Search

International audience; Background The identification of patients at high risk of a disabling disease course would be invaluable in guiding initial therapy in Crohn’s disease (CD). Our objective was to evaluate a combination of clinical, serological, and genetic factors to predict complicated disease course in pediatric-onset CD. Methods Data for pediatric-onset CD patients, diagnosed before 17 years of age between 1988 and 2004 and followed more than 5 years, were extracted from the population-based EPIMAD registry. The main outcome was defined by the occurrence of complicated behavior (stricturing or penetrating) and/or intestinal resection within the 5 years following diagnosis. Lasso logistic regression models were used to build a predictive model based on clinical data at diagnosis, serological data (ASCA, pANCA, anti-OmpC, anti-Cbir1, anti-Fla2, anti-Flax), and 369 candidate single nucleotide polymorphisms. Results In total, 156 children with an inflammatory (B1) disease at diagnosis were included. Among them, 35% (n = 54) progressed to a complicated behavior or an intestinal resection within the 5 years following diagnosis. The best predictive model (PREDICT-EPIMAD) included the location at diagnosis, pANCA, and 6 single nucleotide polymorphisms. This model showed good discrimination and good calibration, with an area under the curve of 0.80 after correction for optimism bias (sensitivity, 79%, specificity, 74%, positive predictive value, 61%, negative predictive value, 87%). Decision curve analysis confirmed the clinical utility of the model. Conclusions A combination of clinical, serotypic, and genotypic variables can predict disease progression in this population-based pediatric-onset CD cohort. Independent validation is needed before it can be used in clinical practice.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake in Table 1. In the paper the authors report cholesterol as mg dl-1 (Table 1) however, the correct unit should be mmol/l. Glucose should be the same. The authors apologize for the error. The correct Table 1 can be found below. (Table presented.).

Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) of randomised trials are an important source of evidence for informing policy makers on how to best allocate limited resources. Missing data are a common issue in trial-based CEA, and methods such as multiple imputation are now commonly used to account for the missing values, assuming the data are ‘missing at random’ (MAR). This implies that the reasons for the missing data can be explained by the observed data. However, the missingness is often related to unobserved values, that is data are ‘missing not at random’ (MNAR, or ‘informative’). For example, patients whose health status is relatively poor may be less likely to return health questionnaires, even conditional on their observed characteristics. In these settings, methodological guidance recommends assessing whether conclusions are sensitive to departures from the MAR assumption. Sensitivity analysis strategies for handling MNAR is an area of rapid development in medical statistics, but this form of uncertainty has not yet been appropriately addressed in health economics. This PhD thesis aims to develop practical, accessible sensitivity analysis strategies and software tools to handle MNAR data in trial-based CEA. The thesis critically assessed the statistical methods for handling MNAR data in CEA practice, and identified barriers to more widespread use of these methods, via a systematic review and stakeholder focus groups. The research then focused on two strategies to conduct sensitivity analysis under MNAR assumptions: pattern-mixture models, which involve imputing the data assuming MAR, then modifying the imputed values to reflect possible departures from that assumption; and reference-based imputation, where the data are imputed assuming a distribution borrowed from a ‘reference group’. These approaches were illustrated in CEAs of 10TT and CoBalT trials, which evaluated weight loss and depression interventions. Software code and practical guidance are provided to facilitate implementation in practice.

OBJECTIVE: Ten Top Tips (10TT) is a primary care-led behavioural intervention which aims to help adults reduce and manage their weight by following 10 weight loss tips. The intervention promotes habit formation to encourage long-term behavioural changes. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of 10TT in general practice from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. DESIGN: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside an individually randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 14 general practitioner practices in England. PARTICIPANTS: All patients were aged ≥18 years, with body mass index ≥30 kg/m2. A total of 537 patients were recruited; 270 received the usual care offered by their practices and 267 received the 10TT intervention. OUTCOMES MEASURES: Health service use and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured over 2 years. Analysis was conducted in terms of incremental net monetary benefits (NMBs), using non-parametric bootstrapping and multiple imputation. RESULTS: Over a 2-year time horizon, the mean costs and QALYs per patient in the 10TT group were £1889 (95% CI £1522 to £2566) and 1.51 (95% CI 1.44 to 1.58). The mean costs and QALYs for usual care were £1925 (95% CI £1599 to £2251) and 1.51 (95% CI 1.45 to 1.57), respectively. This generated a mean cost difference of -£36 (95% CI -£512 to £441) and a mean QALY difference of 0.001 (95% CI -0.080 to 0.082). The incremental NMB for 10TT versus usual care was £49 (95% CI -£1709 to £1800) at a maximum willingness to pay for a QALY of £20 000. 10TT had a 52% probability of being cost-effective at this threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Costs and QALYs for 10TT were not significantly different from usual care and therefore 10TT is as cost-effective as usual care. There was no evidence to recommend nor advice against offering 10TT to obese patients in general practices based on cost-effectiveness considerations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16347068; Post-results.

