Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections: observational study, systematic reviews and mathematical modelling

BACKGROUND Partner notification is essential to the comprehensive case management of sexually transmitted infections. Systematic reviews and mathematical modelling can be used to synthesise information about the effects of new interventions to enhance the outcomes of partner notification. OBJECTIVE To study the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of traditional and new partner notification technologies for curable sexually transmitted infections (STIs). DESIGN Secondary data analysis of clinical audit data; systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) published from 1 January 1966 to 31 August 2012 and of studies of health-related quality of life (HRQL) [MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA)] published from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2011; static models of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness; and dynamic modelling studies to improve parameter estimation and examine effectiveness. SETTING General population and genitourinary medicine clinic attenders. PARTICIPANTS Heterosexual women and men. INTERVENTIONS Traditional partner notification by patient or provider referral, and new partner notification by expedited partner therapy (EPT) or its UK equivalent, accelerated partner therapy (APT). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Population prevalence; index case reinfection; and partners treated per index case. RESULTS Enhanced partner therapy reduced reinfection in index cases with curable STIs more than simple patient referral [risk ratio (RR) 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.89]. There are no randomised trials of APT. The median number of partners treated for chlamydia per index case in UK clinics was 0.60. The number of partners needed to treat to interrupt transmission of chlamydia was lower for casual than for regular partners. In dynamic model simulations, > 10% of partners are chlamydia positive with look-back periods of up to 18 months. In the presence of a chlamydia screening programme that reduces population prevalence, treatment of current partners achieves most of the additional reduction in prevalence attributable to partner notification. Dynamic model simulations show that cotesting and treatment for chlamydia and gonorrhoea reduce the prevalence of both STIs. APT has a limited additional effect on prevalence but reduces the rate of index case reinfection. Published quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) weights were of insufficient quality to be used in a cost-effectiveness study of partner notification in this project. Using an intermediate outcome of cost per infection diagnosed, doubling the efficacy of partner notification from 0.4 to 0.8 partners treated per index case was more cost-effective than increasing chlamydia screening coverage. CONCLUSIONS There is evidence to support the improved clinical effectiveness of EPT in reducing index case reinfection. In a general heterosexual population, partner notification identifies new infected cases but the impact on chlamydia prevalence is limited. Partner notification to notify casual partners might have a greater impact than for regular partners in genitourinary clinic populations. Recommendations for future research are (1) to conduct randomised controlled trials using biological outcomes of the effectiveness of APT and of methods to increase testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and STIs after APT; (2) collection of HRQL data should be a priority to determine QALYs associated with the sequelae of curable STIs; and (3) standardised parameter sets for curable STIs should be developed for mathematical models of STI transmission that are used for policy-making. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor and generic clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome in Switzerland

QUESTION UNDER STUDY The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor and generic clopidogrel as add-on therapy to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), from a Swiss perspective. METHODS Based on the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, one-year mean healthcare costs per patient treated with ticagrelor or generic clopidogrel were analysed from a payer perspective in 2011. A two-part decision-analytic model estimated treatment costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), life years and the cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor and generic clopidogrel in patients with ACS up to a lifetime at a discount of 2.5% per annum. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS Over a patient's lifetime, treatment with ticagrelor generates an additional 0.1694 QALYs and 0.1999 life years at a cost of CHF 260 compared with generic clopidogrel. This results in an Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) of CHF 1,536 per QALY and CHF 1,301 per life year gained. Ticagrelor dominated generic clopidogrel over the five-year and one-year periods with treatment generating cost savings of CHF 224 and 372 while gaining 0.0461 and 0.0051 QALYs and moreover 0.0517 and 0.0062 life years, respectively. Univariate sensitivity analyses confirmed the dominant position of ticagrelor in the first five years and probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed a high probability of cost-effectiveness over a lifetime. CONCLUSION During the first five years after ACS, treatment with ticagrelor dominates generic clopidogrel in Switzerland. Over a patient's lifetime, ticagrelor is highly cost-effective compared with generic clopidogrel, proven by ICERs significantly below commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.