Search

Objective To perform a network meta‐analysis (NMA) to compare the long‐term effectiveness of mindfulness‐based cognitive therapy (MBCT) with available strategies for prevention and time to depressive relapse. Methods Seven electronic databases were searched up to June 2019. Studies evaluated MBCT for the management of depression‐related outcomes and follow‐up assessments occurred at 12 months or longer. Results Twenty‐three publications were included, 17 of which were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data from 14 RCTs including 2077 participants contributed to meta‐analysis (MA) and NMA to assess relapse of depression and 13 RCTs with 2017 participants contributed to MA and NMA for time to relapse of depression. NMAs showed statistically significant advantages for MBCT over treatment as usual (TAU) for relapse of depression (RR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.98) and for MBCT over TAU and placebo for time to relapse of depression (MBCT vs TAU: HR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.88; MBCT vs placebo: HR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.67). Subgroup meta‐analysis of relapse of depression by previous number of depressive episodes showed similar results between subgroups. Subgroup meta‐analysis by the use or not of booster sessions suggests these may lead to improved effectiveness. Conclusions MBCT is more effective than TAU in the long‐term in preventing relapse of depression and has statistically significant advantages over TAU and placebo for time to relapse of depression. No statistically significant differences were observed between MBCT and active treatment strategies for rate of relapse or time to relapse of depression.

Background: Dispensing of antibiotics without a prescription (DAwP) has been widely practised among community pharmacies in Saudi Arabia despite being illegal. However, in May 2018, the law and regulations were enforced alongside fines. Consequently, we wanted to evaluate the impact of these changes. Methods: A study was conducted among 116 community pharmacies in two phases. A pre-law enforcement phase between December 2017 and March 2018 and a post-law enforcement phase one year later. Each phase consisted of a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey and a simulated client method (SCM) approach. In the SCM, clients presented with either pharyngitis or urinary tract infections (UTI). In SCM, for each phase, all 116 pharmacies were visited with one of the scenarios. Results: Before the law enforcement, 70.7% of community pharmacists reported that DAwP was common with 96.6% and 87.7% of participating pharmacies dispensed antibiotics without a prescription for pharyngitis and UTI respectively. After the law enforcement, only 12.9% reported that DAwP is still a common practice, with only 12.1% and 5.2% dispensing antibiotics without prescriptions for pharyngitis and UTI respectively. Conclusion: law enforcement was effective. However, there is still further scope for improvement. This could include further educational activities with pharmacists, physicians and the public.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the effects of intravenous continuous infusion versus bolus injection of loop diuretics for the initial treatment of acute decompensated heart failure.

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation affects an estimated 33 million individuals worldwide and is a major cause of stroke, heart failure, and death. Anticoagulants substantially reduces risk of stroke but are also associated with an increased risk of bleeding and especially intracranial hemorrhages which are the most feared complication. Because of this many patients are not offered anticoagulants, particularly patients at risk of falls or with history of falls. It is unclear what anticoagulant treatment these patients should be offered, and the Liverpool AF-Falls project aims to investigate this area. This protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis aims to define what is the most appropriate anticoagulant treatment option for the for the management of atrial fibrillation patients at risk of falls or with a history of falls. MethodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis will include randomized and non-randomized studies evaluating safety and efficacy of different anticoagulant treatments (vitamin K antagonist, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anti-coagulant, anti-platelet agent and no treatment). Bibliographic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov) will be searched according to a pre-specified search strategy. Titles, abstracts, and full texts will be assessed by two independent reviewers and disagreement resolved with a third independent reviewer. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2 will be used to assess risk of bias in randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale tool will be used for non-randomized studies. Pairwise meta-analysis based on the fixed and random-effects models will be conducted. Publication bias will be evaluated with a funnel plot and the Egger’s test. Heterogeneity will be assessed with the I2 statistic. If conditions for indirect comparison are met and sufficient data are available, a network meta-analysis will be conducted using frequentist and Bayesian methodologies. DiscussionThis review will be the first to summarize direct and indirect evidence on safety and efficacy of anticoagulant treatments in atrial fibrillation patients at risk of falls or with history of falls. The findings will be important to patients, clinicians, and health policy-makers to inform best practice in the use of these treatments. Systematic review registrationPROSPERO registry number: CRD42020201086

Background Atrial fibrillation affects an estimated 33 million individuals worldwide and is a major cause of stroke, heart failure, and death. Anticoagulants substantially reduce the risk of stroke but are also associated with an increased risk of bleeding and especially intracranial hemorrhage which is the most concerning complication. Because of this, many patients are not offered anticoagulants, particularly patients at risk of falls or with a history of falls. It is unclear what anticoagulant treatment these patients should be offered. The Liverpool AF-Falls project aims to investigate this area, and this protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis aims to define what is the most appropriate anticoagulant treatment option for the management of atrial fibrillation patients at risk of falls or with a history of falls. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis will include randomized and non-randomized studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of different anticoagulant treatments (vitamin K antagonist and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anti-coagulant). Bibliographic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science) will be searched according to a pre-specified search strategy. Titles, abstracts, and full texts will be assessed by two independent reviewers and disagreements resolved with a third independent reviewer. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2 (RoB 2) will be used to assess the risk of bias in randomized trials, and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool will be used for non-randomized studies. A pairwise meta-analysis based on the fixed and random-effects models will be conducted. Publication bias will be evaluated with a funnel plot and Egger’s test. Heterogeneity will be assessed with the I2 statistic. If conditions for indirect comparison are met and sufficient data are available, a network meta-analysis will be conducted using frequentist and Bayesian methodologies. Discussion This review will be the first to summarize direct and indirect evidence on the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant treatments in atrial fibrillation patients at risk of falls or with a history of falls. The findings will be important to patients, clinicians, and health policy-makers to inform best practices in the use of these treatments. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registry number: CRD42020201086

