Search

Summary Background The Food and Drug Administration has approved several pharmacotherapies for the treatment of obesity. This study assesses the cost‐effectiveness of six pharmacotherapies and lifestyle intervention for people with mild obesity (body mass indices [BMIs] 30 to 35). Methods A microsimulation model was constructed to compare seven weight loss strategies plus no treatment: intensive lifestyle intervention, orlistat, phentermine, phentermine/topiramate, lorcaserin, liraglutide, and semaglutide. Weight loss, quality‐of‐life scores, and costs were estimated using clinical trials and other published literature. Endpoints included costs, quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) threshold of $100 000/QALY. Results were analysed at 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year time horizons. Results At each of the three follow‐up periods, phentermine was the cost‐effective strategy, with ICERs of $46 258/QALY, $20 157/QALY, and $17 880/QALY after 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Semaglutide was the most effective strategy in the 3‐ and 5‐year time horizons, with total QALYs of 2.224 and 3.711, respectively. However, the ICERs were prohibitively high at $1 437 340/QALY after 3 years and $576 931/QALY after 5 years. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated these results were robust. Conclusions Phentermine is the cost‐effective pharmacologic weight‐loss strategy. Although semaglutide is the most effective, it is not cost‐effective because of its high price.

Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) screening is endorsed by certain guidelines for individuals aged ≥65 years. Yet many AF screening strategies exist, including the use of wrist‐worn wearable devices, and their comparative effectiveness is not well‐understood. Methods and Results We developed a decision‐analytic model simulating 50 million individuals with an age, sex, and comorbidity profile matching the United States population aged ≥65 years (ie, with a guideline‐based AF screening indication). We modeled no screening, in addition to 45 distinct AF screening strategies (comprising different modalities and screening intervals), each initiated at a clinical encounter. The primary effectiveness measure was quality‐adjusted life‐years, with incident stroke and major bleeding as secondary measures. We defined continuous or nearly continuous modalities as those capable of monitoring beyond a single time‐point (eg, patch monitor), and discrete modalities as those capable of only instantaneous AF detection (eg, 12‐lead ECG). In total, 10 AF screening strategies were effective compared with no screening (300–1500 quality‐adjusted life‐years gained/100 000 individuals screened). Nine (90%) effective strategies involved use of a continuous or nearly continuous modality such as patch monitor or wrist‐worn wearable device, whereas 1 (10%) relied on discrete modalities alone. Effective strategies reduced stroke incidence (number needed to screen to prevent a stroke: 3087–4445) but increased major bleeding (number needed to screen to cause a major bleed: 1815–4049) and intracranial hemorrhage (number needed to screen to cause intracranial hemorrhage: 7693–16 950). The test specificity was a highly influential model parameter on screening effectiveness. Conclusions When modeled from a clinician‐directed perspective, the comparative effectiveness of population‐based AF screening varies substantially upon the specific strategy used. Future screening interventions and guidelines should consider the relative effectiveness of specific AF screening strategies.

Background Patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) show a significant response to checkpoint inhibitor therapies, but the economic impact of these therapies is unknown. A decision analytic model was used to explore the effectiveness and cost burden of MSI-H/dMMR mCRC treatment. Methods The treatment of hypothetical patients with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC was simulated in 2 treatment scenarios: a third-line treatment and an exploratory first-line treatment. The treatments compared were nivolumab, ipilimumab and nivolumab, trifluridine and tipiracil (third-line treatment), and mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (first-line treatment). Disease progression, drug toxicity, and survival rates were based on the CheckMate 142, study of TAS-102 in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapies (RECOURSE), and Cancer and Leukemia Group B/Southwest Oncology Group 80405 trials. The analyzed outcomes included survival (life-years), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results Ipilimumab with nivolumab was the most effective strategy (10.69 life-years and 9.25 QALYs for the third line; 10.69 life-years and 9.44 QALYs for the first line) in comparison with nivolumab (8.21 life-years and 6.76 QALYs for the third line; 8.21 life-years and 7.00 QALYs for the first line), trifluridine and tipiracil (0.74 life-years and 0.07 QALYs), and mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (2.72 life-years and 1.63 QALYs). However, neither checkpoint inhibitor therapy was cost-effective in comparison with trifluridine and tipiracil (nivolumab ICER, $153,000; ipilimumab and nivolumab ICER, $162,700) or mFOLFOX6 and cetuximab (nivolumab ICER, $150,700; ipilimumab and nivolumab ICER, $158,700). Conclusions This modeling analysis found that both single and dual checkpoint blockade could be significantly more effective for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC than chemotherapy, but they were not cost-effective, largely because of drug costs. Decreases in drug pricing and/or the duration of maintenance nivolumab could make ipilimumab and nivolumab cost-effective. Prospective clinical trials should be performed to explore the optimal duration of maintenance nivolumab.

