Search

Summary Background & aims COVID-19 patients present a high hospitalization rate with a high mortality risk for those requiring intensive care. When these patients have other comorbid conditions and older age, the risk for severe disease and poor outcomes after ICU admission are increased. The present work aims to describe the preliminary results of the ongoing NUTRICOVID study about the nutritional and functional status and the quality of life of adult COVID-19 survivors after ICU discharge, emphasizing the in-hospital and discharge situation of this population. Methods A multicenter, ambispective, observational cohort study was conducted in 16 public hospitals of the Community of Madrid with COVID-19 survivors who were admitted to the ICU during the first outbreak. Preliminary results of this study include data retrospectively collected. Malnutrition and sarcopenia were screened at discharge using MUST and SARC-F; the use of healthcare resources was measured as the length of hospital stay and requirement of respiratory support and tracheostomy during hospitalization; other study variables were the need for medical nutritional treatment; and patients’ functional status (Barthel index) and health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L). Results A total of 176 patients were included in this preliminary analysis. Most patients were male and older than 60 years, who suffered an average (SD) weight loss of 16.6% (8.3%) during the hospital stay, with a median length of stay of 53 (27–89.5) days and a median ICU stay of 24.5 (11–43.5) days. At discharge, 83.5% and 86.9% of the patients were at risk of malnutrition and sarcopenia, respectively, but only 38% were prescribed medical nutrition therapy. In addition, more than 70% of patients had significant impairment of their mobility and to conduct their usual activities at hospital discharge. Conclusions This preliminary analysis evidences the high nutritional and functional impairment of COVID-19 survivors at hospital discharge and highlights the need for guidelines and systematic protocols, together with appropriate rehabilitation programs, to optimize the nutritional management of these patients after discharge.

Objectives To assess the efficiency of secukinumab compared to adalimumab as first biologic treatment for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) from the Spanish National Health System (SNHS) perspective. Methods A cost-consequence analysis of the cost and clinical response of two treatment strategies was conducted over a 2-year time horizon. A hypothetical cohort of 10 patients with PsA initiated treatment with secukinumab 150 mg (cohort A) or adalimumab 40 mg (cohort B), respectively. Patients achieving clinical response (ACR20/50/70) at week 24 continued the initial treatment, while patients with inadequate response switched to secukinumab 300 mg. Pharmacological costs were calculated based on SmPC (notified ex-factory price). The lowest cost of adalimumab biosimilar was considered. Data on clinical response were extracted from the two matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) published comparing secukinumab vs adalimumab. Results were expressed as the cost difference between the two cohorts (€, 2019) and were calculated for each clinical response criteria (ACR20/50/70) and for each MAIC. Sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of potential discounts on the cost of adalimumab while maintaining the cost of secukinumab unchanged. Results Depending on the MAIC used, the cost of initiating biologic treatment for PsA with secukinumab 150 mg was 18–33% lower than the one estimated for adalimumab 40 mg, for ACR20, 18–28% for ACR50, and 16–23% for ACR70 response rate. Sensitivity analysis showed that it would be necessary a discount of 40–60%, 40–65% and 50–75% over the adalimumab cost to compensate for the differences in efficacy observed for ACR20/50/70, respectively, depending on the MAIC used. Conclusion In patients with PsA, secukinumab could be considered a more efficient first-line biologic treatment compared to adalimumab, from the SNHS perspective.