Introduction/Objectives: Health authorities are facing increasing challenges to the sustainability of their healthcare systems because of the growing expenditures on medicines, including new, high-priced oncology medicines, and changes in disease prevalence in their ageing populations. Medicine prices in European countries are greatly affected by the ability to negotiate reasonable prices. Concerns have been expressed that prices of patented medicines do not fall sufficiently after the introduction of lower-cost generic oncology medicines. The objective of this study was to examine the associations over time in selected European countries between the prices of oral oncology medicines, population size, and gross domestic product (GDP) before and after the introduction of generic versions. Evidence of periodic reassessments of the price, value, and place in treatment of these medicines was also looked for. The goal of this review was to stimulate debate about possible improvements in approaches to reimbursement negotiations. Methodology: Analysis was performed of reimbursed prices of three oral oncology medicines (imatinib, erlotinib and fludarabine) between 2013 and 2017 across Europe. Correlations were explored between GDP, population size, and prices. Findings were compared with previous research regarding prices of generic oral oncology medicines. Results: The prices of imatinib, erlotinib and fludarabine varied among European countries, and there was limited price erosion over time in the absence of generics. There appeared to be no correlation between population size and price, but higher prices of on-patent oral cancer medicines were seen among countries with higher GDP per capita. Conclusion: Limited price erosion for patented medicines contributed to increases in oncology medicine budgets across the region. There was also a concerning lack of evidence re-assessments of the price, value, and place in treatment of patented oncology medicines following the loss of patent protection of standard medicines. The use of such proactive re-assessments in negotiating tactics might positively impact global expenditures for oncology medicines.

Introduction: There are growing concerns among European health authorities regarding increasing prices for new cancer medicines, prices not necessarily linked to health gain and the implications for the sustainability of their healthcare systems. Areas covered: Narrative discussion principally among payers and their advisers regarding potential approaches to the pricing of new cancer medicines. Expert opinion: A number of potential pricing approaches are discussed including minimum effectiveness levels for new cancer medicines, managed entry agreements, multicriteria decision analyses (MCDAs), differential/tiered pricing, fair pricing models, amortization models as well as de-linkage models. We are likely to see a growth in alternative pricing deliberations in view of ongoing challenges. These include the considerable number of new oncology medicines in development including new gene therapies, new oncology medicines being launched with uncertainty regarding their value, and continued high prices coupled with the extent of confidential discounts for reimbursement. However, balanced against the need for new cancer medicines. This will lead to greater scrutiny over the prices of patent oncology medicines as more standard medicines lose their patent, calls for greater transparency as well as new models including amortization models. We will be monitoring these developments., peer-reviewed

BACKGROUND: Currently about 19 million people in Africa are known to be living with diabetes, mainly Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) (95%), estimated to grow to 47 million people by 2045. However, there are concerns with early diagnosis of patients with Type 1 diabetes (T1DM) as often patients present late with complications. There are also challenges with access and affordability of insulin, monitoring equipment and test strips with typically high patient co-payments, which can be catastrophic for families. These challenges negatively impact on the quality of care of patients with T1DM increasing morbidity and mortality. There are also issues of patient education and psychosocial support adversely affecting patients' quality of life. These challenges need to be debated and potential future activities discussed to improve the future care of patients with T1DM across Africa. METHODOLOGY: Documentation of the current situation across Africa for patients with T1DM including the epidemiology, economics, and available treatments within public healthcare systems as well as ongoing activities to improve their future care. Subsequently, provide guidance to all key stakeholder groups going forward utilizing input from senior-level government, academic and other professionals from across Africa. RESULTS: Whilst prevalence rates for T1DM are considerably lower than T2DM, there are concerns with late diagnosis as well as the routine provision of insulin and monitoring equipment across Africa. High patient co-payments exacerbate the situation. However, there are ongoing developments to address the multiple challenges including the instigation of universal health care and partnerships with non-governmental organizations, patient organizations, and pharmaceutical companies. Their impact though remains to be seen. In the meantime, a range of activities has been documented for all key stakeholder groups to improve future care. CONCLUSION: There are concerns with the management of patients with T1DM across Africa. A number of activities has been suggested to address this and will be monitored.

