Effectiveness of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the treatment of pain in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the backbone of osteoarthritis pain management. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of different preparations and doses of NSAIDs on osteoarthritis pain in a network meta-analysis. METHODS For this network meta-analysis, we considered randomised trials comparing any of the following interventions: NSAIDs, paracetamol, or placebo, for the treatment of osteoarthritis pain. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the reference lists of relevant articles for trials published between Jan 1, 1980, and Feb 24, 2015, with at least 100 patients per group. The prespecified primary and secondary outcomes were pain and physical function, and were extracted in duplicate for up to seven timepoints after the start of treatment. We used an extension of multivariable Bayesian random effects models for mixed multiple treatment comparisons with a random effect at the level of trials. For the primary analysis, a random walk of first order was used to account for multiple follow-up outcome data within a trial. Preparations that used different total daily dose were considered separately in the analysis. To assess a potential dose-response relation, we used preparation-specific covariates assuming linearity on log relative dose. FINDINGS We identified 8973 manuscripts from our search, of which 74 randomised trials with a total of 58 556 patients were included in this analysis. 23 nodes concerning seven different NSAIDs or paracetamol with specific daily dose of administration or placebo were considered. All preparations, irrespective of dose, improved point estimates of pain symptoms when compared with placebo. For six interventions (diclofenac 150 mg/day, etoricoxib 30 mg/day, 60 mg/day, and 90 mg/day, and rofecoxib 25 mg/day and 50 mg/day), the probability that the difference to placebo is at or below a prespecified minimum clinically important effect for pain reduction (effect size [ES] -0·37) was at least 95%. Among maximally approved daily doses, diclofenac 150 mg/day (ES -0·57, 95% credibility interval [CrI] -0·69 to -0·46) and etoricoxib 60 mg/day (ES -0·58, -0·73 to -0·43) had the highest probability to be the best intervention, both with 100% probability to reach the minimum clinically important difference. Treatment effects increased as drug dose increased, but corresponding tests for a linear dose effect were significant only for celecoxib (p=0·030), diclofenac (p=0·031), and naproxen (p=0·026). We found no evidence that treatment effects varied over the duration of treatment. Model fit was good, and between-trial heterogeneity and inconsistency were low in all analyses. All trials were deemed to have a low risk of bias for blinding of patients. Effect estimates did not change in sensitivity analyses with two additional statistical models and accounting for methodological quality criteria in meta-regression analysis. INTERPRETATION On the basis of the available data, we see no role for single-agent paracetamol for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis irrespective of dose. We provide sound evidence that diclofenac 150 mg/day is the most effective NSAID available at present, in terms of improving both pain and function. Nevertheless, in view of the safety profile of these drugs, physicians need to consider our results together with all known safety information when selecting the preparation and dose for individual patients. FUNDING Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 405340-104762) and Arco Foundation, Switzerland.

Outcomes and cost effectiveness of treating type 2 diabetes with a nurse case manager following treatment algorithms versus primary care physicians

Background. Diabetes places a significant burden on the health care system. Reduction in blood glucose levels (HbA1c) reduces the risk of complications; however, little is known about the impact of disease management programs on medical costs for patients with diabetes. In 2001, economic costs associated with diabetes totaled $100 billion, and indirect costs totaled $54 billion. ^ Objective. To compare outcomes of nurse case management by treatment algorithms with conventional primary care for glycemic control and cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients in a low-income Mexican American community-based setting, and to compare the cost effectiveness of the two programs. Patient compliance was also assessed. ^ Research design and methods. An observational group-comparison to evaluate a treatment intervention for type 2 diabetes management was implemented at three out-patient health facilities in San Antonio, Texas. All eligible type 2 diabetic patients attending the clinics during 1994–1996 became part of the study. Data were obtained from the study database, medical records, hospital accounting, and pharmacy cost lists, and entered into a computerized database. Three groups were compared: a Community Clinic Nurse Case Manager (CC-TA) following treatment algorithms, a University Clinic Nurse Case Manager (UC-TA) following treatment algorithms, and Primary Care Physicians (PCP) following conventional care practices at a Family Practice Clinic. The algorithms provided a disease management model specifically for hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and microalbuminuria that progressively moved the patient toward ideal goals through adjustments in medication, self-monitoring of blood glucose, meal planning, and reinforcement of diet and exercise. Cost effectiveness of hemoglobin AI, final endpoints was compared. ^ Results. There were 358 patients analyzed: 106 patients in CC-TA, 170 patients in UC-TA, and 82 patients in PCP groups. Change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was the primary outcome measured. HbA1c results were presented at baseline, 6 and 12 months for CC-TA (10.4%, 7.1%, 7.3%), UC-TA (10.5%, 7.1%, 7.2%), and PCP (10.0%, 8.5%, 8.7%). Mean patient compliance was 81%. Levels of cost effectiveness were significantly different between clinics. ^ Conclusion. Nurse case management with treatment algorithms significantly improved glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes, and was more cost effective. ^