To assess the use of resources and the costs associated with following up patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus after discontinuation of an antiretroviral treatment and initiation of a new one due to a lack of effectiveness or unacceptable toxicity, as compared to the costs involved in the routine follow-up of patients on antiretroviral treatment, from the Spanish National Health System perspective. Method: The use of resources (clinical tests, medical visits, and hospital pharmacy visits) associated with following three profiles of patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (stable ones, those discontinuing an existing antiretroviral treatment and being switched to a new one due to a lack of effectiveness, and those discontinuing an existing antiretroviral treatment and being switched to a new one due to unacceptable toxicity) was identified, based on clinical practice guidelines and the findings of a multidisciplinary expert panel (n = 5). The experts agreed on the main adverse events leading to discontinuation, classifying them into gastrointestinal, renal, osseous, musculoskeletal, dermatological, hepatic, lipid profile-related, neuropsychiatric and sexual alterations. Unit costs were identified from official healthcare costs databases. The cost (€, 2020) of following up each patient profile was estimated, excluding the cost of the antiretroviral treatment itself, with a time horizon of two years.The per-patient cost of following up stable patients over two years was estimated at €4,148 (tests: €2,293; visits: €1,855). Patient follow-up after discontinuation of an existing antiretroviral treatment and initiation of a different one due to a lack of effectiveness was estimated at €5,434 (tests: €2,777; visits: €2,657). The cost of follow-up after discontinuation of an existing regimen and initiation of a new one due to unacceptable toxicity varied according to the adverse event prompting the switch, ranging from €4,690 for lipid profile dysregulation, to €5,304, for musculoskeletal alterations. In this patient profile, the cost of tests ranged from €2,403 to €3,017, and that of visits from €2,287 to €2,842.The cost associated with following up of patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus after discontinuation of an existing antiretroviral regimen and initiation of a new one is higher than that of routine follow-up, without taking the cost of drugs into account. The treatment discontinuation rate is a relevant factor when selecting the most appropriate therapy for each patient.Estimar el uso de recursos y costes asociados al seguimiento de pacientes con infección por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana tras discontinuación del tratamiento antirretroviral actual debido a falta de efectividad o toxicidad inaceptable y cambio a un nuevo tratamiento antirretroviral, comparado con el seguimiento habitual de los pacientes con tratamiento antirretroviral, desde la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud español.Método: Se identificó el uso de recursos (pruebas clínicas, visitas médicas, visitas a la farmacia hospitalaria) asociado al seguimiento de pacientes con infección por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana en tres perfiles de pacientes (estable, discontinuación y cambio por falta de efectividad, discontinuación y cambio por toxicidad inaceptable), a partir de las guías de práctica clínica y un panel de expertos multidisciplinar (n = 5). Los expertos consensuaron los principales eventos adversos que conducían a la discontinuación, agrupándolos en: alteraciones gastrointestinales, renales, óseas, musculoesqueléticas, dermatológicas, hepáticas y del perfil lipídico, trastornos neuropsiquiátricos y sexuales. Los costes unitarios se identificaron a partir de bases de datos oficiales assode costes sanitarios y de la literatura. Se estimó el coste (€, 2020) del seguimiento en cada perfil de paciente, sin incluir el coste derivado del tratamiento antirretroviral, en un horizonte temporal de dos años.El coste por paciente a dos años se estimó en 4.148 € (pruebas: 2.293 €; visitas: 1.855 €) para el seguimiento del paciente estable. El seguimiento del paciente tras discontinuación por falta de efectividad y cambio de tratamiento antirretroviral se estimó en 5.434 € (pruebas: 2.777 €; visitas: 2.657 €). El coste del seguimiento tras la discontinuación por toxicidad inaceptable y cambio de tratamiento antirretroviral varió en función del evento adverso que motivó el cambio, oscilando entre 4.690 € para las alteraciones del perfil lipídico, y 5.304 € para las alteraciones musculoesqueléticas. En este perfil de pacientes, las pruebas variaron entre 2.403 € y 3.017 € y las visitas entre 2.287 € y 2.842 €.El coste asociado al seguimiento del paciente con infección por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana tras discontinuación y cambio a un nuevo tratamiento antirretroviral es mayor comparado con el seguimiento habitual, sin tener en cuenta el coste farmacológico. La tasa de discontinuación del tratamiento antirretroviral es un factor relevante a la hora de seleccionar la terapia más adecuada para cada paciente.

Patient Support Programs (PSPs) reinforce patients’ care provided by health care professionals with the aim to improve adherence and patient empowerment. PSPs may include interventions such as home-based care, individualized medication counseling, support, training, and home delivery of medicines and/or devices. This study described these services and its impact on patient-reported outcomes and health care savings. We conducted an integrative literature review which was limited to publications from the last 10 years (2009-2019) and focused on diseases that require special support and/or parenteral administration. From 7040 total citations, we identified 64 home-based care services performed worldwide. Among the home-based care services, most were provided by nurses (n = 47/64; 73.4%) and addressed to cancer patients (n = 22/64; 34.4%); 23 out of 64 services (35.9%) incorporated telepharmacy. In general, home-based services and PSPs showed a positive impact on patients’ adherence to medication, patient satisfaction, and health-related quality of life. In addition, 14 (21.9%) services reported economic results, most of which showed that home therapy led to substantial cost savings.

