Search

Objective: Self‐monitored point‐of‐care urate‐measuring devices are an underexplored strategy to improve adherence to urate‐lowering therapy and clinical outcomes in gout. This study observed patient‐led urate self‐monitoring practice and assessed its influence on allopurinol adherence, urate control, and health‐related quality of life. Methods: People with gout (n = 31) and prescribed allopurinol self‐monitored their urate concentrations (HumaSens2.0plus) at baseline and thereafter monthly for 12 months (3 months per quarter). Adherence to allopurinol was measured using medication event monitoring technology (Medication Event Monitoring System cap). Time spent below the target urate concentration (<0.36 mmol/L) was determined. Health‐related quality of life was measured using a survey (EuroQoL EQ‐5D‐5L). Gout flares were recorded. Two‐tailed Spearman correlation and the Wilcoxon matched‐pairs signed‐rank test (P < 0.05) were used for statistical comparisons. Results: Most participants were male (94%) and had urate concentrations below the target (74%) at baseline. Overall, seven participants demonstrated repeated periods of "missed doses" (two or fewer allopurinol doses missed consecutively) and "drug holidays" (three or more missed doses). Most participants (94%) persisted with allopurinol. Time spent within the target urate concentration increased 1.3‐fold (from 79% to 100%; P = 0.346), and the incidence of gout flares decreased 1.6‐fold (from 8 to 5; P = 0.25) in the final quarter compared to that in the first quarter of the study. Health‐related quality of life was reduced for participants reporting at least one gout flare (median utility values 0.9309 vs 0.9563, P = 0.04). Conclusion: Patient‐led urate self‐monitoring may support the maintenance of allopurinol adherence and improve urate control, thus reducing the incidence of gout flares. Further research on patient‐led urate self‐monitoring in a randomized controlled study is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adverse events suffer from poor reporting within randomised controlled trials, despite them being crucial to the evaluation of a treatment. A recent update to the CONSORT harms checklist aims to improve reporting by providing structure and consistency to the information presented. We propose an extension wherein harms would be reported in conjunction with effectiveness outcome(s) rather than in silo to provide a more complete picture of the evidence acquired within a trial. Benefit-risk methods are designed to simultaneously consider both benefits and risks, and therefore, we believe these methods could be implemented to improve the prominence of adverse events when reporting trials. The aim of this article is to use case studies to demonstrate the practical utility of benefit-risk methods to present adverse events results alongside effectiveness results. Two randomised controlled trials have been selected as case studies, the Option-DM trial and the SANAD II trial. Using a previous review, a shortlist of 17 benefit-risk methods which could potentially be used for reporting RCTs was created. From this shortlist, three benefit-risk methods are applied across the two case studies. We selected these methods for their usefulness to achieve the aim of this paper and which are commonly used in the literature. The methods selected were the Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) Framework, net clinical benefit (NCB), and the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 3 × 3 table. Results using the benefit-risk method added further context and detail to the clinical summaries made from the trials. In the case of the SANAD II trial, the clinicians concluded that despite the primary outcome being improved by the treatment, the increase in adverse events negated the improvement and the treatment was therefore not recommended. The benefit-risk methods applied to this case study outlined the data that this decision was based on in a clear and transparent way. Using benefit-risk methods to report the results of trials can increase the prominence of adverse event results by presenting them alongside the primary efficacy/effectiveness outcomes. This ensures that all the factors which would be used to determine whether a treatment would be recommended are transparent to the reader. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Gout management remains suboptimal despite safe and effective urate‐lowering therapy. Self‐monitoring of urate may improve gout management, however, the acceptability of urate self‐monitoring by people with gout is unknown. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of urate self‐monitoring in people with gout. Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with people taking urate‐lowering therapy (N = 30) in a 12‐month trial of urate self‐monitoring in rural and urban Australia. Interviews covered the experience of monitoring and its effect on gout self‐management. Deidentified transcripts were analysed thematically. Results: Participants valued the ability to self‐monitor and gain more understanding of urate control compared with the annual monitoring ordered by their doctors. Participants indicated that self‐monitoring at home was easy, convenient and informed gout self‐management behaviours such as dietary modifications, hydration, exercise and medication routines. Many participants self‐monitored to understand urate concentration changes in response to feeling a gout flare was imminent or whether their behaviours, for example, alcohol intake, increased the risk of a gout flare. Urate concentrations were shared with doctors mainly when they were above target to seek management support, and this led to allopurinol dose increases in some cases. Conclusion: Urate self‐monitoring was viewed by people with gout as convenient and useful for independent management of gout. They believed self‐monitoring achieved better gout control with a less restricted lifestyle. Urate data was shared with doctors at the patient's discretion and helped inform clinical decisions, such as allopurinol dose changes. Further research on implementing urate self‐monitoring in routine care would enable an evaluation of its impact on medication adherence and clinical outcomes, as well as inform gout management guidelines. Patient or Public Contribution: One person with gout, who was not a participant, was involved in the study design by providing feedback and pilot testing the semistructured interview guide. In response to their feedback, subsequent modifications to the interview guide were made to improve the understandability of the questions from a patient perspective. No additional questions were suggested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Delayed response to clinical deterioration of hospital inpatients is common. Deployment of an electronic automated advisory vital signs monitoring and notification system to signal clinical deterioration is associated with significant improvements in clinical outcomes but there is no evidence on the cost-effectiveness compared with routine monitoring, in the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom (UK). Methods: A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of an electronic automated advisory notification system versus standard care, in adults admitted to a district general hospital. Analyses considered: (1) the cost-effectiveness of the technology based on secondary analysis of patient level data of 3787 inpatients in a before-and-after study; and (2) the cost-utility (cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)) over a lifetime horizon, extrapolated using published data. Analysis was conducted from the perspective of the NHS. Uncertainty in the model was assessed using a range of sensitivity analyses. Results: The study population had a mean age of 68 years, 48% male, with a median inpatient stay of 6 days. Expected life expectancy at discharge was assumed to be 17.74 years. (1) Cost-effectiveness analysis: The automated notification system was more effective (-0.027 reduction in mean events per patient) and provided a cost saving of -£12.17 (-182.07 to 154.80) per patient admission. (2) Cost-utility analysis: Over a lifetime horizon the automated notification system was dominant, demonstrating a positive incremental QALY gain (0.0287 QALYs, equivalent to ~10 days of perfect health) and a cost saving of £55.35. At a threshold of £20,000 per QALY, the probability of automated monitoring being cost-effective in the NHS was 81%. Increased use of cableless sensors may reduce cost-savings, however, the intervention remains cost-effective at 100% usage (ICER: £3,107/QALY). Stratified cost-effectiveness analysis by age, National Early Warning Score (NEWS) on admission, and primary diagnosis indicated the automated notification system was cost-effective for most strategies and that use representative of the patient population studied was the most cost-saving strategy. Conclusion: Automated notification system for adult patients admitted to general wards appears to be a cost-effective use in the NHS; adopting this technology could be good use of scarce resources with significance for patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is acknowledged that health technology assessment (HTA) is an inherently value-based activity that makes use of normative reasoning alongside empirical evidence. But the language used to conceptualise and articulate HTA's normative aspects is demonstrably unnuanced, imprecise, and inconsistently employed, undermining transparency and preventing proper scrutiny of the rationales on which decisions are based. This paper – developed through a cross-disciplinary collaboration of 24 researchers with expertise in healthcare priority-setting – seeks to address this problem by offering a clear definition of key terms and distinguishing between the types of normative commitment invoked during HTA, thus providing a novel conceptual framework for the articulation of reasoning. Through application to a hypothetical case, it is illustrated how this framework can operate as a practical tool through which HTA practitioners and policymakers can enhance the transparency and coherence of their decision-making, while enabling others to hold them more easily to account. The framework is offered as a starting point for further discussion amongst those with a desire to enhance the legitimacy and fairness of HTA by facilitating practical public reasoning, in which decisions are made on behalf of the public, in public view, through a chain of reasoning that withstands ethical scrutiny. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this 6-month intervention pilot feasibility randomised trial was to test sending brief messages using mobile phones to promote self-management through taking medication as prescribed to people with type 2 diabetes. This was to inform the design and conduct of a future large-scale United Kingdom-based clinical trial and establish the feasibility of recruitment, the technology used, follow-up, and data collection. Methods: A multicentre individually randomised, controlled parallel group trial in primary care, recruiting adults (≥ 35 years) with type 2 diabetes in England. Consenting participants were randomly allocated to receive short message system text messages up to four times a week, or usual care, for a period of 6 months; messages contained behavioural change techniques targeting medication use. The primary outcome was the rate of recruitment to randomisation of participants to the trial with a planned rate of 22 participants randomised per month. The study also aimed to establish the feasibility of follow-up at 6 months, with an aim of retaining more than 80% of participants. Data, including patient-reported measures, were collected at baseline and the end of the 6-month follow-up period, and a notes review was completed at 24 months. Results: The trial took place between 26 November 2018 and 30 September 2019. In total 209 participants were randomly allocated to intervention (n = 103) or usual care (n = 106). The maximum rate of monthly recruitment to the trial was 60–80 participants per month. In total, 12,734 messages were sent to participants. Of these messages, 47 were identified as having failed to be sent by the service provider. Participants sent 2,864 messages to the automated messaging system. Baseline data from medical records were available for > 90% of participants with the exception of cholesterol (78.9%). At 6 months, a further HbA1c measurement was reported for 67% of participants. In total medical record data were available at 6 months for 207 (99.0%) of participants and completed self-report data were available for 177 (84.7%) of participants. Conclusion: The feasibility of a large-scale randomised evaluation of brief message intervention for people with type 2 diabetes appears to be high using this efficient design. Failure rate of sending messages is low, rapid recruitment was achieved among people with type 2 diabetes, clinical data is available on participants from routine medical records and self-report of economic measures was acceptable. Trial registration: ISCTRN ISRCTN13404264. Registered on 10 October 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The sources of bias in medication adherence research have not been comprehensively explored. We aimed to identify biases expected to affect adherence research and to develop a framework for mapping these onto the phases of adherence (initiation, implementation and discontinuation). A literature search was conducted, key papers were reviewed and a Catalogue of Bias was consulted. The specific biases related to adherence measurement and metrics were mapped onto the phases of adherence using a tabular matrix. Twenty‐three biases were identified, of which 11 were specifically relevant to adherence measures and metrics. The mapping framework showed differences in the numbers and types of biases associated with each measure and metric while highlighting those common to many adherence study designs (e.g., unacceptability bias and apprehension bias). The framework will inform the design of adherence studies and the development of risk of bias tools for adherence research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Orphan Regulation ((EC) No 141/2000) has successfully redirected private and public investment towards previously neglected areas through incentives, regulatory obligations and rewards. However, the growth in the number of licensed orphan medicinal products (OMPs) has led to concerns about increased costs. The aims were to investigate the trend in the costs of OMPs to the National Health Service in Wales, to attribute costs of medicines within and outside periods of marketing exclusivity, and estimate the contribution of individual medicines to the overall costs of OMPs. Methods: Expenditure on OMPs in Wales was analysed between the 2014/15 and 2019/20 financial years using data on prescriptions dispensed in primary care, secondary care, and specialised commissioned services. OMP spend was calculated as a proportion of total medicines expenditure, whether it was incurred during, or outside the marketing exclusivity period (MEP), and by therapeutic area and medicine. Results: Overall spend on OMPs and all medicines increased from £32 m to £82 m, and from £1,030 m to £1,198 m, respectively, with the proportion of spend on OMPs more than doubling from 3.1% to 6.9% per annum. Average year-on-year growth in the costs of OMPs was 21%, compared to 2% for other medicines. Costs following MEP expiry contributed significantly to overall OMP costs, increasing from £8 m to £30 m, corresponding to an increase from 24% to 37%. Treatments for 'malignant disease and immunosuppression', 'nutrition and blood' and the 'respiratory system' accounted for 90% of all OMP spend. Half of total OMP annual expenditure was on just 4 medicines in 2014/15, increasing to 8 in 2019/20. Conclusions: Both the number of OMPs and the amount spent on OMPs in Wales has increased over time, possibly as a consequence of favourable licensing conditions, permissive health technology assessment policies and dedicated funding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Measuring adherence to medication is complex due to the diversity of contexts in which medications are prescribed, dispensed and used. The Timelines‐Events‐Objectives‐Sources (TEOS) framework outlined a process to operationalize adherence. We aimed to develop practical recommendations for quantification of medication adherence using self‐report (SR), electronic monitoring (EM) and electronic healthcare databases (EHD) consistent with the TEOS framework for adherence operationalization. Methods: An adherence methodology working group of the International Society for Medication Adherence (ESPACOMP) analysed implications of the process of medication adherence for all data sources and discussed considerations specific to SR, EM and EHD regarding the information available on the prescribing, dispensing, recommended and actual use timelines, the four events relevant for distinguishing the adherence phases, the study objectives commonly addressed with each type of data, and the potential sources of measurement error and quality criteria applicable. Results: Four key implications for medication adherence measurement are common to all data sources: adherence is a comparison between two series of events (recommended and actual use); it refers to one or more specific medication(s); it applies to regular repeated events coinciding with known recommended dosing; and it requires separate measurement of the three adherence phases for a complete picture of patients' adherence. We propose recommendations deriving from these statements, and aspects to be considered in study design when measuring adherence with SR, EM and EHD using the TEOS framework. Conclusion: The quality of medication adherence estimates is the result of several design choices that may optimize the data available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stigma may influence the use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). However, there is an absence of robust measures for PrEP-related stigma. We describe an adaptation of a HIV stigma scale for use in PrEP users and experiences of PrEP users in Wales (UK) with regards to PrEP-related stigma. A mixed methods study was conducted where PrEP users completed questionnaire items about PrEP-related stigma and a subset were interviewed about their experiences of taking PrEP. We adapted items from the HIV stigma scale and assessed construct validity and internal consistency. We analysed interview data using a framework approach, with themes focussing on enacted and anticipated stigma in order to identify areas for scale refinement. Our measure had good psychometric properties but additional items may be useful (e.g. specific instances of enacted stigma, concerns around homonegativity). Further work is needed to develop this scale and validate it in a larger sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated the determinants of daily PrEP use and coverage of condomless anal sex (CAS) by PrEP among men who have sex with men in Wales, UK. We measured PrEP use by electronic monitors and CAS by secure online surveys. We defined