Cost-effectiveness of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Leaflet Repair for the Treatment of Mitral Regurgitation in Heart Failure

Contexte: La régurgitation mitrale (RM) est une maladie valvulaire nécessitant une intervention dans les cas les plus grave. Une réparation percutanée de la valve mitrale avec le dispositif MitraClip est un traitement sécuritaire et efficace pour les patients à haut risque chirurgical. Nous voulons évaluer les résultats cliniques et l'impact économique de cette thérapie par rapport à la gestion médicale des patients en insuffisance cardiaque avec insuffisance mitrale symptomatique. Méthodes: L'étude a été composée de deux phases; une étude d'observation de patients souffrant d'insuffisance cardiaque et de régurgitation mitrale traitée avec une thérapie médicale ou le MitraClip, et un modèle économique. Les résultats de l'étude observationnelle ont été utilisés pour estimer les paramètres du modèle de décision, qui a estimé les coûts et les avantages d'une cohorte hypothétique de patients atteints d'insuffisance cardiaque et insuffisance mitrale sévère traitée avec soit un traitement médical standard ou MitraClip. Résultats: La cohorte de patients traités avec le système MitraClip était appariée par score de propension à une population de patients atteints d'insuffisance cardiaque, et leurs résultats ont été comparés. Avec un suivi moyen de 22 mois, la mortalité était de 21% dans la cohorte MitraClip et de 42% dans la cohorte de gestion médicale (p = 0,007). Le modèle de décision a démontré que MitraClip augmente l'espérance de vie de 1,87 à 3,60 années et des années de vie pondérées par la qualité (QALY) de 1,13 à 2,76 ans. Le coût marginal était 52.500 $ dollars canadiens, correspondant à un rapport coût-efficacité différentiel (RCED) de 32,300.00 $ par QALY gagné. Les résultats étaient sensibles à l'avantage de survie. Conclusion: Dans cette cohorte de patients atteints d'insuffisance cardiaque symptomatique et d insuffisance mitrale significative, la thérapie avec le MitraClip est associée à une survie supérieure et est rentable par rapport au traitement médical.

Evidence-based medicine is affordable: The cost-effectiveness of current compared with optimal treatment in rheumatoid and osteoarthritis

Objective. To determine the cost-effectiveness of averting the burden of disease. We used secondary population data and metaanalyses of various government-funded services and interventions to investigate the costs and benefits of various levels of treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA) in adults using a burden of disease framework. Method. Population burden was calculated for both diseases in the absence of any treatment as years lived with disability (YLD), ignoring the years of life lost. We then estimated the proportion of burden averted with current interventions, the proportion that could be averted with optimally implemented cut-rent evidence-based guidelines, and the direct treatment cost-effectiveness ratio in dollars per YLD averted for both treatment levels. Results. The majority of people with arthritis sought medical treatment. Current treatment for RA averted 26% of the burden, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $19,000 per YLD averted. Optimal, evidence-based treatment would avert 48% of the burden. with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $12,000 per YLD averted. Current treatment of OA in Australia averted 27% of the burden, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $25,000 per YLD averted. Optimal, evidence-based treatment would avert 39% of the burden, with an unchanged cost-effectiveness ratio of $25,000 per YLD averted. Conclusion. While the precise dollar costs in each country will differ, the relativities at this level of coverage should remain the same. There is no evidence that closing the gap between evidence and practice would result in a drop in efficiency.