Juan Antonio Trigueros,1 Noé Garin,2 Adolfo Baloira,3 Susana Aceituno,4 Ana Calvo,4 Miriam Prades,4 Carolina Touron,5 Anisia Martínez,5 Covadonga Torres5 1Health Center Menasalbas, Castilla-La Mancha Health Service, Toledo, Spain; 2Pharmacy Department, Hospital of the Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain; 3Respiratory Department, University Hospital of Pontevedra, Pontevedra, Spain; 4Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Outcomes’ 10, S.L., Castellón de la Plana, Spain; 5Pricing&HEOR, AstraZeneca Farmacéutica Spain, S.A., Madrid, SpainCorrespondence: Susana Aceituno, Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Outcomes’ 10, S.L, Castellón de la Plana, Spain, Email saceituno@outcomes10.comObjective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Budesonide/Glycopyrronium/Formoterol (BUD/GLY/FOR) versus LAMA/LABA and ICS/LABA, respectively, in patients with moderate to severe COPD, from the Spanish National Healthcare System (NHS) perspective.Methods: A lifetime Markov model with monthly cycle length was developed with baseline and treatment effect data from ETHOS clinical trial, together with utility values from literature and Spanish healthcare resource costs (€, 2021). A 3% annual discount rate was used for costs and benefits. The model comprised ten health states: nine forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)-related, which were divided by three levels of severity: moderate (FEV1 ≥ 50% and < 80%); severe (FEV1 ≥ 30% and < 50%) and very severe (FEV1 < 30%) and a death state. Each FEV1-health state was divided into no exacerbation, moderate exacerbation, and severe exacerbations. An expert panel validated data and assumptions. Outcomes were measured as incremental cost per exacerbation avoided, per life year (LY) gained, and per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (ICUR). One-way (OWSA), scenario, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed.Results: According to this cost-effectiveness analysis based on a Markov model, BUD/GLY/FOR was associated with a lower totals exacerbation per patient (12.80) compared to LAMA/LABA (13.36) and ICS/LABA (13.23) and higher LYs (10.32 vs 10.14 and 10.06, respectively) and QALYs (7.55 vs 7.41 and 7.32, respectively). The incremental costs were € 850.95, and € 2422.26, respectively, per exacerbation avoided, € 2733.38 and € 4111.15, respectively, per LY gained and € 3461.19 and € 4545.24 per QALY gained. OWSA showed that the model was most sensitive to the costs of treatments following discontinuation, but the ICUR remained below the cost-effectiveness threshold of € 25,000 per QALY gained. In the PSA, the probability of BUD/GLY/FOR being cost-effective was 91.32% vs LAMA/LABA and 99.29% vs ICS/LABA.Conclusion: BUD/GLY/FOR is a cost-effective treatment strategy for Spanish NHS patients with COPD compared to dual therapies.Keywords: COPD, economic evaluation, exacerbation, inhaled bronchodilator, inhaled corticosteroid, single-inhaler triple therapy