Background & Aims Although treatment of T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is shifting from esophagectomy to endoscopic therapy, T1b EACs are considered too high risk to be treated endoscopically. We investigated the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of esophagectomy vs endoscopic therapy for T1a and T1b EACs, and the effects of age and comorbidities, using a decision analytic Markov model. Methods We developed a model to simulate a hypothetical cohort of men 75 years old with Charlson comorbidity index scores of 0 and either T1aN0M0 or T1bN0M0 EAC, as a base case. We used the model to compare the effects of esophagectomy vs serial endoscopic therapy. We performed sensitivity analyses based on age at diagnosis of 60–85 years, comorbidity indices of 0–2, and utilities. Post-procedure cancer-specific mortality was derived from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare database. Results In the T1a base case, esophagectomy yielded more unadjusted life years than endoscopic therapy (6.97 vs 6.81), but fewer quality-adjusted life years (QALYs, 4.95 for esophagectomy vs 5.22 for endoscopic therapy). In the T1b base case, esophagectomy yielded more unadjusted life years than endoscopic therapy (5.73 vs 5.01) and QALYs (4.07 vs 3.85 for endoscopic therapy), but was not cost effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $156,981). Sensitivity analyses showed endoscopic therapy optimized QALYs for patients more than 80 years old with a comorbidity index of 1 or 2, or if the ratio of post-esophagectomy to post-endoscopic therapy utilities was below 0.875. Conclusion In a Markov model, we showed that endoscopic therapy of T1a EAC yields more QALYs and is more cost effective than esophagectomy for patients of all ages and comorbidity indices tested. In contrast, selection of therapy for T1b EAC depends on age and comorbidities, due to surgical mortality and the competing risk of non-cancer death.

Importance Obesity is the most common risk factor for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), the progressive form of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease that can lead to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Weight loss can be an effective treatment for obesity and may slow the progression of advanced liver disease. Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis. Design, Setting, and Participants This economic evaluation study used a Markov-based state-transition model to simulate the benefits and risks of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (GB), and intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) compared with usual care in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis and varying baseline weight (overweight, mild obesity, moderate obesity, and severe obesity). Patients faced varied risks of perioperative mortality and complications depending on the type of surgery they underwent. Data were collected on March 22, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (in 2017 $US), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Results Demographic characteristics of the patient population were based on a previously published prospective study (n = 161). Patients in the model were 41.0% female, and the base case age was 54 years. Compared with usual care, SG was associated with an increase in QALYs of 0.263 to 1.180 (bounds of ranges represent overweight to severe obesity); GB, 0.263 to 1.207; and ILI, 0.004 to 0.216. Sleeve gastrectomy was also associated with an increase in life-years of 0.693 to 1.930; GB, 0.694 to 1.947; and ILI, 0.012 to 0.114. With usual care, expected life-years in overweight, mild obesity, moderate obesity, and severe obesity were 12.939, 11.949, 10.976, and 10.095, respectively. With usual care, QALY in overweight was 6.418; mild obesity, 5.790; moderate obesity, 5.186; and severe obesity, 4.577. Sleeve gastrectomy was the most cost-effective option for patients across all weight classes assessed: ICER for SG in patients with overweight was $66 119 per QALY; mild obesity, $18 716 per QALY; moderate obesity, $10 274 per QALY; and severe obesity, $6563 per QALY. A threshold analysis on the procedure cost of GB found that for GB to be cost-effective, the cost of the surgery must be decreased from its baseline value of $28 734 by $4889 for mild obesity, by $3189 for moderate obesity, and by $2289 for severe obesity. In overweight patients, GB involved fewer QALYs than SG, and thus decreasing the cost of surgery would not result in cost-effectiveness. Conclusions and Relevance Bariatric surgery could be highly cost-effective in patients with NASH compensated cirrhosis and obesity or overweight. The findings from this analysis suggest that it can inform clinical trials evaluating the effect of bariatric procedures in patients with NASH cirrhosis, including those with a lower body mass index.

e15134Background: We use a decision analytic model to project the effectiveness and cost burden of microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) metastatic colorectal can...

e16089Background: Immune checkpoint inhibition has shown early promising results in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic or advanced tumors of the esophagus, gastroesophageal junction, ...