methodology, such as partitioned survival (n = 28) or Markov models (n = 9). All included models evaluated specific interventions rather than the whole treatment sequence. Where subsequent therapies were included in the model, these were generally only considered from a cost and resource use perspective. The models generally used overall and progression-free survival as model inputs, although data were often immature. Sensitivity analyses were frequently reported (n = 41) whereas validation was only considered in less than half (n = 19) of the models.

Conclusions: Published economic models in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma rarely followed an individual patient approach, mainly owing to the higher need for complex data assumptions compared with simpler modeling approaches. As many patients experience disease progression on multiple treatment lines, there is a growing need for modeling complex treatment strategies, leading to more sophisticated approaches in the future. Maintaining transparency, high reporting standards, and thorough analyses of uncertainty are crucial to support these advancements.

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
Design and Features of Pricing and Payment Schemes for Health Technologies: A Scoping Review and a Proposal for a Flexible Need-Driven Classification. Economic Burden Associated with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in the United States. The Impact of Tocilizumab Coverage on Health Equity for Inpatients with COVID-19 in the USA: A Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Managed Entry Agreements for High-Cost, One-Off Potentially Curative Therapies: A Framework and Calculation Tool to Determine Their Suitability. How Much Better is Faster? Empirical Tests of QALY Assumptions in Health-Outcome Sequences.
×
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