Introduction: Smartchronic is a non-profit collaborative Spanish project for developing a platform to improve and optimize the management of chronic patients based on artificial intelligence tools. Smartchronic platform models the frailty states from patients’ data from electronic health records to predict and simulate their evolution and associated care pathways. This platform has incorporated a non-invasive, continuous monitoring mobile health application (mHealth app) for patient self-reporting variables. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) could help enriching the information obtained in routine clinical practice to assess frailty and used for predictive analytics. Objectives: To design an mHealth app for smartphones for continuous and non-invasive monitoring of chronic patients by collecting relevant variables for frail patients.Methods: Phase 1 involved a literature review to identify dimensions and variables related to the patient frailty that could be collected with smartphones as PROs or passive sensors. The search strategy focused on frailty-related terms, dimensions and variables, and mHealth terms. Phase 2 involved five healthcare professionals (HCPs; primary care, internal medicine, geriatrics and nursing) and five chronic older patients. HCPs ordered identified dimensions and variables through an ad-hoc questionnaire according to their importance degree for assessing patient frailty in clinical practice. Through phone semi-structured interviews patients identified those dimensions and variables that matter to patients. Phase 3, based on the HCPs’ and patients’ opinions a mHealth app prototype was designed and the app was developed and integrated to Smartchronic platform. Phase 4, undertook a pilot study with older patients to prove app usability. The study was approved by the Ethical Clinical Research Committee of La FE Hospital-Valencia (Reference 2020-138-1).Results: In phase 1, following dimensions were identified in the literature review: physical function, mood, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), cognitive function, nutritional status, social function, symptoms and sleep quality. For each dimension, variables and tools (PROs or passive sensors) to collect them were registered. During phase 2, five dimensions were identified by HCPs and patients as important and feasible to collect: physical function, nutritional status, HRQoL, symptoms and sleep quality. Identified variables were: number of daily steps measured by smartphone-accelerometer (physical function); weight entered by the patient and appetite level determined by a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) (nutritional status); EQ-5D questionnaire (HRQoL); VAS for pain, fatigue, hearing and sight (symptoms); and quality and hours of sleep measured by a Likert-scale (sleep quality). In phase 3, according to these variables the app was developed. Phase 4 is currently underway.Conclusions: Involving clinicians and patients is essential in the design and development as recipients of the potential benefits. Our methodology has allowed us to develop an app that easily collects outcomes that matter to patients. This new tool has been integrated into the Smartchronic platform and could support HCPs to assess patient frailty and to improve the care of frail patients.Limitations: In phases 2 and 5 the small sample of participants may limit the generalization of results, however app usability in more chronic patients is being tested.Funding: this Project has been funded by the Valencian Innovation Agency (INNEST/2020/47).

Studies in patients with dyslipidemia have revealed that, despite guideline recommendations, treatment remains unchanged even when therapeutic goals are not achieved. Our objective was to determine the degree to which primary care (PC) and specialty care (SC) physicians adhere to clinical guidelines for the management of atherogenic dyslipidemia (AD). This was an observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. Physicians working in the Spanish Health System completed an electronic questionnaire comprising 24 items organized into three blocks: clinical guidelines, adherence to clinical guidelines, and other issues in the management of AD. The questions were formulated with closed polytomous or categorized responses. Adherence to guidelines, in terms of treatment, was assessed according to physicians’ responses to six patient profiles. Absolute and relative frequencies (qualitative variables), central tendency and dispersion (quantitative variables) were calculated. In total, 980 physicians (88.5% PC) participated in the study; 77.3% used guidelines in their routine clinical practice, with the most used being the Spanish SEMERGEN (73.8%) and the European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society guidelines (41.2%). A total of 83% adhered to guideline recommendations in more than four of the six profiles proposed, 26.2% adhered to the SEMERGEN definition of AD, 66.6% combined all lipoprotein ratios to diagnose AD, and > 60% used non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) to diagnose patients with AD at high cardiovascular risk. In total, 99.0% prescribed a fibrate to reduce triglyceride levels, 47.4% to increase HDL-C levels and 40.2% to reduce small, dense low-density lipoprotein cholesterol particles. Since adherence to clinical guidelines improves both the quality of care and health outcomes, greater adherence to and satisfaction with clinical guidelines for the management of AD may contribute to improvements in and optimization of the management of patients with AD in the Spanish health system.

Introduction Recommendations on chronic diseases management emphasise the need to consider patient perspectives and shared decision-making. Discrepancies between patients and physicians’ perspectives on treatment objectives, disease activity, preferences and treatment have been described for immune-mediate inflammatory diseases. These differences could result on patient dissatisfaction and negatively affect outcomes. Objective To describe the degree of patient-physician discrepancy in three chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (rheumatoid arthritis [RA], psoriatic arthritis [PsA] and psoriasis [Ps]), identifying the main areas of discrepancy and possible predictor factors. Methods Qualitative systematic review of the available literature on patient and physician discrepancies in the management of RA, PsA and Ps. The search was performed in international (Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, ISI-WOK) and Spanish electronic databases (MEDES, IBECS), including papers published from April 1, 2008 to April 1, 2018, in English or Spanish, and conducted in European or North American populations. Study quality was assessed by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria. Results A total of 21 studies were included (13 RA; 3 PsA; 4 Ps; 1 RA, Ps, and Axial Spondyloarthritis). A significant and heterogeneous degree of discrepancy between patients and physicians was found, regarding disease activity, treatment, clinical expectations, remission concept, and patient-physician relationship. In RA and PsA, studies were mainly focused on the evaluation of disease activity, which is perceived as higher from the patient’s than the physician’s perspective, with the discrepancy determined by factors such as patient’s perception of pain and fatigue. In Ps, studies were focused on treatment satisfaction and patient-physician relationship, showing a lower degree of discrepancy in the satisfaction regarding these aspects. Conclusions There is a significant degree of patient-physician discrepancy regarding the management of RA, PA, and Ps, what can have a major impact on shared decision-making. Future research may help to show whether interventions considering discrepancy improve shared decision-making.