PrEP use based on daily medication cap openings and coverage as CAS episodes preceded by ≥ 3 days of PrEP use and followed by ≥ 2 days of PrEP use. We included 57 participants (5463 observations). An STI diagnosis was associated with lower PrEP use but also lower PrEP coverage. Older adults had higher PrEP use. A belief that other PrEP users took PrEP as prescribed was associated with lower PrEP coverage. An STI diagnosis is an important cue for an intervention, reflecting episodes of high-risk sexual behaviour and low PrEP coverage. Other results provide a basis for the development of an evidence-informed intervention for promoting coverage of PrEP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In paediatric epilepsy, the evidence of effectiveness of antiseizure treatment is inconclusive for some types of epilepsy. As with other paediatric clinical trials, researchers undertaking paediatric epilepsy clinical trials face a range of challenges that may compromise external validity Main body: In this paper, we critically reflect upon the factors which impacted recruitment to the pilot phase of a phase IV unblinded, randomised controlled 3×2 factorial trial examining the effectiveness of two antiseizure medications (ASMs) and a sleep behaviour intervention in children with Rolandic epilepsy. We consider the processes established to support recruitment, public and patient involvement and engagement (PPIE), site induction, our oversight of recruitment targets and figures, and the actions we took to help us understand why we failed to recruit sufficient children to continue to the substantive trial phase. The key lessons learned were about parent preference, children's involvement and collaboration in decision-making, potential and alternative trial designs, and elicitation of stated preferences pre-trial design. Despite pre-funding PPIE during the trial design phase, we failed to anticipate the scale of parental treatment preference for or against antiseizure medication (ASMs) and consequent unwillingness to be randomised. Future studies should ensure more detailed and in-depth consultation to ascertain parent and/or patient preferences. More intense engagement with parents and children exploring their ideas about treatment preferences could, perhaps, have helped predict some recruitment issues. Infrequent seizures or screening children close to natural remission were possible explanations for non-consent. It is possible some clinicians were unintentionally unable to convey clinical equipoise influencing parental decision against participation. We wanted children to be involved in decisions about trial participation. However, despite having tailored written and video information to explain the trial to children we do not know whether these materials were viewed in each consent conversation or how much input children had towards parents' decisions to participate. Novel methods such as parent/patient preference trials and/or discrete choice experiments may be the way forward. Conclusion: The importance of diligent consultation, the consideration of novel methods such as parent/patient preference trials and/or discrete choice experiments in studies examining the effectiveness of ASMs versus no-ASMs cannot be overemphasised even in the presence of widespread clinician equipoise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To estimate the health utilities and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) receiving reldesemtiv versus placebo in FORTITUDE-ALS. We performed a post hoc analysis of clinical trial data from FORTITUDE-ALS (NCT03160898). This Phase IIb, double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 12-week trial evaluated reldesemtiv in patients with ALS. Health utilities from the five-level version of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) were estimated using ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) scores collected during the trial. QALYs were estimated using the area under the curve method. The full analysis set consisted of 456 patients (reldesemtiv n = 342, placebo n = 114), who received at least one dose of the double-blind study drug, and had ALSFRS-R assessed at baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment. The difference in EQ-5D-5L utility least-squares (LS) mean change from baseline to week 12 for reldesemtiv versus placebo, adjusted for baseline values, was statistically significant (0.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01, 0.05; p =.0008). The incremental QALY of reldesemtiv versus placebo adjusted for baseline utility values showed a modest, but statistically significant, difference (0.004, 95% CI: 0.001, 0.007; p =.0058). This post hoc analysis of FORTITUDE-ALS suggests that reldesemtiv showed a modest but significant benefit in health utilities and QALYs compared with placebo. Future long-term studies that include direct collection of EQ-5D-5L data will be needed to confirm our findings. NCT03160898 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sublingual tablet buprenorphine (BUP-SL) and oral liquid methadone (MET) are the daily, standard-of-care (SOC) opioid agonist treatment medications for opioid use disorder (OUD). A sizable proportion of the OUD treatment population is not exposed to sufficient treatment to attain the desired clinical benefit. Two promising therapeutic technologies address this deficit: long-acting injectable buprenorphine and personalised psychosocial interventions (PSI). This study will determine (A) the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness - monthly injectable, extended-release (BUP-XR) in a head-to-head comparison with BUP-SL and MET, and (B) the effectiveness of BUP-XR with adjunctive PSI versus BUP-SL and MET with PSI. Safety, retention, craving, substance use, quality-adjusted life years, social functioning, and subjective recovery from OUD will be also evaluated.Methods: This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, open-label, parallel-group, superiority RCT, with a qualitative (mixed-methods) evaluation. The study population is adults. The setting is five National Health Service community treatment centres in England and Scotland. At each centre, participants will be randomly allocated (1:1) to BUP-XR or SOC. At the London study co-ordinating centre, there will also be allocation of participants to BUP-XR with PSI or SOC with PSI. With 24 weeks of study treatment, the primary outcome is days of abstinence from non-medical opioids during study weeks 2-24 combined with up to 12 urine drug screen tests for opioids. For 90% power (alpha, 5%; 15% inflation for attrition), 304 participants are needed for the BUP-XR versus SOC comparison. With the same planning parameters, 300 participants are needed for the BUP-XR and PSI versus SOC and PSI comparison. Statistical and health economic analysis plans will be published before data-lock on the Open Science Framework. Findings will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards.Discussion: This pragmatic randomised controlled trial is the first evaluation of injectable BUP-XR versus the SOC medications BUP-SL and MET, with personalised PSI. If there is evidence for the superiority of BUP-XR over SOC medication, study findings will have substantial implications for OUD clinical practice and treatment policy in the UK and elsewhere.Trial Registration: EU Clinical Trials register 2018-004460-63. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: HIV pre‐exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) involves the use of antiretroviral medication in HIV‐negative individuals considered to be at risk of acquiring HIV. It has been shown to prevent HIV and has been available in Wales since July 2017. Measuring and understanding adherence to PrEP is complex as it relies on the simultaneous understanding of both PrEP use and sexual activity. We aimed to understand the experiences of men who have sex with men (MSM) living in Wales initiating, implementing and persisting with HIV PrEP. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with MSM PrEP users in Wales who participated in a cohort study of PrEP use and sexual behaviour. Following completion of the cohort study, participants were invited to take part in a semistructured interview about their experiences of taking PrEP. We aimed to include both individuals who had persisted with and discontinued PrEP during the study. The interview topic guide was informed by the ABC taxonomy for medication adherence and the theory of planned behaviour. We analysed our data using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Twenty‐one participants were interviewed, five having discontinued PrEP during the cohort study. The developed themes focused on triggers for initiating PrEP, habitual behaviour, drivers for discontinuation and engagement with sexual health services. Stigma surrounding both PrEP and HIV permeated most topics, acting as a driver for initiating PrEP, an opportunity to reduce discrimination against people living with HIV, but also a concern around the perception of PrEP users. Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate PrEP‐taking experiences incorporating established medication adherence taxonomy. We highlight key experiences regarding the initiation, implementation and persistence with PrEP and describe how taking PrEP may promote positive engagement with sexual health services. These findings may be useful for informing PrEP rollout programmes and need to be explored in other key populations. Patient and Public Contribution: PrEP users, in addition to PrEP providers and representatives of HIV advocacy and policy, were involved in developing the topic guide for this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to systematically review and compare the quantitative effect of clinical interventions designed to improve adherence to urate-lowering therapy. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for interventional studies reporting quantitative adherence to urate-lowering therapy information as an endpoint. Intervention details, quantitative adherence information, clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness data were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed. From 4721 records, 11 studies (3 randomised and 8 observational) met the inclusion criteria. Pharmacist- and nurse-led interventions were described, involving a mixture of patient education, telephone or mobile texting reminders, and medication blister packing. Quantitative adherence information was obtained using methods such as patient self-reporting and pharmacy-dispensing data. Most studies had a moderate-to-high risk of bias. Two of the three randomised studies reported improvement in adherence between the intervention and control groups, including a 13% increase in the mean proportion of days covered >0.8 [341/681 participants (50%) versus 289/782 participants (37%)] and an 88% increase in achieving a high Medicine Taking Behaviour questionnaire score [37/42 participants (88.1%) versus 0/40 participants (0%)]. Four of the eight observational studies reported improved adherence from baseline (ranging from 33% to 91% based on the longitudinal change in adherence metrics reported). A comparison of the different types of interventions was not feasible due to the heterogeneity between study designs and adherence metrics used. These findings support the need for more interventional studies to be conducted to aid adherence management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: There has been sustained growth in the prescribing of direct oral anticoagulants (OACs) in primary care in the UK. Given the different indications, properties and prices of OACs, variation between prescribers is expected; however, a high level of variation may be evidence of inappropriate or suboptimal prescribing. This study examined the variation in the relative use of OACs in primary care in Wales. Methods: Data on total defined daily doses of all community‐dispensed OACs in 2019 were linked at the GP practice level with disease registers, patient demographic data and GP and patient numbers. The relative use of each OAC, as a fraction of all OACs prescribed, was analysed using Dirichlet regression to quantify the association between prescribing patterns and practice and area‐level characteristics. Results: Across 417 GP practices, the mean (range) in the relative prescribing of warfarin was 37% (6%–64%), apixaban was 32% (2%–65%), rivaroxaban 23% (0%–66%), dabigatran 3% (0%–23%) and edoxaban 6% (0%–59%). Statistical modelling provided strong evidence that prescribing patterns are associated with a GP practice's health board and also their nearest major hospital. Compared to the null model, a model including health board resulted in a 15% fall in Akaike information criterion, increasing to 20% with the addition of nearest major hospital and 27% including further covariates. Conclusion: Systematic variation in OAC prescribing, by health board and based on nearest hospital, indicates that factors other than patient clinical characteristics and preferences may be influencing prescribing decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is a rare, neurological disease that places a significant burden on patients, their carers, and healthcare systems.Objectives: To estimate patient and carer health utilities and costs of NMOSD within the UK setting.Methods: Patients with NMOSD and their carers, recruited via a regional specialist treatment centre, completed a postal questionnaire that included a resource use measure, the EuroQoL (EQ)-5D-5L, EQ-5D-VAS, Vision and Quality of Life Index (VisQoL), Carer Experience Survey (CES) and the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). The questionnaire asked about respondents' use of health and community care services, non-medical costs, informal care and work capacity. Data were analysed descriptively. Uncertainties in costs and utilities were assessed using bootstrap analysis.Results: 117 patients and 74 informal carers responded to the survey. Patients' mean EQ-5D-5L and VisQoL health utilities (95% central range) were 0.54 (- 0.29, 1.00) and 0.79 (0.11, 0.99), respectively. EQ-5D-5L utility decreased with increasing EDSS score bandings, from 0.80 (0.75, 0.85) for EDSS ≤ 4.0, to 0.20 (- 0.29, 0.56) for EDSS 8.0 to 9.5. Mean, 3-month total costs were £5623 (£2096, £12,156), but ranged from £562 (£381, £812) to £32,717 (£2888, £98,568) for these EDSS bandings. Carer-reported EQ-5D-5L utility and CES index scores were 0.85 (0.82, 0.89) and 57.67 (52.69, 62.66). Mean, 3-month costs of informal care were £13,150 to £24,560.Conclusions: NMOSD has significant impacts on health utilities and NHS and carer costs. These data can be used as inputs to cost-effectiveness analyses of new medicines for NMOSD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Novel oral iron supplements may be associated with a reduced incidence of adverse drug reactions compared to standard treatments of iron deficiency anaemia. The aim was to establish their value‐based price under conditions of uncertainty surrounding their tolerability. Methods: A discrete‐time Markov model was developed to assess the value‐based price of oral iron preparations based on their incremental cost per quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the perspective of the NHS in the UK. Primary and secondary care resource use and health state occupancy probabilities were estimated from routine electronic health records; and unit costs and health state utilities were derived from published sources. Patients were pre‐menopausal women with iron deficiency anaemia who were prescribed oral iron supplementation between 2000 and 2014. Results: The model reflecting current use of iron salts yielded a mean total cost to the NHS of £779, and 0.84 QALYs over 12 months. If a new iron preparation were to reduce the risk of adverse drug reactions by 30–40%, then its value‐based price, based on a threshold of £20 000 per QALY, would be in the region of £10–£13 per month, or about 7–9 times the average price of basic iron salts. Conclusions: There are no adequate, direct comparisons of new oral iron supplements to ferrous iron salts, and therefore other approaches are needed to assess their value. Our modelling shows that they are potentially cost‐effective at prices that are an order of magnitude higher than existing iron salts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Some levothyroxine unresponsive individuals with hypothyroidism are prescribed a natural desiccated thyroid (NDT) preparation such as Armour Thyroid® or ERFA Thyroid®. These contain a mixture of levothyroxine and liothyronine in a fixed ratio. We evaluated the response to NDT in individuals at a single endocrine centre in terms of how the change from levothyroxine to NDT impacted on their lives in relation to quality of life (QOL) and thyroid symptoms. Methods: The ThyPRO39 (thyroid symptomatology) and EQ‐5D‐5L‐related QoL/EQ5D5L (generic QOL) questionnaires were administered to 31 consecutive patients who had been initiated on NDT, before initiating treatment/6 months later. Results: There were 28 women and 3 men. The dose range of NDT was 60‐180 mg daily. Age range was 26‐77 years with length of time since diagnosis with hypothyroidism ranging from 2 to 40 years. One person discontinued the NDT because of lack of response; two because of cardiac symptoms. EQ‐5D‐5L utility increased from a mean (SD) of 0.214 (0.338) at baseline, to 0.606 (0.248) after 6 months; corresponding to a difference of 0.392 (95% CI 0.241‐0.542), t = 6.82, P <.001. EQ‐VAS scores increased from 33.4 (17.2) to 71.1 (17.5), a difference of 37.7 (95% CI 25.2‐50.2), t = −4.9, P <.001. ThyPRO scores showed consistent fall across all domains with the composite QoL‐impact Score improving from 68.3 (95% CI 60.9‐75.7) to 25.2 (95% CI 18.7‐31.7), a difference of 43.1 (95% CI 33‐53.2) (t = 5.6, P <.001). Conclusion: Significant symptomatic benefit and improvement in QOL was experienced by people with a history of levothyroxine unresponsive hypothyroidism treated with NDT, suggesting the need for further evaluation of NDT in this context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Induction of long-term synaptic depression (LTD) is proposed as a treatment mechanism for chronic pain but remains untested in clinical populations. Two interlinked studies; (1) A patient-assessor blinded, randomised, sham-controlled clinical trial and (2) an open-label mechanistic study, sought to examine therapeutic LTD for persons with chronic peripheral nerve injury pain.Methods: (1) Patients were randomised using a concealed, computer-generated schedule to either active or sham non-invasive low-frequency nerve stimulation (LFS), for 3 months (minimum 10 min/day). The primary outcome was average pain intensity (0-10 Likert scale) recorded over 1 week, at 3 months, compared between study groups. (2) On trial completion, consenting subjects entered a mechanistic study assessing somatosensory changes in response to LFS.Results: (1) 76 patients were randomised (38 per group), with 65 (31 active, 34 sham) included in the intention to treat analysis. The primary outcome was not significant, pain scores were 0.3 units lower in active group (95% CI - 1.0, 0.3; p = 0.30) giving an effect size of 0.19 (Cohen's D). Two non-device related serious adverse events were reported. (2) In the mechanistic study (n = 19) primary outcomes of mechanical pain sensitivity (p = 0.006) and dynamic mechanical allodynia (p = 0.043) significantly improved indicating reduced mechanical hyperalgesia.Conclusions: Results from the RCT failed to reach significance. Results from the mechanistic study provide new evidence for effective induction of LTD in a clinical population. Taken together results add to mechanistic understanding of LTD and help inform future study design and approaches to treatment. Trial registration ISRCTN53432663. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Cyclophosphamide (CYC) is used in clinical practice off‐label for the induction of remission in childhood polyarteritis nodosa (PAN). Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) might offer a less toxic alternative. This study was undertaken to explore the relative effectiveness of CYC and MMF treatment in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Methods: This was an international, open‐label, Bayesian RCT to investigate the relative effectiveness of CYC and MMF for remission induction in childhood PAN. Eleven patients with newly diagnosed childhood PAN were randomized (1:1) to receive MMF or intravenous CYC; all patients received the same glucocorticoid regimen. The primary end point was remission within 6 months while compliant with glucocorticoid taper. Bayesian distributions for remission rates were established a priori for MMF and CYC by experienced clinicians and updated to posterior distributions on trial completion. Results: Baseline disease activity and features were similar between the 2 treatment groups. The primary end point was met in 4 of 6 patients (67%) in the MMF group and 4 of 5 patients (80%) in the CYC group. Time to remission was shorter in the MMF group compared to the CYC group (median 7.1 weeks versus 17.6 weeks). No relapses occurred in either group within 18 months. Two serious infections were found to be likely linked to MMF treatment. Physical and psychosocial quality‐of‐life scores were superior in the MMF group compared to the CYC group at 6 months and 18 months. Combining the prior expert opinion with results from the present study provided posterior estimates of remission of 71% for MMF (90% credibility interval [90% CrI] 51, 83) and 75% for CYC (90% CrI 57, 86). Conclusion: The present results, taken together with prior opinion, indicate that rates of remission induction in childhood PAN are similar with MMF treatment and CYC treatment, and MMF treatment might be associated with better health‐related quality of life than CYC treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Market access and pricing of pharmaceuticals are increasingly contingent on the ability to demonstrate comparative effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness. As such, it is widely recognized that predictions of the economic potential of drug candidates in development could inform decisions across the product life cycle. This may be challenging when safety and efficacy profiles in terms of the relevant clinical outcomes are unknown or highly uncertain early in product development. Linking pharmacometrics and pharmacoeconomics, such that outputs from pharmacometric models serve as inputs to pharmacoeconomic models, may provide a framework for extrapolating from early‐phase studies to predict economic outcomes and characterize decision uncertainty. This article reviews the published studies that have implemented this methodology and used simulation to inform drug development decisions and/or to optimize the use of drug treatments. Some of the key practical issues involved in linking pharmacometrics and pharmacoeconomics, including the choice of final outcome measures, methods of incorporating evidence on comparator treatments, approaches to handling multiple intermediate end points, approaches to quantifying uncertainty, and issues of model validation are also discussed. Finally, we have considered the potential barriers that may have limited the adoption of this methodology and suggest that closer alignment between the disciplines of clinical pharmacology, pharmacometrics, and pharmacoeconomics, may help to realize the potential benefits associated with linked pharmacometric‐pharmacoeconomic modeling and simulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Managing adherence to medications is a priority for health systems worldwide. Adherence research is accumulating, yet the quality of the evidence is reduced by various methodological limitations. In particular, the heterogeneity and low accuracy of adherence measures have been highlighted in many literature reviews. Recent consensus‐based guidelines advise on best practices in defining adherence (ABC) and reporting of empirical studies (EMERGE). While these guidelines highlight the importance of operational definitions in adherence measurement, such definitions are rarely included in study reports. To support researchers in their measurement decisions, we developed a structured approach to formulate operational definitions of adherence. Methods: A group of adherence and research methodology experts used theoretical, methodological and practical considerations to examine the process of applying adherence definitions to various research settings, questions and data sources. Consensus was reached through iterative review of discussion summaries and framework versions. Results: We introduce TEOS, a four‐component framework to guide the operationalization of adherence concepts: (1) describe treatment as four simultaneous interdependent timelines (recommended and actual use, conditional on prescribing and dispensing); (2) locate four key events along these timelines to delimit the three ABC phases (first and last recommended use, first and last actual use); (3) revisit study objectives and design to fine‐tune research questions and assess measurement validity and reliability needs, and (4) select data sources (e.g., electronic monitoring, self‐report, electronic healthcare databases) that best address measurement needs. Conclusion: Using the TEOS framework when designing research and reporting explicitly on these components can improve measurement quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs), which include gene, somatic cell therapies and tissue‐engineered medicines, have the potential to transform current care pathways by offering durable and potentially curative outcomes. However, they are exceptionally expensive, with prices exceeding £1m per patient in some cases. With an expectation that a large number of ATMPs will soon gain marketing authorisation (global market is estimated to reach £9bn to £14bn by 2025), healthcare payers and providers face a number of challenges to facilitate patient access to this new category of medicines. This viewpoint reflects on the experience of introducing ATMPs into the National Health Service in Wales where £1 in every £200 spent on medicines (2019/2020) is expected to be on ATMPs for just 20 patients. Evidence to date makes it apparent that decisions regarding clinical and cost‐effectiveness and the scale of the budget impact of implementing ATMPs create both financial and health service risks. Consequently, there are significant policy implications. A critical examination is made of the approaches taken for the health technology assessment and appraisal of ATMPs, the methods of payment and service impacts of these medicines, and the approach taken to horizon scanning and subsequent modelling of the financial impact over the next 10 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) represent a new category of medicinal products with a potential for transformative improvements in health outcomes but at exceptionally high prices. Routine adoption of ATMPs requires robust evidence of their cost‐effectiveness. Methods: A systematic literature review of economic evaluations of ATMPs, including gene therapies, somatic cell therapies and tissue‐engineered products, was conducted. Literature was searched using MedLine, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Register, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the grey literature of health technology assessment organisations with search terms relating to ATMPs and economic evaluations. Titles were screened independently by 2 reviewers. Articles deemed to meet the inclusion criteria were screened independently on abstract, and full texts reviewed. Study findings were appraised critically. Results: 4514 articles were identified, of which 23 met the inclusion criteria. There was some evidence supporting the cost‐effectiveness of: chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell therapy axicabtagene–ciloleucel (Yescarta), embryonic neural stem cells, tumour infiltrating lymphocytes, in vitro expanded myoblast, autologous chondrocyte implantation, ex vivo gene therapy (Strimvelis) and voretigene neparvovec (Luxturna). However, estimates of cost‐effectiveness were associated with significant uncertainty and high likelihood of bias, resulting from largely unknown long‐term outcomes, a paucity of evidence on health state utilities and extensive modelling assumptions. Conclusion: There are critical limitations to the economic evidence for ATMPs, most notably in relation to evidence on the durability of treatment effect, and the reliability of opinion‐based assumptions necessary when evidence is absent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Medicines regulatory authorities advise that patient information leaflets (PILs) should provide specific advice on what actions to