Introduction: There are positive aspects regarding the prescribing of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) versus prescribing the medicines separately. However, these have to be balanced against concerns including increased costs and their irrationality in some cases. Consequently, there is a need to review their value among lower and middle income countries (LMICs) which have the greatest prevalence of both infectious and non-infectious diseases and issues of affordability. Areas covered: Review of potential advantages, disadvantages, cost-effectiveness and availability of FDCs in high priority disease areas in LMICs and possible initiatives to enhance the prescribing of valued FDCs and limit their use where concerns with their value. Expert commentary: FDCs are valued across LMICs. Advantages include potentially improved response rates, reduced adverse reactions, increased adherence rates and reduced costs. Concerns include increased chances of drug:drug interactions, reduced effectiveness, potential for imprecise diagnoses and higher unjustified prices. Overall certain FDCs including those for malaria, tuberculosis and hypertension are valued and listed in country’s essential medicine lists, with initiatives needed to enhance their prescribing where currently low prescribing rates. Proposed initiatives include robust clinical and economic data to address the current paucity of pharmacoeconomic data. Irrational FDCs persists in some countries which is being addressed.

Introduction: Antibiotics are indispensable to maintaining human health; however, their overuse has resulted in resistant organisms, increasing morbidity, mortality and costs. Increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major public health threat, resulting in multiple campaigns across countries to improve appropriate antimicrobial use. This includes addressing the overuse of antimicrobials for self-limiting infections, such as upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), particularly in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where there is the greatest inappropriate use and where antibiotic utilization has increased the most in recent years. Consequently, there is a need to document current practices and successful initiatives in LMICs to improve future antimicrobial use. Methodology: Documentation of current epidemiology and management of URTIs, particularly in LMICs, as well as campaigns to improve future antimicrobial use and their influence where known. Results: Much concern remains regarding the prescribing and dispensing of antibiotics for URTIs among LMICs. This includes considerable self-purchasing, up to 100% of pharmacies in some LMICs. However, multiple activities are now ongoing to improve future use. These incorporate educational initiatives among all key stakeholder groups, as well as legislation and other activities to reduce self-purchasing as part of National Action Plans (NAPs). Further activities are still needed however. These include increased physician and pharmacist education, starting in medical and pharmacy schools; greater monitoring of prescribing and dispensing practices, including the development of pertinent quality indicators; and targeted patient information and health education campaigns. It is recognized that such activities are more challenging in LMICs given more limited resources and a lack of healthcare professionals. Conclusion: Initiatives will grow across LMICs to reduce inappropriate prescribing and dispensing of antimicrobials for URTIs as part of NAPs and other activities, and these will be monitored.

Tuberculosis is over-represented in hard-to-reach (underserved) populations in high-income countries of low tuberculosis incidence. The mainstay of tuberculosis care is early detection of active tuberculosis (case finding), contact tracing, and treatment completion. We did a systematic review with a scoping component of relevant studies published between 1990 and 2015 to update and extend previous National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) reviews on the effectiveness of interventions for identifying and managing tuberculosis in hard-to-reach populations. The analyses showed that tuberculosis screening by (mobile) chest radiography improved screening coverage and tuberculosis identification, reduced diagnostic delay, and was cost-effective among several hard-to-reach populations. Sputum culture for pre-migration screening and active referral to a tuberculosis clinic improved identification. Furthermore, monetary incentives improved tuberculosis identification and management among drug users and homeless people. Enhanced case management, good cooperation between services, and directly observed therapy improved treatment outcome and compliance. Strong conclusions cannot be drawn because of the heterogeneity of evidence with regard to study population, methodology, and quality.

Background New onset atrial fibrillation is the most commonly encountered arrhythmia in critically unwell patients with a reported incidence of 4% to 29%. The occurrence of new onset atrial fibrillation may precipitate acute heart failure and lead to thromboembolic complications as well as being associated with increased in-hospital and in intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Despite being common, much of our current knowledge regarding the treatment of new onset atrial fibrillation comes from patients with chronic atrial fibrillation or post cardiac surgery. It is unclear if management strategies in these patient cohorts can be applied to new onset atrial fibrillation in the general ICU. This protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to address this uncertainty and define what is the most effective management strategy for the treatment of new onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in acutely unwell adult patients. Methods In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we plan to search electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL], MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded on Web of Science and relevant trial registries) for relevant randomised and non-randomised trials. Citations will be reviewed by title, abstract and full text by two independent reviewers and disagreement resolved by discussion and a third independent reviewer, if necessary. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool will be used to assess risk of bias in randomised trials and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool will be used for non-randomised studies. Statistical analysis will be carried out using R package meta and netmeta. We will first conduct a pairwise meta-analysis. If conditions for indirect comparison are satisfied and suitable data are available, we will conduct network meta-analysis using frequentist methodology. Treatments will be ranked according to efficacy with associated P-scores. We will assess the quality of the evidence in the pairwise using GRADE methodology and network meta-analysis comparisons in the CINeMA module in R package meta. Discussion Our review will be the first to assess direct and indirect evidence to assess the efficacy and rank the treatments available for new onset atrial fibrillation in critically unwell patients. Our review findings will be applicable to the care of people in a range of acute settings including, ICU, the emergency department and acute medical units. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registry number: CRD42019121739.