Management of elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is complex due to their age-related conditions. Several clinical guidelines provide specific recommendations for management of these patients but little is known about their implementation in clinical practice. To describe physician and community pharmacist perceptions and routine clinical practice in the management of elderly T2DM patients. Cross-sectional study. A total of 993 physicians and 999 community pharmacists completed the questionnaire. More physicians than pharmacists agreed on the need to establish more flexible HbA1c targets for elderly (79.4% vs. 30.6%; p

Elena Labrador Barba,1 Marta Rodríguez de Miguel,1 Antonio Hernández-Mijares,2,3 Francisco Javier Alonso-Moreno,4 Maria Luisa Orera Peña,1 Susana Aceituno,5 María José Faus Dader6 1Department of Medicine, Mylan, Madrid, 2Department of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Doctor Peset University Hospital, Valencia, 3Department of Medicine, University of Valencia, Valencia, 4Department for Primary Health Care, Centro de Salud Sillería, Toledo, 5Outcomes’10, Castellon, 6Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Granada, Granada, Spain Objective: A good relationship between diabetes patients and their health care team is crucial to ensure patients’ medication adherence and self-management. To this end, we aimed to identify and compare the views of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients, physicians and pharmacists concerning the factors and strategies that may be associated with, or could improve, medication adherence and persistence.Methods: An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted using an electronic self-administered questionnaire comprising 11 questions (5-point Likert scale) concerning factors and strategies related to medication adherence. The survey was designed for T2DM patients and Spanish National Health System professionals.Results: A total of 963 T2DM patients, 998 physicians and 419 pharmacists participated in the study. Overall, a lower proportion of pharmacists considered the proposed factors associated with medication adherence important as compared to patients and physicians. It should be noted that a higher percentage of physicians in comparison to pharmacists perceived that “complexity of medication” (97% vs 76.6%, respectively) and “adverse events” (97.5% vs 72.2%, respectively) were important medication-related factors affecting adherence. In addition, both patients (80.8%) and physicians (80.8%) agreed on the importance of “cost and co-payment” for adherence, whereas only 48.6% of pharmacists considered this factor important. It is also noteworthy that nearly half of patients (43%) agreed that “to adjust medication to activities of daily living” was the best strategy to reduce therapeutic complexity, whereas physicians believed that “reducing the frequency of administration” (47.9%) followed by “reducing the number of tablets” (28.5%) was the most effective strategy to improve patients’ adherence.Conclusion: Our results highlight the need for pharmacists to build a stronger relationship with physicians in order to improve patients monitoring and adherence rates. Additionally, these findings may help to incorporate greater patient-centeredness when developing management strategies, focusing on adjusting medication regimens to patients’ daily lives. Keywords: type 2 diabetes mellitus, adherence, persistence, factors, strategies&nbsp

