Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30596210›Full record

SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2019

Evaluating Cost-Effectiveness Models for Pharmacologic Interventions in Adults with Heart Failure: A Systematic Literature Review.

Gian Luca Di Tanna, Anna Bychenkova, Frank O'Neill, Heidi S Wirtz, Paul Miller, Briain Ó Hartaigh, Gary Globe

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Model parameters influencing the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure: evidence from a systematic literature review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Gian Luca Di TannaEconomic Modelling Centre of Excellence, Amgen (Europe) GmbH, Rotkreuz, Switzerland.
Anna BychenkovaGlobal Health Economics, Amgen Inc, Uxbridge, UK.
Frank O'NeillGlobal Health Economics, Amgen Inc, Uxbridge, UK.
Heidi S WirtzAmgen Inc., One Amgen Center Drive, Thousand Oaks, CA, 91320-1799, USA.
Paul MillerMiller Economics Ltd, Biohub Alderley Park, Alderley Edge, UK.
Briain Ó HartaighEnvision Pharma Group, Southport, CT, USA.
Gary GlobeAmgen Inc., One Amgen Center Drive, Thousand Oaks, CA, 91320-1799, USA. gglobe@amgen.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHeart failure (HF) is a well-recognized public health concern and imposes high economic and societal costs. Decision analytic models exist for evaluating the economic ramifications associated with HF. Despite this, studies that appraise these modelling approaches for augmenting best-practice decisions remain scarce.

objectiveOur objective was to conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) of published economic models for the management of HF and describe their general and methodological features.

methodsThis SLR employed a combination of relevant search terms associated with HF, which were used in a number of databases, including MEDLINE, Embase, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, ScHARR Health Utilities Database and Cochrane Library Database. A number of model features (i.e. model structure, specification, outcomes assessed, scenario and sensitivity analysis, key model drivers) were extracted and subsequently summarized.

resultsOf 64 publications retained, a selection of modelling approaches were identified, including Markov (n = 28), trial-based analytic (n = 22), discrete-event simulation (n = 6), survival analytic (n = 7) and decision-tree modelling (n = 1) approaches. The bulk of publications employed either a cost-utility (n = 27) or cost-effectiveness (n = 36) analysis and evaluated more than one study outcome, which typically included overall costs (n = 59), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (n = 55), life-years gained (n = 48) and willingness-to-pay thresholds (n = 37). Most publications focused on patients with chronic HF (n = 40) and used New York Heart Association (NYHA) disease classifications to categorize patients and determine disease severity. Few (n = 19) publications documented the use of hospitalization states for modelling patient outcomes and associated costs. A quality assessment of the included publications revealed most articles demonstrated reasonable methodological value.

conclusionsWe identified numerous decision analytic modelling approaches for evaluating the cost effectiveness of pharmacologic treatments in HF. A Markov cohort model approach was most commonly used, and most models relied on NYHA classes as a proxy of HF severity, disease progression and prognosis.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesModels, EconomicAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision TreesDisease ProgressionHeart FailureHumansMarkov Chains

Identifiers

PMID30596210
PMCPMC6386015

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.