BackgroundManaging polypharmacy is a challenge for healthcare systems globally. It is also a health inequality concern as it can expose some of the most vulnerable in society to unnecessary medications and adverse drug-related events. Care for most patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy occurs in primary care. Safe deprescribing interventions can reduce exposure to inappropriate polypharmacy. However, these are not fully accepted or routinely implemented.AimTo identify barriers and facilitators to safe deprescribing interventions for adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in primary care.Design & settingA systematic review of studies published from 2000, examining safe deprescribing interventions for adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.MethodA search of electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINHAL), Cochrane, and Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) from inception to 26 Feb 2019, using an agreed search strategy. This was supplemented by handsearching of relevant journals, and screening of reference lists and citations of included studies.ResultsIn total, 40 studies from 14 countries were identified. Cultural and organisational barriers included: a culture of diagnosing and prescribing; evidence-based guidance focused on single diseases; a lack of evidence-based guidance for the care of older people with multimorbidities; and a lack of shared communication, decision-making systems, tools, and resources. Interpersonal and individual-level barriers included: professional etiquette; fragmented care; prescribers’ and patients’ uncertainties; and gaps in tailored support. Facilitators included: prudent prescribing; greater availability and acceptability of non-pharmacological alternatives; resources; improved communication, collaboration, knowledge, and understanding; patient-centred care; and shared decision-making.ConclusionA whole systems, patient-centred approach to safe deprescribing interventions is required, involving key decision-makers, healthcare professionals, patients, and carers.

Background: There has been an appreciable increase in the number of people in Africa with metabolic syndrome and Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in recent years as a result of a number of factors. Factors include lifestyle changes, urbanisation, and the growing consumption of processed foods coupled with increasing levels of obesity. Currently there are 19 million adults in Africa with diabetes, mainly T2DM (95%), estimated to grow to 47 million people by 2045 unless controlled. This has a considerable impact on morbidity, mortality and costs in the region. There are a number of issues to address to reduce the impact of T2DM including improving detection rates and current access to services alongside addressing issues of adherence to prescribed medicines. There are also high rates of co-morbidities with infectious diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis in patients in Africa with T2DM that require attention. Objective: Document ongoing activities across Africa to improve the care of patients with T2DM especially around issues of identification, access, and adherence to changing lifestyles and prescribed medicines. In addition, discussing potential ways forward to improve the care of patients with T2DM based on ongoing activities and experiences including addressing key issues associated with co-morbidities with infectious diseases. Our Approach: Contextualise the findings from a wide range of publications including internet based publications of national approaches coupled with input from senior level government, academic and other professionals from across Africa to provide future guidance. Ongoing Activities: A number of African countries are actively instigating programmes to improve the care of patients with T2DM starting with improved diagnosis. This recognises the growing burden of non-communicable diseases across Africa, which has been neglected in the past. Planned activities include programmes to improve detection rates and address key issues with diet and lifestyle changes, alongside improving monitoring of care and activities to enhance adherence to prescribed medicines. In addition, addressing potential complexities involving diabetes patients with infectious disease co-morbidities. It is too early to fully assess the impact of such activities, Conclusion: There are a number of ongoing activities across Africa to improve the management of patients with diabetes including co-morbidities. However, more needs to be done considering the high and growing burden of T2DM in Africa. Ongoing research will help further benefit resource allocation and subsequent care.

Introduction: Appropriately managing mental disorders is a growing priority across countries in view of the impact on morbidity and mortality. This includes patients with bipolar disorders (BD). Management of BD is a concern as this is a complex disease with often misdiagnosis, which is a major issue in lower and middle-income countries (LMICs) with typically a limited number of trained personnel and resources. This needs to be addressed. Areas covered: Medicines are the cornerstone of managing patients with Bipolar II across countries including LMICs. The choice of medicines, especially antipsychotics, is important in LMICs with high rates of diabetes and HIV. However, care is currently compromised in LMICs by issues such as the stigma, cultural beliefs, a limited number of trained professionals and high patient co-payments. Expert opinion: Encouragingly, some LMICs have introduced guidelines for patients with BD; however, this is very variable. Strategies for the future include addressing the lack of national guidelines for patients with BD, improving resources for mental disorders including personnel, improving medicine availability and patients’ rights, and monitoring prescribing against agreed guidelines. A number of strategies have been identified to improve the treatment of patients with Bipolar II in LMICs, and will be followed up.

Summary Tuberculosis disproportionately affects hard-to-reach populations, such as homeless people, migrants, refugees, prisoners, or drug users. These people often face challenges in accessing quality health care. We did a systematic review of the qualitative literature to identify barriers and facilitators to the uptake of tuberculosis diagnostic and treatment services by people from hard-to-reach populations in all European Union (EU), European Economic Area, EU candidate, and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. The 12 studies included in this review mainly focused on migrants. Views on perceived susceptibility to and severity of tuberculosis varied widely and included many misconceptions. Stigma and challenges regarding access to health care were identified as barriers to tuberculosis diagnosis and treatment uptake, whereas support from nurses, family, and friends was a facilitator for treatment adherence. Further studies are required to identify barriers and facilitators to the improved identification and management of tuberculosis in hard-to-reach populations to inform recommendations for more effective tuberculosis control programmes.