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has proven effective in reducing CRC mortality. This study aimed to systematically review, and evaluate the reporting quality, of the economic evidence regarding CRC screening in average-risk individuals. Methods Databases searched included Medline, EMBASE, National Health Service Economic Evaluation, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry, EconLit, and Health Technology Assessment database. Eligible studies were cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses comparing CRC screening strategies in average-risk individuals, published in English or Spanish, between January 2012 and November 2018. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Results Of 1,993 publications initially retrieved, 477 were excluded by duplicate review, 1,449 by title/abstract review, and 34 by full-text review. Finally, 33 publications were included in the qualitative synthesis. Most studies were conducted in Europe (36,4%), followed by United States (24,2%) and Asia (24,2%). The main screening modalities considered were fecal immunochemical tests (70%), colonoscopy (67%), guaiac fecal occult blood test (42%) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (30%). In most studies, CRC screening was deemed cost-effective compared to no screening. Sensitivity analyses indicated that cost of CRC screening tests, adherence to screening, screening test sensitivity, and cost of CRC treatment had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness results across studies. The majority of studies (73%) adequately reported at least 50% of the items included in the CHEERS checklist. Least well reported items included setting, study perspective, discount rate, model choice, and methods to identify effectiveness data or to estimate resource use and costs. Conclusions CRC screening is an efficient alternative to no screening. Nevertheless, it is not possible to conclude which strategy should be preferred for population-based screening programs. Although we observed an overall good adherence to CHEERS recommendations, there is still room for improvement in economic evaluations reporting in this field.

Introduction Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is the major cause of infectious nosocomial diarrhoea and is associated with considerable morbidity, mortality and economic impact. Bezlotoxumab administered in combination with standard of care (SoC) antibiotic therapy prevents recurrent CDI. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of bezlotoxumab added to SoC, compared to SoC alone, to prevent the recurrence of CDI in high-risk patients from the Spanish National Health System perspective. Methods A Markov model was used to simulate the natural history of CDI over a lifetime horizon in five populations of patients at high risk of CDI recurrence according to MODIFY trials: (1) ≥ 65 years old; (2) severe CDI; (3) immunocompromised; (4) ≥ 1 CDI episode in the previous 6 months; and (5) ≥ 65 years old and with ≥ 1 CDI episode in the previous 6 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained was calculated. Deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed. Results In all patient populations (from 1 to 5), bezlotoxumab added to SoC reduced CDI recurrence compared to SoC alone by 26.4, 19.5, 21.2, 26.6 and 39.7%, respectively. The resulting ICERs for the respective subgroups were €12,724, €17,495, €9545, €7386, and €4378. The model parameters with highest impact on the ICER were recurrence rate (first), mortality, and utility values. The probability that bezlotoxumab was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €21,000/QALY was 85.5%, 54.1%, 86.0%, 94.5%, 99.6%, respectively. Conclusion The results suggest that bezlotoxumab added to SoC compared to SoC alone is a cost-effective treatment to prevent the recurrence of CDI in high-risk patients. The influence of changes in model parameters on DSA results was higher in patients ≥ 65 years old, with severe CDI and immunocompromised. Additionally, PSA estimated that the probability of cost-effectiveness exceeded 85% in most subgroups. Funding Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s12325-018-0813-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BACKGROUND Multiple myeloma is a hematologic malignancy affecting bone marrow derived plasma cells. Current therapies are not able to eradicate the disease and most patients become refractory to the treatment. Lenalidomide and bortezomib have proved effective in the second-line treatment of these patients. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone compared to bortezomib in combination with dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma previously treated with bortezomib, from the perspective of the Chilean National Health Service. METHODOLOGY A four-state Markov model (preprogression on treatment; preprogression off treatment, progression and death) was used to simulate the evolution of a cohort of multiple myeloma patients over a 25-year time horizon. Efficacy data, resource use and frequency of adverse events were extracted from MM009/010 studies and a retrospective analysis of retreatment with bortezomib. All inputs were validated by experts. A 3% annual discount rate was used for costs and health outcomes. The robustness of the results was evaluated through univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS Lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone treatment provided 1.41 incremental life years and 0.83 incremental quality-adjusted life years in comparison with bortezomib in combination with dexamethasone, with an incremental cost of 11 864 597.86 CLP (19 589.86 US$). The incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratio were estimated at 8 410 266.92 CLP (13 886,35 US$) / incremental life year and 14 271 896.16 CLP (23 564,59 US$)/incremental quality-adjusted life years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone represents a potentially cost-effective alternative for the second-line treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who are not eligible for transplantation, from the perspective of the Chilean National Health Service. CONTEXTO El mieloma múltiple es una neoplasia de las células plasmáticas de la medula ósea. Las terapias disponibles no son curativas y la mayoría de los pacientes se vuelve refractario al tratamiento. Agentes como lenalidomida y bortezomib han demostrado su eficacia en el tratamien-to en segunda línea de estos pacientes. OBJETIVO Evaluar el costo-efectividad de la combinación lenalidomida/dexametasona frente a bortezomib/dexametasona en pacientes con mieloma múltiple, no candidatos a trasplante, previamente tratados con bortezomib, desde la perspectiva del sistema nacional de salud chileno. METODOLOGÍA Se empleó un modelo de Markov que simula la evolución de una cohorte de pacientes a través de cuatro estados de salud (preprogresión en tratamiento, preprogresión sin tratamiento, progresión o muerte) en un horizonte temporal de 25 años. Los datos de eficacia, uso de recursos y frecuencia de efectos adversos fueron extraídos de los ensayos sobre mieloma múltiple MM-009 y MM-010 y de un estudio retrospectivo de retratamiento con bortezomib. Todos los parámetros fueron validados por expertos. Se aplicó una tasa de descuento en costos y beneficios de 3%. La robustez de los resultados fue evaluada mediante un análisis de sensibilidad univariante y probabilístico. RESULTADOS El tratamiento con lenalidomida/dexametasona proporciona 1,41 años de vida y 0,83 años de vida ajustados por calidad incrementales respecto a bortezomib/dexametasona, con un costo incremental de 11 864 597,86 pesos chilenos (19 589,86 dólares). La ratio de cos-to-efectividad y costo-utilidad incremental se cifró en 8 410 266,92 pesos chilenos (13 886,35 dólares) por año de vida ganado y 14 271 896,16 pesos chilenos (23 564,59 dólares) por año de vida ajustado por calidad respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN La lenalidomida/dexametasona representa una alternativa potencialmente costo-efectiva, desde la perspectiva del sistema nacional de salud chileno, para el tratamiento en segunda línea de pacientes con mieloma múltiple no candidatos a trasplante.