The effectiveness of lamotrigine in the treatment of photosensitive epilepsy

Photosensitive epilepsy and associated pattern sensitivity are more prevalent in females and are usually treated with sodium valproate. Sodium valproate has an adverse effect profile, which particularly affects females, including teratogenicity, association with the polycystic ovary syndrome and weight gain. It would be useful therefore if an alternative treatment for photosensitive epilepsy could be found. The principle aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of lamotrigine in the treatment of photosensitive epilepsy in adults and children. Patients were either drug-naive, commencing lamotrigine therapy or were transferring from other antiepileptic drugs to lamotrigine (primarily sodium valproate) due to lack of response, adverse effects or desired pregnancy. The photoparoxsymal response in the electroencephalograph was used as the primary measure of photo and pattern sensitivity. In addition the effects of lamotrigine on occipital spikes and normal responses in the EEG to visual stimuli were investigated. Secondary measures also included the resting EEG, seizures, body mass index, menstrual function, mood and cognitive function. The results suggest that in adult patients lamotrigine is efficacious in the treatment of photosensitive epilepsy, although it appears inferior to sodium valproate. Lamotrigine does however have a more favourable adverse effect profile than valproate. The results indicate that lamotrigine therapy is suitable for photosensitive epilepsy in women of childbearing age or in patients experiencing unacceptable adverse effects with valproate therapy. Patients are more likely to respond to lamotrigine treatment if they present with sensitivity to a limited number of frequencies. Lamotrigine does not seem to be as efficacious in the treatment of children, although against it may be considered a second line drug if the child does not respond to or will not tolerate sodium valproate.

The effectiveness of leflunomide etanercept and infliximab in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis:a systematic review

DUE TO COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS ONLY AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION AT ASTON UNIVERSITY LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES WITH PRIOR ARRANGEMENT

A randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in primary care against standard treatment for menorrhagia:the ECLIPSE trial

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a common problem, yet evidence to inform decisions about initial medical treatment is limited. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) (Mirena(®), Bayer) compared with usual medical treatment, with exploration of women's perspectives on treatment. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre randomised trial with an economic evaluation and a longitudinal qualitative study. SETTING: Women who presented in primary care. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 571 women with HMB. A purposeful sample of 27 women who were randomised or ineligible owing to treatment preference participated in semistructured face-to-face interviews around 2 and 12 months after commencing treatment. INTERVENTIONS: LNG-IUS or usual medical treatment (tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen-progestogen or progesterone alone). Women could subsequently swap or cease their allocated treatment. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the patient-reported score on the Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (MMAS) assessed over a 2-year period and then again at 5 years. Secondary outcomes included general quality of life (QoL), sexual activity, surgical intervention and safety. Data were analysed using iterative constant comparison. A state transition model-based cost-utility analysis was undertaken alongside the randomised trial. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were derived from the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and the Short Form questionnaire-6 Dimensions (SF-6D). The intention-to-treat analyses were reported as cost per QALY gained. Uncertainty was explored by conducting both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The MMAS total scores improved significantly in both groups at all time points, but were significantly greater for the LNG-IUS than for usual treatment [mean difference over 2 years was 13.4 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.9 to 16.9 points; p < 0.001]. However, this difference between groups was reduced and no longer significant by 5 years (mean difference in scores 3.9 points, 95% CI -0.6 to 8.3 points; p = 0.09). By 5 years, only 47% of women had a LNG-IUS in place and 15% were still taking usual medical treatment. Five-year surgery rates were low, at 20%, and were similar, irrespective of initial treatments. There were no significant differences in serious adverse events between groups. Using the EQ-5D, at 2 years, the relative cost-effectiveness of the LNG-IUS compared with usual medical treatment was £1600 per QALY, which by 5 years was reduced to £114 per QALY. Using the SF-6D, usual medical treatment dominates the LNG-IUS. The qualitative findings show that women's experiences and expectations of medical treatments for HMB vary considerably and change over time. Women had high expectations of a prompt effect from medical treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The LNG-IUS, compared with usual medical therapies, resulted in greater improvement over 2 years in women's assessments of the effect of HMB on their daily routine, including work, social and family life, and psychological and physical well-being. At 5 years, the differences were no longer significant. A similar low proportion of women required surgical intervention in both groups. The LNG-IUS is cost-effective in both the short and medium term, using the method generally recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Using the alternative measures to value QoL will have a considerable impact on cost-effectiveness decisions. It will be important to explore the clinical and health-care trajectories of the ECLIPSE (clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in primary care against standard treatment for menorrhagia) trial participants to 10 years, by which time half of the cohort will have reached menopause. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN86566246. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 88. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Systematic review and analysis of evidences on clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of biological drugs for the treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis

Technology: Infliximab and comparator biological such as adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab. Conditions: Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) Issue: Infliximab is registered to be used in patients with AS. The aim of the Report is to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of infliximab and comparator biologicals for the treatment of adult AS. Methods: Systematic literature review and analysis as well as meta-analysis (direct and indirect comparison) of published randomised controlled clinical trials (RCT) were performed, all relevant health economics literature were identified ad analysed. Results: Clinical efficacy of biological therapies is based on good clinical evidences regarding to all clinical efficacy endpoints (ASAS20, ASAS40, ASAS 5/6, and BASDAI 50% response). Altogether, 22 trials are included in our meta-analysis, 12 infliximab, 3 adalimumab studies, 6 etanercept and 1 golimumab. Efficacy of biological treatments for the treatment of AS has been established by clinical scientific evidences, significant improvement at all outcomes considered was confirmed. According to the results of indirect comparison, there were no significant difference between biological treatments and placebo in terms of safety and tolerability endpoints. We found no significant difference between the clinical efficacy and safety of infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept and golimumab therapies. Cost-utility analysis of adalimumab and/or infliximab, etanercept and golimumab treatment for AS were performed in the UK, Canada, The Netherlands, Germany, Spain and France. There are no cost-utility studies from Eastern Central Europe. Implications for decision making: Efficacy of infliximab and comparator biologicals for the treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) was proved by clinical evidence, significant improvement at all outcomes considered was confirmed. We found no significant differences in efficacy and safety of different biological treatments. Health economics results suggest that biological therapies are cost-effective alternatives for the treatment of AS in group of developed high income countries. There is a lack of health economics results in Central-Eastern European countries however these data are more and more required by governments and funders as part of the company economic dossiers.

The effectiveness of female -sensitive substance abuse treatment

This research investigated whether female-sensitive treatment was more effective than a traditional mixed-gender modal. The study participants were evaluated for levels of depression, self-esteem, social support, and presence and severity of addiction. Analyses were conducted to see which demographic, treatment, and service variables were associated with treatment survival rates. It was found that the chemical dependent treatments evaluated all produced equally ineffective results. The women surveyed did have significantly high levels of depression and presence and severity of addiction, yet moderate levels of self-esteem and social support. A mixed-gender chemical dependency model which provided mental health services focusing on depression was recommended. Ancillary services which provided self-esteem building and social support was also suggested. ^

The effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma : a randomized controlled trial (EAGLE)

Medical Research Council (ref G0701604) and administered by the NIHR-EME (ref 09-800-26)

Effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE): a randomised controlled trial

Background
Primary angle-closure glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. In early-stage disease, intraocular pressure is raised without visual loss. Because the crystalline lens has a major mechanistic role, lens extraction might be a useful initial treatment.

Methods
From Jan 8, 2009, to Dec 28, 2011, we enrolled patients from 30 hospital eye services in five countries. Randomisation was done by a web-based application. Patients were assigned to undergo clear-lens extraction or receive standard care with laser peripheral iridotomy and topical medical treatment. Eligible patients were aged 50 years or older, did not have cataracts, and had newly diagnosed primary angle closure with intraocular pressure 30 mm Hg or greater or primary angle-closure glaucoma. The co-primary endpoints were patient-reported health status, intraocular pressure, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life-year gained 36 months after treatment. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN44464607.

Findings
Of 419 participants enrolled, 155 had primary angle closure and 263 primary angle-closure glaucoma. 208 were assigned to clear-lens extraction and 211 to standard care, of whom 351 (84%) had complete data on health status and 366 (87%) on intraocular pressure. The mean health status score (0·87 [SD 0·12]), assessed with the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions questionnaire, was 0·052 higher (95% CI 0·015–0·088, p=0·005) and mean intraocular pressure (16·6 [SD 3·5] mm Hg) 1·18 mm Hg lower (95% CI –1·99 to –0·38, p=0·004) after clear-lens extraction than after standard care. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £14 284 for initial lens extraction versus standard care. Irreversible loss of vision occurred in one participant who underwent clear-lens extraction and three who received standard care. No patients had serious adverse events.

Interpretation
Clear-lens extraction showed greater efficacy and was more cost-effective than laser peripheral iridotomy, and should be considered as an option for first-line treatment.