ObjectiveTo determine which service models and organisational structures are effective and cost-effective for delivering tuberculosis (TB) services to hard-to-reach populations.DesignEmbase and MEDLINE (1990–2017) were searched in order to update and extend the 2011 systematic review commissioned by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), discussing interventions targeting service models and organisational structures for the identification and management of TB in hard-to-reach populations. The NICE and Cochrane Collaboration standards were followed.SettingEuropean Union, European Economic Area, European Union candidate countries and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries.ParticipantsHard-to-reach populations, including migrants, homeless people, drug users, prisoners, sex workers, people living with HIV and children within vulnerable and hard-to-reach populations.Primary and secondary outcome measuresEffectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the interventions.ResultsFrom the 19 720 citations found, five new studies were identified, in addition to the six discussed in the NICE review. Community health workers from the same migrant community, street teams and peers improved TB screening uptake by providing health education, promoting TB screening and organising contact tracing. Mobile TB clinics, specialised TB clinics and improved cooperation between healthcare services can be effective at identifying and treating active TB cases and are likely to be cost-effective. No difference in treatment outcome was detected when directly observed therapy was delivered at a health clinic or at a convenient location in the community.ConclusionsAlthough evidence is limited due to the lack of high-quality studies, interventions using peers and community health workers, mobile TB services, specialised TB clinics and improved cooperation between health services can be effective to control TB in hard-to-reach populations. Future studies should evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness of interventions on TB identification and management in hard-to-reach populations and countries should be urged to publish the outcomes of their TB control systems.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42015017865.

Aims To provide systematic assessment of the clinical effectiveness of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus non-DES to inform national guidance. Methods and results The review was conducted according to internationally recognised methods. The search strategy identified published (7) and unpublished (7) randomised controlled trials comparing the use of DES to non-DES. Outcomes included death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), revascularisation, event rate (composite of adverse events), and binary restenosis. Data synthesis included descriptive statistics and meta-analysis. Fourteen randomised clinical trials comparing DES to non-DES and involving 5747 patients were identified. There were reductions in event rates between DES and non-DES; odds ratio (OR) 0.63 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.47, 0.84, \batchmode \documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsmath} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \(n=1978\) \end{document}) for paclitaxel-eluting stents at 12 months, OR 0.30 (95% CI 0.22, 0.42, \batchmode \documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsmath} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \(n=1296\) \end{document}) for sirolimus-eluting stents at 12 months. Combined event rates were inconsistently defined across trials and were primarily composed of revascularisations, possibly driven by protocol-required angiograms. DES reduced binary restenosis rates at angiogram compared to non-DES. No significant differences in rates of death or AMI were identified. Conclusion The early data available indicate that DES reduce adverse cardiac events, mainly revascularisations. However, these data are limited in terms of patient numbers, length of follow-up, and method of outcome assessment. The evaluation of rapidly evolving technologies requires the inclusion of data not routinely considered for inclusion in systematic reviews of effectiveness.

To undertake a systematic review of the clinical effectiveness of routine percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) plus stenting vs PTCA alone.MEDLINE; EMBASE; Science Citation Index; The Cochrane Library; cardiovascular journals and conference proceedings; Internet resources (including industry supported web pages); and reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews.Study selection included published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of coronary stents to PTCA. Outcome measures assessed included death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), event rate (such as major cardiac adverse events (MACE) or other composite measures), and binary restenosis (BR). Data extraction and quality assessment were conducted according to internationally recognized methods. Data synthesis included meta-analysis of assessed outcomes, reported as odds ratios (ORs).Fifty RCTs involving 16,500 patients met the inclusion criteria (39 full articles, 11 abstracts). Of these, 23 studies compared stenting with PTCA in patients with non-specific coronary artery disease (CAD), 11 compared stents with PTCA following AMI, 8 included patients with small coronary arteries and 8 included patients whose vessels had chronic total occlusion. There were no differences in rates of death or AMI. There were reductions in the rates of MACE (death, AMI or revascularization) with stents compared to PTCA (at 6 months, for non-specific group OR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.44-1.87; for AMI group OR: 2.36, 95% CI 1.92-2.89; for small vessel group OR: 1.38, 95% CI 1.10-1.74; at 12 months, for non-specific group OR: 1.31, 95% CI 1.11-1.55; for AMI OR: 2.26, 95% CI 1.47-3.46). Reporting of combined major adverse cardiac events was inconsistent across studies. Most events were revascularizations that may have been partly driven by protocol-required angiograms. Stents reduced BR rates at angiogram at 6 months compared to PTCA in all groups.We found no differences in mortality or AMI, but the studies were not powered to identify changes in these endpoints. Coronary stenting is associated with reduced restenosis and combined adverse cardiac events, primarily revascularizations. However, the frequency of revascularization may have been distorted by protocol-dictated angiography.

