Mwayi Kachapila, Samuel Watson, Thomas Pinkney, James A Hall, Lazaros Andronis, Raymond Oppong
{"title":"多臂、多阶段自适应和自适应平台随机对照试验的设计和修改中的经济考虑因素:系统性文献综述。","authors":"Mwayi Kachapila, Samuel Watson, Thomas Pinkney, James A Hall, Lazaros Andronis, Raymond Oppong","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.10.3849","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>There is uncertainty around whether, and under what circumstances, there is value in embedding economic considerations into multi-arm, multi-stage (MAMS), adaptive, and adaptive-platform trial designs. This systematic review was conducted to assess the analytical methods and factors that are considered when incorporating health economic analyses when designing and modifying MAMS adaptive, and adaptive-platform trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review searched for health economic analyses, including planned analyses, of interventions assessed through MAMS adaptive, and adaptive-platform trials. The search for articles was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov electronic databases from their inception to 7<sup>th</sup> August 2023. The screening for articles was conducted by two blinded reviewers who followed a predetermined screening process. A narrative synthesis was conducted on the methods used in the analysis and how the results informed the trial designs and modifications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review included 17 articles of which four were results of economic evaluations while 13 were economic evaluation protocols. No trial reported using pre-trial economic evaluations to inform the trial designs. In 14 articles it was possible to estimate the costs and benefits of the interventions at the interim analysis stages. However, there were only five interim cost-effectiveness analyses and three of these informed decisions to drop or maintain trial arms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Health economics is being embedded in some MAMS adaptive, and platform-adaptive trials to inform trial modifications. However, the use of economic evidence is limited, both by design and circumstance, despite its potential important to adoption decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Economic considerations in designs and modifications of multi-arm, multi-stage adaptive, and adaptive-platform randomised control trials: A systematic literature review.\",\"authors\":\"Mwayi Kachapila, Samuel Watson, Thomas Pinkney, James A Hall, Lazaros Andronis, Raymond Oppong\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jval.2024.10.3849\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>There is uncertainty around whether, and under what circumstances, there is value in embedding economic considerations into multi-arm, multi-stage (MAMS), adaptive, and adaptive-platform trial designs. This systematic review was conducted to assess the analytical methods and factors that are considered when incorporating health economic analyses when designing and modifying MAMS adaptive, and adaptive-platform trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review searched for health economic analyses, including planned analyses, of interventions assessed through MAMS adaptive, and adaptive-platform trials. The search for articles was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov electronic databases from their inception to 7<sup>th</sup> August 2023. The screening for articles was conducted by two blinded reviewers who followed a predetermined screening process. A narrative synthesis was conducted on the methods used in the analysis and how the results informed the trial designs and modifications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review included 17 articles of which four were results of economic evaluations while 13 were economic evaluation protocols. No trial reported using pre-trial economic evaluations to inform the trial designs. In 14 articles it was possible to estimate the costs and benefits of the interventions at the interim analysis stages. However, there were only five interim cost-effectiveness analyses and three of these informed decisions to drop or maintain trial arms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Health economics is being embedded in some MAMS adaptive, and platform-adaptive trials to inform trial modifications. However, the use of economic evidence is limited, both by design and circumstance, despite its potential important to adoption decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Value in Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Value in Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.10.3849\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.10.3849","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Economic considerations in designs and modifications of multi-arm, multi-stage adaptive, and adaptive-platform randomised control trials: A systematic literature review.
Objective: There is uncertainty around whether, and under what circumstances, there is value in embedding economic considerations into multi-arm, multi-stage (MAMS), adaptive, and adaptive-platform trial designs. This systematic review was conducted to assess the analytical methods and factors that are considered when incorporating health economic analyses when designing and modifying MAMS adaptive, and adaptive-platform trials.
Methods: The review searched for health economic analyses, including planned analyses, of interventions assessed through MAMS adaptive, and adaptive-platform trials. The search for articles was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov electronic databases from their inception to 7th August 2023. The screening for articles was conducted by two blinded reviewers who followed a predetermined screening process. A narrative synthesis was conducted on the methods used in the analysis and how the results informed the trial designs and modifications.
Results: The review included 17 articles of which four were results of economic evaluations while 13 were economic evaluation protocols. No trial reported using pre-trial economic evaluations to inform the trial designs. In 14 articles it was possible to estimate the costs and benefits of the interventions at the interim analysis stages. However, there were only five interim cost-effectiveness analyses and three of these informed decisions to drop or maintain trial arms.
Conclusions: Health economics is being embedded in some MAMS adaptive, and platform-adaptive trials to inform trial modifications. However, the use of economic evidence is limited, both by design and circumstance, despite its potential important to adoption decisions.
期刊介绍:
Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.