Resumen Introduccion y objetivos Estimar el coste-efectividad de rosuvastatina frente a simvastatina, atorvastatina y pitavastatina en Espana, de acuerdo con las guias europeas de tratamiento de las dislipidemias, en pacientes con alto y muy alto riesgo cardiovascular. Metodos Modelo de Markov de coste-efectividad a largo plazo de rosuvastatina versus simvastatina, atorvastatina y pitavastatina, en pacientes de alto y muy alto riesgo cardiovascular definido por 5 factores (sexo, edad, habito tabaquico, nivel de colesterol inicial, presion arterial sistolica) segun el sistema SCORE. La ratio coste-efectividad incremental se expresa en euros por ano de vida ajustado por calidad y se calcula desde la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud. Resultados Los resultados indican que rosuvastatina se asocia a un beneficio mayor que las otras estatinas en todos los perfiles considerados. Rosuvastatina es mas coste-efectiva con respecto a simvastatina en pacientes con riesgo SCORE ≥ 8% en mujeres y ≥ 6% en hombres, mientras que entre 5% y los valores indicados su coste-efectividad depende del nivel basal de c-LDL del paciente. Rosuvastatina resulta mas coste-efectiva frente a atorvastatina a partir de un riesgo SCORE de 11% en mujeres y 10% en hombres. Rosuvastatina resulta dominante frente a pitavastatina, tanto en mujeres como en hombres con riesgo alto y muy alto en el sistema SCORE. Conclusiones Rosuvastatina es una terapia coste-efectiva en el tratamiento de la hipercolesterolemia, frente a simvastatina, atorvastatina y pitavastatina, especialmente en determinados perfiles de pacientes con factores de riesgo cardiovascular alto y muy alto segun el sistema SCORE en Espana.

Establishing a home enteral nutrition (HEN) that is adapted to the patient's needs and preferences can improve their quality of life and adherence, contributing to a higher treatment efficiency, better prognosis and cost reduction. As in most cases, patients need total or partial help from their caregivers, and there is a need for evaluating how well do caregivers know their patients' priorities.Exploring patients' preferences for HEN characteristics in Spain, and the concordance between patients and caregivers.A cross-sectional observational study based on the discrete choice experiment methodology. A set of eight choice scenarios generated from six attributes with two levels each was presented along with an ad hoc questionnaire on the importance and satisfaction with HEN. The relative importance (RI) of each attribute and the patient-caregiver concordance was estimated in every question.One hundred and forty-eight patients participated, and in 77 cases both the patient and the caregiver took the survey. The most important attributes (RI) for HEN were adaptation to comorbidities (33%), tolerability (33%), nutrients and calories (26%) and package characteristics (8%). Patients showed a high degree of satisfaction with the assistance received. Concordance between patient and caregiver was found in every question, being it moderate to good.According to patients, an ideal HEN product would be adaptable to comorbidities, easy to tolerate, providing the necessary nutrients and calories, with an easy to handle package. Caregivers know well their patients' preferences.