Streptokinase and alteplase both reduce mortality from acute myocardial infarction. Newer thrombolytic drugs (reteplase and tenecteplase) have putative advantages, such as ease of delivery and better fibrin specificity, although they are more expensive. A systematic review and meta‐analysis identified the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of these drugs.1 But this can only compare drugs where there are direct trial comparisons. Inevitably, we need to make indirect comparisons also, as well as to interpret the results of the direct comparisons. We present an interpretation and consider its strengths and weaknesses. Broadly, ‘superiority studies’, where one drug is thought likely to be better than another, assume a null hypothesis that there is no difference, which may then be disproved. Such studies are usually analysed by intention to treat (ITT, i.e. to analyse all patients according to their initial randomized allocation, and not whether they ever received the therapy or changed at some point to the alternative therapy). The null hypothesis and ITT are conservative, and limit the chances of a type 1 error, i.e. ascribing a difference where none exists.2 Equivalence trials examine whether a new therapy is as effective as an existing standard. Equivalence studies might also be used to compare adverse effects, or costs of two effective drugs. In a randomized trial, the two drugs are unlikely to produce exactly the same results (this would be the case even if we compared one drug to itself). We must therefore define ‘equivalence’ a priori , i.e. what is the range of apparent difference in efficacy between two therapies, within which the therapies may be considered clinically equivalent. This is an arbitrary decision. For thrombolytics, the efficacy is usually recorded as 30‐ or 35‐day mortality. The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP)3 and others4 have suggested that the …

Background: The comparative clinical effectiveness of new (reteplase, tenecteplase) vs. older (alteplase, streptokinase) thrombolytic agents in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction is uncertain. Aim: To examine 30–35 day mortality and major adverse effects of thrombolytic agents in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. Design: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing the clinical efficacy of included drug regimens. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index/Web of Science from 1980 to December 2001, and the Cochrane Library (2001, Issue 4). Reference lists of included studies and a number of medical journals were hand searched. Randomized controlled trials that compared any two of the included drugs provided to patients in the early stages of acute myocardial infarction, were included. Outcome measures included: mortality, bleeding, stroke, reinfarction, allergy and anaphylaxis. Results: We found 14 studies, total study population 142 907. For available comparisons (all alteplase vs. streptokinase, reteplase vs. streptokinase or alteplase, tenecteplase vs. alteplase), meta‐analysis showed no significant differences in mortality at 30–35 days. The GUSTO‐I study showed an apparent benefit of accelerated alteplase over streptokinase, but its inclusion or exclusion made little difference. Total stroke and haemorrhagic stroke rates were lower for streptokinase than for all alteplase combined (total stroke, OR 1.29, 95%CI 1.13–1.46; haemorrhagic stroke OR 1.83, 95%CI 1.14–2.93). Discussion: All thrombolytic drugs appear to be of similar efficacy in reducing mortality, and the apparent benefits of accelerated alteplase in GUSTO‐I are consistent with this. Whether accelerated alteplase is sufficiently different from other regimens of administering alteplase to be excluded from a meta‐analysis, and whether more weight should be placed on a meta‐analysis than on a single trial, are matters for debate.

Genetically engineered foodstuffs are now becoming commercially available. A closed‐form questionnaire to explore how such foods might be received was completed by 416 school students in English National Curriculum Years 7 (age 11–12 years), 9 (age 13–14) and 11 (age 15–16). The most commonly perceived benefits of genetically engineered foodstuffs were improved productivity and extended storage; few students thought they would be cheaper, healthier to eat or taste better. About a third thought that genetic engineering of foodstuffs would present health or environmental risks. Approximately half thought genetic engineering was unnatural, and a similar proportion felt that mankind had no right to produce such organisms for food; few of these objections were based on religious views. About a quarter thought that genetic engineering was needed to produce enough food for the world, but about half thought it unnecessary. About half of the group felt that genetic engineering for foodstuffs would increase the cha...

This study explores the prevalence of ideas among 16‐19 year old students about the application of a rapidly expanding technology, genetic engineering, to food production. A closed‐form questionnaire with items about genetically engineered vegetables and animals was completed by 386 students from 13 further education institutes. The most common ideas about the advantages of genetically engineered foods were those of improved storage and increased productivity; fewer students thought that such foods would be better tasting, cheaper or healthier. Few thought that genetically engineered foodstuffs were unsafe for the environment or for the consumer, although almost all wanted such foodstuffs to be labelled. Approximately half thought that genetically engineered foodstuffs were ‘unnatural’, although fewer thought that it was wrong to produce such organisms and even fewer gam religious beliefs as their reason. There was a suggestion that greater understanding of genetic engineering increases confidenc...

The ideas of 290 Year 1 biology undergraduate students about cystic fibrosis, gene therapy, and gene screening have been explored using a multiple-choice-type questionnaire. Students were reasonably informed about the nature of cystic fibrosis disease, although many underestimated its prevalence. Fewer of the students understood the mechanism of inheritance of cystic fibrosis. Only a third of the students appreciated the way in which gene therapy is currently effected; many thought that ‘faulty’ genes could be removed and some even imagined that they could be repaired and replaced. A quarter of the students thought that testing for the cystic fibrosis gene would produce medical side-effects. In the affective domain, about half the group would wish to be tested, but a third were uncertain.

