Search

OnkoNetwork is a patient navigation program established in the Moritz Kaposi General Hospital to improve the timeliness and completeness of cancer investigations and treatment. The H2020 SELFIE consortium selected OnkoNetwork as a promising integrated care initiative in Hungary and conducted a multicriteria decision analysis based on health, patient experience, and cost outcomes. In this paper, a more detailed analysis of clinical impacts is provided in the largest subgroup, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. A retrospective cohort study was conducted, enrolling new cancer suspect patients with subsequently confirmed NSCLC in two annual periods, before and after OnkoNetwork implementation (control and intervention cohorts, respectively). To control for selection bias and confounding, baseline balance was improved via propensity score weighting. Overall survival was analyzed in univariate and multivariate weighted Cox regression models and the effect was further characterized in a counterfactual analysis. Our analysis included 123 intervention and 173 control NSCLC patients from early to advanced stage, with significant between-cohort baseline differences. The propensity score-based weighting resulted in good baseline balance. A large survival benefit was observed in the intervention cohort, and intervention was an independent predictor of longer survival in a multivariate analysis when all baseline characteristics were included (HR = 0.63, p = 0.039). When post-baseline variables were included in the model, belonging to the intervention cohort was not an independent predictor of survival, but the survival benefit was explained by slightly better stage distribution and ECOG status at treatment initiation, together with trends for broader use of PET-CT and higher resectability rate. In conclusion, patient navigation is a valuable tool to improve cancer outcomes by facilitating more timely and complete cancer diagnostics. Contradictory evidence in the literature may be explained by common sources of bias, including the wait-time paradox and adjustment to intermediate outcomes., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: the described research was conducted as part of the H2020 SELFIE project that has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634288. JGP, MCs, MRM, KI, ZK, and ZV are employees of SELFIE beneficiaries. The employer of JGP, MCs, ZK, and ZV received additional EU research grants related to the evaluation of smoking cessation interventions and national cancer screening programs. MM, ÉSE, GL, and ASz are employees of Móritz Kaposi General Hospital, this Hospital initiated the OnkoNetwork program and received study funding from the SELFIE grant. These interests do not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. (as detailed online in the guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests).

Introduction: Policies to adequately respond to the rise in multimorbidity have top-priority. To understand the actual burden of multimorbidity, this study aimed to: 1) estimate the trend in prevalence of multimorbidity in the Netherlands, 2) study the association between multimorbidity and physical and mental health outcomes and healthcare cost, and 3) investigate how the association between multimorbidity and health outcomes interacts with socio-economic status (SES)., Methods: Prevalence estimates were obtained from a nationally representative pharmacy database over 2007-2016. Impact on costs was estimated in a fixed effect regression model on claims data over 2009-2015. Data on physical and mental health and SES were obtained from the National Health Survey in 2017, in which the Katz-10 was used to measure limitations in activities of daily living (ADL) and the Mental Health Inventory (MHI) to measure mental health. SES was approximated by the level of education. Generalized linear models (2-part models for ADL) were used to analyze the health data. In all models an indicator variable for the presence or absence of multimorbidity was included or a categorical variable for the number of chronic conditions. Interactions terms of multimorbidity and educational level were added into the previously mentioned models., Results: Over the past ten years, there was an increase of 1.6%-point in the percentage of people with multimorbidity. The percentage of people with three or more conditions increased with +2.1%-point. People with multimorbidity had considerably worse physical and mental health outcomes than people without multimorbidity. For the ADL, the impact of multimorbidity was three times greater in the lowest educational level than in the highest educational level. For the MHI, the impact of multimorbidity was two times greater in the lowest than in the highest educational level. Each additional chronic condition was associated with a greater worsening in health outcomes. Similarly, for costs, where there was no evidence of a diminishing impact of additional conditions either. In patients with multimorbidity total healthcare costs were on average €874 higher than in patients with a single morbidity., Conclusion: The impact of multimorbidity on health and costs seems to be greater in the sicker and lower educated population., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The objective of this study was to evaluate current approaches to economic modeling in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and propose a new conceptual model for evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of RA interventions. We followed recommendations from the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research-Society of Medical Decision Making (ISPOR-SMDM) Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-2. The process involved scoping the decision problem by a working group and drafting a preliminary cost-effectiveness model framework. A systematic literature review (SLR) of existing decision-analytic models was performed and analysis of an RA registry was conducted to inform the structure of the draft conceptual model. Finally, an expert panel was convened to seek input on the draft conceptual model. The proposed conceptual model consists of three separate modules: 1) patient characteristic module, 2) treatment module, and 3) outcome module. Consistent with the scope, the conceptual model proposed six changes to current economic models in RA. These changes proposed are to: 1) use composite measures of disease activity to evaluate treatment response as well as disease progression (at least two measures should be considered, one as the base case and one as a sensitivity analysis); 2) conduct utility mapping based on disease activity measures; 3) incorporate subgroups based on guideline-recommended prognostic factors; 4) integrate realistic treatment patterns based on clinical practice/registry datasets; 5) assimilate outcomes that are not joint related (extra-articular outcomes); and 6) assess mortality based on disease activity. We proposed a conceptual model that incorporates the current understanding of clinical and real-world evidence in RA, as well as of existing modeling assumptions. The proposed model framework was reviewed with experts and could serve as a foundation for developing future cost-effectiveness models in RA., Competing Interests: E. Alemao is an employee of BMS, a manufacturer of biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic medication. This does not alter the authors’ adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.