Introduccion: establecer una nutricion enteral domiciliaria (NED) adaptada a las necesidades y preferencias del paciente puede mejorar la calidad de vida y la adherencia, contribuyendo a una mayor eficiencia del tratamiento, mejor pronostico y reduccion de costes. En muchos casos los pacientes requieren ayuda total o parcial de cuidadores, por lo que es importante evaluar hasta que punto estos conocen sus preferencias. Objetivos: explorar las preferencias de los pacientes por las caracteristicas de la NED en Espana, y la concordancia entre paciente y cuidador. Metodos: estudio observacional, transversal, basado en la metodologia del experimento de eleccion discreta. Se presentaron ocho escenarios de eleccion generados a partir de seis atributos con dos niveles, y un cuestionario ad hocde importancia y satisfaccion con la NED. Se estimo la importancia relativa (IR) de cada atributo y la concordancia paciente-cuidador en todas las cuestiones. Resultados: participaron 148 pacientes; en 77 casos cumplimentaron las cuestiones los pacientes y sus cuidadores. Los atributos mas importantes (IR) en la NED fueron adaptabilidad a comorbilidades (33%), tolerabilidad (33%), aporte de nutrientes y calorias (26%) y caracteristicas del envase (8%). Los pacientes mostraron un elevado grado de satisfaccion con la asistencia recibida. Se encontro concordancia paciente-cuidador en todas las cuestiones, siendo esta de moderada a buena. Conclusiones: segun los pacientes, el producto para NED ideal se adapta a las comorbilidades, es facilmente tolerable, y aporta los nutrientes y calorias necesarios, con un envase de facil manejo. Los cuidadores conocen bien las preferencias del paciente.

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin versus simvastatin, atorvastatin and pitavastatin in Spain, according to the European guidelines for the treatment of dyslipidemias in patients with high and very high cardiovascular risk.A Markov long-term cost-effectiveness model of rosuvastatin versus simvastatin, atorvastatin and pitavastatin in patients with high and very high cardiovascular risk defined according to 5 factors (sex, age, smoking habit, baseline cholesterol level, and systolic blood pressure) using the SCORE system. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is expressed in euros per quality adjusted life years and is calculated according to the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.Rosuvastatin is associated with a greater health benefit than the other statins across the considered profiles. Rosuvastatin is cost-effective compared to simvastatin in patients with SCORE risk ≥8% in females and ≥6% in males, while between 5% and the indicated values its cost-effectiveness is conditional to the patient baseline c-LDL level. Rosuvastatin is more cost-effective versus atorvastatin in female profiles associated with a SCORE risk≥11% and male profiles with SCORE risk ≥10%. Rosuvastatin is superior versus pitavastatin in both female and male profiles with high and very high cardiovascular risk.Rosuvastatin is a cost-effective therapy in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia versus simvastatin, atorvastatin and pitavastatin, especially in specific profiles of patients with high and very high cardiovascular risk factors, according to the SCORE system, in Spain.

The present study investigated schizophrenics' and college students' preference for and judgment of humor samples written by schizophrenics and normals. Twenty male hospitalized schizophrenics and 20 male undergraduate college students ranked from most to least funny two sets of captions that had been previously written by an independent group of 10 college students and 10 schizophrenics. In addition, all subjects identified which captions they thought were written by college students and which by schizophrenics. The schizophrenic judges ranked the schizophrenic captions significantly more humorous than the student judges did. Student judges found the student captions significantly more humorous than the schizophrenic judges found them. When presented with both schizophrenic and student captions, however, all 40 subjects found the student captions significantly more humorous than the schizophrenic captions. Schizophrenic judges were not significantly better than student judges in the identification of schizophrenic captions. Student judges, however, were significantly better judges of "normal" humor than schizophrenic judges were.