Objectives To assess the comparative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Data sources Major electronic databases were searched up to November 2005. Unpublished evidence such as conference abstracts, reviews of published economic evaluations, and company submissions to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) were also reviewed. Review methods The assessment was conducted according to accepted procedures for conducting and reporting systematic reviews and economic evaluations. Full economic evaluations that compared two or more options for treatment and considered both costs and consequences were eligible for inclusion in the economic literature review. Results Nine placebo controlled randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the review of clinical effects. These included two studies of adalimumab, five of etanercept and two of infliximab in comparison with placebo (along with conventional management). No RCTs directly comparing anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) agents were identified. Meta-analyses were conducted for data on Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) (20, 50 and 70% improvement), mean change in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) and mean change in Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) at 12 weeks following initiation of anti-TNF-alpha therapy or placebo for all three drugs. Meta-analyses were also conducted at 24 weeks for etanercept and infliximab. Each meta-analysis of anti-TNF-alpha therapy demonstrated statistically significant advantages over placebo, although there was no significant difference between individual anti-TNF-alpha agents. At 12 weeks, ASAS 50% responses were 3.6-fold more likely with anti-TNF-alpha treatment than placebo. Compared with baseline, BASDAI scores were reduced by close to 2 points at 12 weeks. Functional scores (BASFI) were reduced at 12 weeks. Six full economic evaluations (two peer-reviewed published papers, four abstracts) were included in the review. The conclusions among economic evaluations were mixed, although the balance of evidence indicates that over short time-frames anti-TNF-alpha therapies are unlikely to be considered cost-effective. The limitations of the clinical outcome data impose restrictions on the economic assessment of cost-effectiveness. Direct unbiased RCT evidence is only available in the short term. Current assessment tools are limited and at present BASDAI and BASFI are the best available, although not designed for, or ideal for, use in economic evaluations. The review of the three models submitted to NICE identified a number of inherent flaws and errors. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of etanercept and adalimumab were roughly similar, falling below an assumed willingness-to-pay threshold of 30,000 pounds. The ICER for infliximab was in the range of 40,000-50,000 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The short-term (12-month) model developed by this report's authors confirmed the large front-loading of costs with a result that none of the three anti-TNF-alpha agents appears cost-effective at the current acceptable threshold, with infliximab yielding much poorer economic results (57,000-120,000 pounds per QALY). The assumptions of the short-term model were used to explore the cost-effectiveness of the use of anti-TNF-alpha agents in the long term. This model is far more speculative than the first since trends and parameter values must be projected far beyond the available evidence. Sensitivity analyses reveal wide variations in estimates of cost over the long term although it is considered unlikely that costs will decrease over time. Conclusions The review of clinical data related to the three drugs (including conventional treatment) compared with conventional treatment plus placebo indicates that in the short term (12-24 weeks), the three treatments are clinically effective in relation to assessment of ASAS, BASDAI and BASFI. Indirect comparisons of treatments were limited and did not show a significant difference in effectiveness between the three agents. The short-term economic assessment indicates that none of the three anti-TNF-alpha agents is likely to be considered cost-effective at current acceptability thresholds, with infliximab consistently the least favourable option. There is an absence of evidence concerning a number of limiting factors related to patients suffering from AS, the disease itself and its treatment. In order to obtain robust estimates of the longer term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of anti-TNF-alpha agents for AS, clinical trials that aim to address these limiting factors need to be conducted.

Background Coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) replaces obstructed vessels with ones from other parts of the body. Alternatively, obstructions are remodelled using catheter-based techniques such as percutaneous coronary angioplasty with the use of stents. Though less invasive, stenting techniques are limited by the re-narrowing of treated vessels (restenosis). We examined evidence on cardiac-related outcomes occurring after CABG or stenting, with implications for resource use, resource allocation and informing patient choice. Objectives To examine evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on benefit of stents or CABG in reducing cardiac events in people with stable angina or acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Search methods CENTRAL (Issue 2 2004), EMBASE (1990 to 2004), MEDLINE (1990 to 2004) and handsearching to July 2004. Selection criteria Only RCTs comparing stents used with PTCA with CABG were included. Participants were adults with stable angina or ACS and unstable angina and had either single or multiple vessel disease. Published and unpublished sources were considered. Data collection and analysis Outcomes included composite event rate (major adverse cardiac event, event free survival), death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), repeat revascularisation and binary restenosis as well as information on design and baseline characteristics. Quality assessment was completed independently. Meta-analyses are presented as odds ratios, 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a fixed-effect model. Heterogeneity between trials was assessed. Main results Nine studies (3519 patients) were included. Four RCTs included patients with multiple vessel disease, five focused on single vessel disease. Four studies reported beyond 1 year. No statistical differences were observed between CABG and stenting for meta-analysis of mortality or AMI, but there was heterogeneity. Composite cardiac event and revascularisation rates were lower for CABG than for stents. Odds ratios resulting from meta-analysis of event rate data at 1 year were, odds ratio 0.43 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.54) and at 3 years, odds ratio 0.37 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.48). Odds ratios for revascularisation at 1 year were, odds ratio 0.18 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.25) and at 3 years, odds ratio 0.09 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.34). Binary restenosis at 6 months (single vessel trials) favoured CABG, odds ratio 0.29 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.51). Authors' conclusions CABG is associated with reduced rates of major adverse cardiac events, mostly driven by reduced repeat revascularisation. However, the RCT data are limited by follow-up, unrepresentative samples and rapid development of both surgical techniques and stenting. Research on real-world patient population or patient level data meta-analyses may identify risk factors and groupings who may benefit most from one strategy over the other.