take if one or more doses are missed. We aimed to assess the content in this regard, of PILs and Summaries of Product Characteristics (SmPCs) of prescription only medicines (POMs) marketed in the UK. Methods: PILs and SmPCs were accessed via the electronic Medicines Compendium. The following terms were used in the advanced search facility: miss(ed), omit(ted), adhere(d), delay(ed), forgot, forget, lapse. Identified documents were screened for instructions on missed doses which were categorised according to level of specificity, and cross-referenced to the National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) grading of risk of harm from omitted and delayed medicines. Any supporting clinical or pharmacological evidence was identified from SmPCs. Results: Two thousand two hundred eighty-four documents were identified from 7248 PILs and SmPCs relating to 1501 POMs. Seven hundred eighty-three (52%) POMs had SmPCs or PILs with no instructions on missed doses; 487 POMs (32%) included non-specific advice (e.g. "take as soon as possible"); 138 (9%) provided specific instructions; and 93 (6%) referred patients to seek medical advice. SmPCs for only 13/138 (9%) of those which included specific instructions provided any supporting clinical or pharmacological evidence. Instructions were absent for several medicines where the NPSA assessed that dose omissions may result in significant risk of harm. Conclusions: Advice on missed doses is generally inadequate. Pharmaceutical companies and regulatory authorities should produce clear and concise instructions on what patients should do if they miss doses, with supporting evidence where necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Depending on the treatment to be investigated, a clinical trial could be designed to assess objectives of superiority, equivalence or non-inferiority. The design of the study is affected by many different elements including the control treatment, the primary outcome and associated relationships. In some studies, there could be more than one outcome of interest. In these situations, benefit-risk methodologies could be used to assess the outcomes simultaneously and consider the trade-off between the benefits against the risks of a treatment. Benefit-risk is used within the regulatory industry but seldom included within publicly funded clinical trials within the UK. This project aims to gain an expert consensus on how to select the appropriate trial design (e.g. superiority) and when to consider including benefit-risk methods.Methods: The project will consist of four work packages: 1. A web-based survey to elicit current experiences and opinions, 2. A rapid literature review to assess any current recommendations, 3. A two-day consensus workshop to gain agreement on the recommendations, and 4. Production of a guidance document.Discussion: The aim of the project is to provide a guideline for clinical researchers, grant funding bodies and reviewers for grant bodies for how to select the most appropriate trial design and when it is appropriate to consider using benefit-risk methods. The focus of the guideline will be on publicly funded trials however, the vision is that the work will be applicable across research settings and we will connect with other organisations and committees as appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Bayesian decision‐analytic approach to trial design uses prior distributions for treatment effects, updated with likelihoods for proposed trial data. Prior distributions for treatment effects based on previous trial results risks sample selection bias and difficulties when a proposed trial differs in terms of patient characteristics, medication adherence, or treatment doses and regimens. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the utility of using pharmacometric‐based clinical trial simulation (CTS) to generate prior distributions for use in Bayesian decision‐theoretic trial design. The methods consisted of four principal stages: a CTS to predict the distribution of treatment response for a range of trial designs; Bayesian updating for a proposed sample size; a pharmacoeconomic model to represent the perspective of a reimbursement authority in which price is contingent on trial outcome; and a model of the pharmaceutical company return on investment linking drug prices to sales revenue. We used a case study of febuxostat versus allopurinol for the treatment of hyperuricemia in patients with gout. Trial design scenarios studied included alternative treatment doses, inclusion criteria, input uncertainty, and sample size. Optimal trial sample sizes varied depending on the uncertainty of model inputs, trial inclusion criteria, and treatment doses. This interdisciplinary framework for trial design and sample size calculation may have value in supporting decisions during later phases of drug development and in identifying costly sources of uncertainty, and thus inform future research and development strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sequential use of alternative treatments for chronic conditions represents a complex intervention pathway; previous treatment and patient characteristics affect both the choice and effectiveness of subsequent treatments. This paper critically explores the methods for quantitative evidence synthesis of the effectiveness of sequential treatment options within a health technology assessment (HTA) or similar process. It covers methods for developing summary estimates of clinical effectiveness or the clinical inputs for the cost-effectiveness assessment and can encompass any disease condition. A comprehensive review of current approaches is presented, which considers meta-analytic methods for assessing the clinical effectiveness of treatment sequences and decision-analytic modelling approaches used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment sequences. Estimating the effectiveness of a sequence of treatments is not straightforward or trivial and is severely hampered by the limitations of the evidence base. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of sequences were often absent or very limited. In the absence of sufficient RCTs of whole sequences, there is no single best way to evaluate treatment sequences; however, some approaches could be re-used or adapted, sharing ideas across different disease conditions. Each has advantages and disadvantages, and is influenced by the evidence available, extent of treatment sequences (number of treatment lines or permutations), and complexity of the decision problem. Due to the scarcity of data, modelling studies applied simplifying assumptions to data on discrete treatments. A taxonomy for all possible assumptions was developed, providing a unique resource to aid the critique of existing decision-analytic models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Resurgence in the use of chloroquine as a potential treatment for COVID‐19 has seen recent cases of fatal toxicity due to unintentional overdoses. Protocols for the management of poisoning recommend diazepam, although there are uncertainties in its pharmacology and efficacy in this context. The aim was to assess the effects of diazepam in experimental models of chloroquine cardiotoxicity. Experimental Approach In vitro experiments involved cardiac tissues isolated from rats and incubated with chloroquine alone or in combination with diazepam. In vivo models of toxicity involved chloroquine administered intravenously to pentobarbitone‐anaesthetised rats and rabbits. Randomised, controlled treatment studies in rats assessed diazepam, clonazepam and Ro5‐4864 administered: (i) prior, (ii) during and (iii) after chloroquine and the effects of diazepam: (iv) at high dose, (v) in urethane‐anaesthetised rats and (vi) co‐administered with adrenaline. Key Results: Chloroquine decreased the developed tension of left atria, prolonged the effective refractory period of atria, ventricular tissue and right papillary muscles, and caused dose‐dependent impairment of haemodynamic and electrocardiographic parameters. Cardiac arrhythmias indicated impairment of atrioventricular conduction. Studies (i), (ii) and (v) showed no differences between treatments and control. Diazepam increased heart rate in study (iv) and as with clonazepam also prolonged the QTc interval in study (iii). Combined administration of diazepam and adrenaline in study (vi) improved cardiac contractility but caused hypokalaemia. Conclusion and Implications: Neither diazepam nor other ligands for benzodiazepine binding sites protect against or attenuate chloroquine cardiotoxicity. However, diazepam may augment the effects of positive inotropes in reducing chloroquine cardiotoxicity. Linked Articles: This article is part of a themed issue on The Pharmacology of COVID‐19. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v177.21/issuetoc [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been a flurry of genomic activity in the United Kingdom, which has led to expanded discussions regarding feasibility of national implementation of personalised medicine using genomic data to guide prescribing. Based on Youssef et al., a panel test for nine genes ( I CYP2D6 i , I CYP2C19 i , I HLA-B i , I SLCO1B1 i , I CYP2C9 i , I F5 i , I HLA-A i , I TPMT i , and I VKORC1 i ) could inform one in every 11 new prescriptions issued in primary care in the United Kingdom.2 Challenges to implementing pharmacogenomics may be somewhat different in hospital settings. GLOBAL PHARMACOGENOMICS AND CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION WORLDWIDE There is continuing interest in studying pharmacogenomics worldwide and understanding of both ethnic differences and local challenges is increasing. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are the mainstay of epilepsy treatment. Over the past 20 years, a number of new drugs have been approved for National Health Service (NHS) use on the basis of information from short-term trials that demonstrate efficacy. These trials do not provide information about the longer term outcomes, which inform treatment policy. This trial will assess the long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of the newer treatment levetiracetam and zonisamide. Methods and analysis This is a phase IV, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled clinical trial comparing new and standard treatments for patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. Arm A of the trial randomised 990 patients with focal epilepsy to standard AED lamotrigine or new AED levetiracetam or zonisamide. Arm B randomised 520 patients with generalised epilepsy to standard AED sodium valproate or new AED levetiracetam. Patients are recruited from UK NHS outpatient epilepsy, general neurology and paediatric clinics. Included patients are aged 5 years or older with two or more spontaneous seizures requiring AED monotherapy, who are not previously treated with AEDs. Patients are followed up for a minimum of 2 years. The primary outcome is time to 12-month remission from seizures. Secondary outcomes include time to treatment failure (including due to inadequate seizure control or unacceptable adverse reactions); time to first seizure; time to 24-month remission; adverse reactions and quality of life. All primary analyses will be on an intention to treat basis. Separate analyses will be undertaken for each arm. Health economic analysis will be conducted from the perspective of the NHS to assess the cost-effectiveness of each AED. Ethics and dissemination This trial has been approved by the North West-Liverpool East REC (Ref. 12/NW/0361). The trial team will disseminate the results through scientific meetings, peer-reviewed publications and patient and public involvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) in England was established in 2011 to facilitate access to cancer medicines that were not routinely available on the National Health Service (NHS). Since April 2016, and the introduction of the new CDF, NICE has accelerated its review of cancer medicines listed on the original CDF, as well as newer cancer medicines. There is a concerning trend in the lack of transparency in relation to CDF medicines, specifically, as explored in this commentary, in respect to their value and overall cost to the NHS. NHS England's new CDF Standard Operating Procedure specifies that drugs should be funded through the CDF for a time period that is to be as short as possible [[5]]. [Extracted from the article]

Introduction Type 2 diabetes is common, affecting over 400 million people worldwide. Risk of serious complications can be reduced through use of effective treatments and active self-management. However, people are often concerned about starting new medicines and face difficulties in taking them regularly. Use of brief messages to provide education and support self-management, delivered through mobile phone-based text messages, can be an effective tool for some long-term conditions. We have developed messages aiming to support patients’ self-management of type 2 diabetes in the use of medications and other aspects of self-management, underpinned by theory and evidence. The aim of this trial is to determine the feasibility of a large-scale clinical trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention, compared with usual care. Methods and analysis The feasibility trial will be a multicentre individually randomised, controlled trial in primary care recruiting adults (≥35 years) with type 2 diabetes in England. Consenting participants will be randomised to receive short text messages three times a week with messages designed to produce change in medication adherence or non-health-related messages for 6 months. The aims are to test recruitment methods, retention to the study, the feasibility of data collection and the mobile phone and web- based processes of a proposed definitive trial and to refine the text messaging intervention. The primary outcome is the rate of recruitment to randomisation of participants to the trial. Data, including patient reported measures, will be collected online at baseline and the end of the 6-month follow-up period. With 200 participants (100 in each group), this trial is powered to estimate 80% follow-up within 95% CIs of 73.8% to 85.3%. The analysis will follow a prespecified plan. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was obtained from the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 05. The results will be disseminated through conference presentations, peer-reviewed journals and will be published on the trial website: www.summit-d.org (SuMMiT-D (SUpport through Mobile Messaging and digital health Technology for Diabetes)). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: Regulatory approval of biosimilars often depends on extrapolating evidence from one clinical indication to all of those of the originator biologic. We aimed to develop a quantitative benefit-risk analysis to assess whether the resulting increase in the uncertainty in the clinical performance of biosimilars (i.e. risk) may be countered by their lower pricing (benefit).Methods: A 1-year decision-analytic model was developed for the biosimilar infliximab (Inflectra®) for Crohn's disease. The perspective was that of the National Health Service in the UK and costs were valued to 2015/16. A hypothetical cohort of biologic-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease was simulated through the model. Immunogenicity to infliximab was a key modifier, influencing rates of non-response and infusion reactions. Net health benefit was estimated based on quality-adjusted life-years. A range of sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results and explored how the biosimilar price must respond to varying immunogenicity to remain the preferred option.Results: The base-case analysis predicted a positive incremental net health benefit of 0.04 (95% central range 0.00-0.09) favouring the biosimilar, based on 0.803 quality-adjusted life-years, and costs of £18,087 and £19,176 for the biosimilar and originator, respectively. Two-way sensitivity analyses suggested that if 50% of patients developed antibodies, the value-based price of £410 per vial must be lower than that of the originator (£420), but remain higher than the actual market price (£378).Conclusions: The model supports the use of Inflecta® for Crohn's disease in the UK, and provides a framework for the quantitative evaluation of biosimilars in the context of a health technology assessment. Value-based pricing using this methodology could protect health systems from the potential risks of biosimilars where they are untested in the approved populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Emergency department (ED) visits for epilepsy are common, costly, often clinically unnecessary and typically lead to little benefit for epilepsy management. An ‘Alternative Care Pathway’ (ACP) for epilepsy, which diverts people with epilepsy (PWE) away from ED when ‘999’ is called and leads to care elsewhere, might generate savings and facilitate improved ambulatory care. It is unknown though what features it should incorporate to make it acceptable to persons from this particularly vulnerable target population. It also needs to be National Health Service (NHS) feasible. This project seeks to identify the optimal ACP configuration. Methods and analysis Mixed-methods project comprising three-linked stages. In Stage 1, NHS bodies will be surveyed on ACPs they are considering and semi-structured interviews with PWE and their carers will explore attributes of care important to them and their concerns and expectations regarding ACPs. In Stage 2, Discrete Choice Experiments (DCE) will be completed with PWE and carers to identify the relative importance placed on different care attributes under common seizure scenarios and the trade-offs people are willing to make. The uptake of different ACP configurations will be estimated. In Stage 3, two Knowledge Exchange workshops using a nominal group technique will be run. NHS managers, health professionals, commissioners and patient and carer representatives will discuss DCE results and form a consensus on which ACP configuration best meets users’ needs and is NHS feasible. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval: NRES Committee (19/WM/0012) and King’s College London ethics Committee (LRS-18/19-10353). Primary output will be identification of optimal ACP configuration which should be prioritised for implementation and evaluation. A pro-active dissemination strategy will make those considering developing or supporting an epilepsy ACP aware of the project and opportunities to take part in it. It will also ensure they are informed of its findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Medication nonadherence can have a significant negative impact on treatment effectiveness. Standard intention-to-treat analyses conducted alongside clinical trials do not make adjustments for nonadherence. Several methods have been developed that attempt to estimate what treatment effectiveness would have been in the absence of nonadherence. However, health technology assessment (HTA) needs to consider effectiveness under real-world conditions, where nonadherence levels typically differ from those observed in trials. With this analytical requirement in mind, we conducted a review to identify methods for adjusting estimates of treatment effectiveness in the presence of patient nonadherence to assess their suitability for use in HTA. Methods. A "Comprehensive Pearl Growing" technique, with citation searching and reference checking, was applied across 7 electronic databases to identify methodological papers for adjusting time-to-event outcomes for nonadherence using individual patient data. A narrative synthesis of identified methods was conducted. Methods were assessed in terms of their ability to reestimate effectiveness based on alternative, suboptimal adherence levels. Results. Twenty relevant methodological papers covering 12 methods and 8 extensions to those methods were identified. Methods are broadly classified into 4 groups: 1) simple methods, 2) principal stratification methods, 3) generalized methods (g-methods), and 4) pharmacometrics-based methods using pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (PKPD) analysis. Each method makes specific assumptions and has associated limitations. Five of the 12 methods are capable of adjusting for real-world nonadherence, with only g-methods and PKPD considered appropriate for HTA. Conclusion. A range of statistical methods is available for adjusting estimates of treatment effectiveness for nonadherence, but most are not suitable for use in HTA. G-methods and PKPD appear to be more appropriate to estimate effectiveness in the presence of real-world adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Motor neurone disease (MND) is a devastating condition which greatly diminishes patients' quality of life and limits life expectancy. Health technology appraisals of future interventions in MND need robust data on costs and utilities. Existing economic evaluations have been noted to be limited and fraught with challenges.Objective: The aim of this study was to identify and critique methodological aspects of all published economic evaluations, cost studies, and utility studies in MND.Methods: We systematically reviewed all relevant published studies in English from 1946 until January 2016, searching the databases of Medline, EMBASE, Econlit, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and the Health Economics Evaluation Database (HEED). Key data were extracted and synthesised narratively.Results: A total of 1830 articles were identified, of which 15 economic evaluations, 23 cost and 3 utility studies were included. Most economic studies focused on riluzole (n = 9). Six studies modelled the progressive decline in motor function using a Markov design but did not include mutually exclusive health states. Cost estimates for a number of evaluations were based on expert opinion and were hampered by high variability and location-specific characteristics. Few cost studies reported disease-stage-specific costs (n = 3) or fully captured indirect costs. Utilities in three studies of MND patients used the EuroQol EQ-5D questionnaire or standard gamble, but included potentially unrepresentative cohorts and did not consider any health impacts on caregivers.Conclusion: Economic evaluations in MND suffer from significant methodological issues such as a lack of data, uncertainty with the disease course and use of inappropriate modelling framework. Limitations may be addressed through the collection of detailed and representative data from large cohorts of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Linked pharmacometric and pharmacoeconomic models provide a structured approach for assessing the value of candidate drugs in development. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of such an approach for identifying the properties of xanthine oxidase inhibitors (XOi) providing improved forgiveness to nonadherence and estimate the maximum reimbursement price. The pharmacometric and pharmacoeconomic models were used to simulate the time course of serum uric acid concentrations and estimate quality‐adjusted life years and costs for the XOi febuxostat and a range of hypothetical analogues. Compounds with reduced clearance or increased potency were more forgiving to missed doses, however, even following relatively large changes in these properties the predicted maximum reimbursement prices represented an increase of only 19% above febuxostat 80 mg. Linked pharmacometric and pharmacoeconomic modeling methods have the potential to inform early drug development by providing an indication of pricing options that may permit reimbursement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cost‐effectiveness of testing for multiple genes implicated in adverse drug reactions requires the simultaneous assessment of all actionable information, including future prescribing decisions based on incidental findings. We developed methodology for determining the value of pharmacogenetic panel tests, illustrated with a multigene panel, including HLA‐A*31:01,HLA‐B*15:02,HLA‐B*57:01,HLA‐B*58:01,HLA‐B (158T), and HLA‐DQB1 (126Q). If the findings for all alleles are acted upon, regardless of their individual cost‐effectiveness, the HLA panel resulted in cost savings of £378 (US $491), and a quality‐adjusted life year gain of 0.0069. Based on a stratified analysis and compared with no testing, initial use of the panel was cost‐effective in patients eligible for abacavir (HLA‐B*57:01), carbamazepine (HLA‐A*31:01), and clozapine (HLA‐B (158T) and HLA‐DQB1 (126Q)), but not for carbamazepine (HLA‐B*15:02) or allopurinol (HLA‐B*58:01). The methods presented allow for the assessment of the cost‐effectiveness of multiple‐gene panels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Establishing a core set of outcomes to be evaluated and reported in intervention trials aims to improve the usefulness of health research. There is no established core outcome set (COS) for childhood epilepsies. The aim of this study was to select a COS to be used in evaluative research of interventions for children with rolandic epilepsy (RE). Methods: We followed guidance from the COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) Initiative. First, we identified outcomes that had been measured in research through a systematic review. Second, young people with RE, parents, and professionals were invited to take part in a Delphi survey in which participants rated the importance of candidate outcomes. Last, a face‐to‐face meeting was convened to seek consensus on which outcomes were critical to include and to ratify the final COS. Results: From 37 eligible papers in the review, we identified and included 48 candidate outcomes in the survey. We sent invitations to 165 people registered to take part in the survey; of these, 102 (62%) completed Round 1, and 80 (78%) completed Round 2 (three young people, 16 parents, 61 professionals). In Round 2 we included four additional outcomes suggested by participants in Round 1. The consensus meeting included two young people, four parents, and nine professionals who were eligible to vote and ratified the COS as 39 outcomes across 10 domains. Significance: Our methodology was a proportionate and pragmatic approach toward producing a COS for evaluating research on interventions aiming to improve the health of children with RE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine Australian community views on factors that influence the distribution of health spending in relation to medicines. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was performed of 3080 adults aged ≥18 years. Participants were asked to rank, in order of importance, 12 criteria according to which medicines funding decisions may be made. Results: Of all respondents, 1213 (39.4%) considered disease severity to be the most important prioritisation criterion for funding a new medicine. This was followed by medicines treating a disease affecting children (13.2%) and medicines for cancer patients (9.1%). Medicines targeting a disease for which there is no alternative treatment available received highest priority from 8.6% of respondents. The remaining eight prioritisation criteria were each assigned a top ranking from 6.6% to 1.7% of respondents. Medicines targeting a disease for which there is no alternative treatment available were ranked least important by 7.7% of respondents, compared with 2.4%, 1.9% and 1.0% for medicines treating severe diseases, diseases affecting children and cancer respectively. 'End-of-life treatments' and 'rare disease therapies' received the least number of highest priority rankings (2.0% and 1.7% respectively). Conclusions: These results provide useful information about public preferences for government spending on prescribed medicines. Understanding of public preferences on the funding of new medicines will help the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and government determine circumstances where greater emphasis on equity is required and help inform medicines funding policy that best meets the needs of the Australian population. What is known about this topic?: There is increased recognition of the importance of taking into account public preferences in the heath technology assessment (HTA) decision-making process. What does this paper add?: The Australian public view the severity of disease to be the most important funding prioritisation criterion for medicines, followed by medicines used to treat children or to treat cancer. What are the implications for practitioners?: The general public are capable of giving opinions on distributional preferences. This information can help inform medicines funding policy and ensure that it is consistent with the values of the Australian population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]