Background: Primary care is the 'first port of call' for weight control advice, creating a need for simple, effective interventions that can be delivered without specialist skills. Ten Top Tips (10TT) is a leaflet based on habit-formation theory that could fill this gap. The aim of the current study was to test the hypothesis that 10TT can achieve significantly greater weight loss over 3 months than ‘usual care’. Methods: A two-arm, individually randomised, controlled trial in primary care. Adults with obesity were identified from 14 primary care providers across England. Patients were randomised to either 10TT or 'usual care' and followed up at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. The primary outcome was weight loss at 3 months, assessed by a health professional blinded to group allocation. Difference between arms was assessed using a mixed-effect linear model taking into account the health professionals delivering 10TT, and adjusted for baseline weight. Secondary outcomes included body mass index, waist circumference, the number achieving a 5% weight reduction, clinical markers for potential comorbidities, weight loss over 24 months and basic costs. Results: Five-hundred and thirty-seven participants were randomised to 10TT (n=267) or to ‘usual care' (n=270). Data were available for 389 (72%) participants at 3 months and for 312 (58%) at 24 months. Participants receiving 10TT lost significantly more weight over 3 months than those receiving usual care (mean difference =−0.87kg; 95% confidence interval: −1.47 to −0.27; P=0.004). At 24 months, the 10TT group had maintained their weight loss, but the ‘usual care’ group had lost a similar amount. The basic cost of 10TT was low, that is, around £23 ($32) per participant. Conclusions: The 10TT leaflet delivered through primary care is effective in the short-term and a low-cost option over the longer term. It is the first habit-based intervention to be used in a health service setting and offers a low-intensity alternative to ‘usual care’.

Background: Whilst evidence suggests cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) may be effective for depressed older people in a primary care setting, few studies have examined its cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), a talking control (TC) and treatment as usual (TAU), delivered in a primary care setting, for older people with depression.Methods: Cost data generated from a single blind randomised controlled trial of 204 people aged 65 years or more were offered only Treatment as Usual, or TAU plus up to twelve sessions of CBT or a talking control is presented. The Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) was the main outcome measure for depression. Direct treatment costs were compared with reductions in depression scores. Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using non-parametric bootstrapping. The primary analysis focussed on the cost-effectiveness of CBT compared with TAU at 10 months follow up.Results: Complete cost data were available for 198 patients at 4 and 10 month follow up. There were no significant differences between groups in baseline costs. The majority of health service contacts at follow up were made with general practitioners. Fewer contacts with mental health services were recorded in patients allocated to CBT, though these differences were not significant. Overall total per patient costs (including intervention costs) were significantly higher in the CBT group compared with the TAU group at 10 month follow up (difference 427 pound, 95% CI: 56 pound - 787 pound, p < 0.001). Reductions in BDI-II scores were significantly greater in the CBT group (difference 3.6 points, 95% CI: 0.7-6.5 points, p = 0.018). CBT is associated with an incremental cost of 120 pound per additional point reduction in BDI score and a 90% probability of being considered cost-effective if purchasers are willing to pay up to 270 pound per point reduction in the BDI-II score.Conclusions: CBT is significantly more costly than TAU alone or TAU plus TC, but more clinically effective. Based on current estimates, CBT is likely to be recommended as a cost-effective treatment option for this patient group if the value placed on a unit reduction in BDI-II is greater than 115 pound.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of referral to group art therapy plus standard care, compared with referral to an activity group plus standard care and standard care alone, among people with schizophrenia. DESIGN: A three-arm, parallel group, single-blind, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomised via an independent and remote telephone randomisation service using permuted blocks, stratified by study centre. SETTING: Study participants were recruited from secondary care mental health and social services in four UK centres. PARTICIPANTS: Potential participants were aged 18 years or over, had a clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia, confirmed by an examination of case notes, and provided written informed consent. We excluded those who were unable to speak sufficient English to complete the baseline assessment, those with severe cognitive impairment and those already receiving arts therapy. INTERVENTIONS: Group art therapy was delivered by registered art therapists according to nationally agreed standards. Groups had up to eight members, lasted for 90 minutes and ran for 12 months. Members were given access to a range of art materials and encouraged to use these to express themselves freely. Activity groups were designed to control for the non-specific effects of group art therapy. Group facilitators offered various activities and encouraged participants to collectively select those they wanted to pursue. Standard care involved follow-up from secondary care mental health services and the option of referral to other services, except arts therapies, as required. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Our co-primary outcomes were global functioning (measured using the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale - GAF) and mental health symptoms (measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - PANSS) at 24 months. The main secondary outcomes were level of group attendance, social functioning, well-being, health-related quality of life, service utilisation and other costs measured 12 and 24 months after randomisation. RESULTS: Four hundred and seventeen people were recruited, of whom 355 (85%) were followed up at 2 years. Eighty-six (61%) of those randomised to art therapy and 73 (52%) of those randomised to activity groups attended at least one group. No differences in primary outcomes were found between the three study arms. The adjusted mean difference between art therapy and standard care at 24 months was -0.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to 2.1] on the GAF Scale and 0.7 (95% CI -3.1 to 4.6) on the PANSS Scale. Differences in secondary outcomes were not found, except that those referred to an activity group had fewer positive symptoms of schizophrenia at 24 months than those randomised to art therapy. Secondary analysis indicated that attendance at art therapy groups was not associated with improvements in global functioning or mental health. Although the total cost of the art therapy group was lower than the cost of the two comparison groups, referral to group art therapy did not appear to provide a cost-effective use of resources. CONCLUSIONS: Referring people with established schizophrenia to group art therapy as delivered in this randomised trial does not appear to improve global functioning or mental health of patients or provide a more cost-effective use of resources than standard care alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 46150447. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 16, No. 8. See the HTA programme website for further project information.