Objectives To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the use of coronary artery stents in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Data sources Electronic databases. Review methods The review was conducted following accepted guidelines for conducting systematic reviews. Randomised controlled trials that include comparisons of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) versus PTCA with stent, stent versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), and drug-eluting stents (DES) versus non-DES in patients with CAD in native or graft vessels and those with stable angina or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and unstable angina were also included. Data on the following outcome measures were included in the review: combined event rate or event-free survival, death, acute myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularisation, repeat treatment (PTCA, stent or CABG) and binary restenosis. An economic model was developed based on extrapolation of trends in mortality and revascularisation from clinical trials data to a 5-year time horizon. Results The inclusion criteria were fulfilled by 50 studies comparing the use of stents with PTCA, six comparing stents with CABG and 12 comparing DES eluting stents with non-DES. No studies were identified that compared DES with PTCA or DES with CABG. Existing quality of life data suggest that revascularisation procedures reduce the patient's quality of life for a short period only. Stents were found to be more effective than PTCA in preventing adverse events and revascularisations. In multiple-vessel disease there was no evidence of a difference in mortality (at 1 year) between patients treated surgically and those receiving a stent. Patients treated surgically required fewer revascularisations. There is no evidence of a difference in mortality between patients receiving DES and those treated with bare metal stents at 1 year. A reduction in event rate at 9 and 12 months was found in patients treated with DES. This event rate is primarily made up of increased revascularisation rates in patients treated with bare metal stents. Two-year outcome data from one study indicate that this benefit of DES continues over the longer term. The economic model proved sufficient to indicate long-term trends in cost-effectiveness. CABG was found initially to be more expensive than bare metal stenting in multivessel disease and may have higher immediate risks, but over time the cost differential is reduced and long-term outcomes favour CABG over stenting. A similar situation was found for DES versus CABG in multiple-vessel disease. However, DES may not generally be considered a cost-effective alternative to bare metal stenting in single-vessel disease by policy makers as substantially higher costs are involved with a very small outcome benefit. Conclusions DES might be considered cost-effective if the additional cost (compared with ordinary stents) was substantially reduced, the outcome benefits from the use of DES were much improved, and/or its use were targeted on the subgroups of patients with the highest risks of requiring reintervention. Long-term clinical studies are needed that focus on significant outcomes such as mortality. Further research should consider: the differences among plain stents; head-to-head comparisons within DES, CABG compared with DES; and the evaluation of newer non-DES against DES. Evaluation of the effects of revascularisation procedures and especially repeat revascularisation procedures on the patient's quality of life would also be useful, as would the development and testing of risk assessment tools to identify patients likely to need further revascularisations.

Aims To provide systematic assessment of the clinical effectiveness of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus non-DES to inform national guidance. Methods and results The review was conducted according to internationally recognised methods. The search strategy identified published (7) and unpublished (7) randomised controlled trials comparing the use of DES to non-DES. Outcomes included death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), revascularisation, event rate (composite of adverse events), and binary restenosis. Data synthesis included descriptive statistics and meta-analysis. Fourteen randomised clinical trials comparing DES to non-DES and involving 5747 patients were identified. There were reductions in event rates between DES and non-DES; odds ratio (OR) 0.63 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.47, 0.84, \batchmode \documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsmath} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \(n=1978\) \end{document}) for paclitaxel-eluting stents at 12 months, OR 0.30 (95% CI 0.22, 0.42, \batchmode \documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsmath} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \(n=1296\) \end{document}) for sirolimus-eluting stents at 12 months. Combined event rates were inconsistently defined across trials and were primarily composed of revascularisations, possibly driven by protocol-required angiograms. DES reduced binary restenosis rates at angiogram compared to non-DES. No significant differences in rates of death or AMI were identified. Conclusion The early data available indicate that DES reduce adverse cardiac events, mainly revascularisations. However, these data are limited in terms of patient numbers, length of follow-up, and method of outcome assessment. The evaluation of rapidly evolving technologies requires the inclusion of data not routinely considered for inclusion in systematic reviews of effectiveness.

Prasugrel (Efient, Eli Lilly) is an oral inhibitor of platelet activation and aggregation. Prasugrel, coadministered with acetylsalicylic acid, has marketing authorisation for the prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal guidance on the use of prasugrel for patients undergoing PCI was published in October 2009.1 Prasugrel, in combination with aspirin, is recommended as an option for patients when: The following sections present evidence on use of prasugrel and an overview of the independent advisory Appraisal Committee's considerations in developing its guidance for NICE. The importance of expert and stakeholder involvement in the development of NICE guidance is also explained. Prasugrel was considered under the NICE single technology appraisal process.2 In this process, the manufacturer provides an evidence submission, which comprises a report (structured according to a template set by NICE) and economic model. The structured report sets out the evidence base for the drug, and the economic model assesses its cost-effectiveness compared to current standard practice – in this case the use of clopidogrel. The manufacturer's submission, therefore, forms the core evidence source for the Appraisal Committee's considerations. In addition, an academic group, the Evidence Review Group (in this case, the Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group, University of Liverpool) is commissioned to critique the manufacturer's submission, and produce a report of its findings.3 The Evidence Review Group may also undertake exploratory analyses using the submitted materials and report these to the Appraisal Committee. The Appraisal Committee developed recommendations for the use of prasugrel in two stages. First, it met to consider the available evidence and the …