Literature DB >> 23796288

Using whole disease modeling to inform resource allocation decisions: economic evaluation of a clinical guideline for colorectal cancer using a single model.

Paul Tappenden1, Jim Chilcott, Alan Brennan, Hazel Squires, Rob Glynne-Jones, Janine Tappenden.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and value of simulating whole disease and treatment pathways within a single model to provide a common economic basis for informing resource allocation decisions.
METHODS: A patient-level simulation model was developed with the intention of being capable of evaluating multiple topics within National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's colorectal cancer clinical guideline. The model simulates disease and treatment pathways from preclinical disease through to detection, diagnosis, adjuvant/neoadjuvant treatments, follow-up, curative/palliative treatments for metastases, supportive care, and eventual death. The model parameters were informed by meta-analyses, randomized trials, observational studies, health utility studies, audit data, costing sources, and expert opinion. Unobservable natural history parameters were calibrated against external data using Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. Economic analysis was undertaken using conventional cost-utility decision rules within each guideline topic and constrained maximization rules across multiple topics.
RESULTS: Under usual processes for guideline development, piecewise economic modeling would have been used to evaluate between one and three topics. The Whole Disease Model was capable of evaluating 11 of 15 guideline topics, ranging from alternative diagnostic technologies through to treatments for metastatic disease. The constrained maximization analysis identified a configuration of colorectal services that is expected to maximize quality-adjusted life-year gains without exceeding current expenditure levels.
CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that Whole Disease Model development is feasible and can allow for the economic analysis of most interventions across a disease service within a consistent conceptual and mathematical infrastructure. This disease-level modeling approach may be of particular value in providing an economic basis to support other clinical guidelines.
Copyright © 2013 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23796288     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.02.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  12 in total

1.  Development and Use of Disease-Specific (Reference) Models for Economic Evaluations of Health Technologies: An Overview of Key Issues and Potential Solutions.

Authors:  Gerardus W J Frederix; Hossein Haji Ali Afzali; Erik J Dasbach; Robyn L Ward
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Improving early diagnosis of symptomatic cancer.

Authors:  Willie Hamilton; Fiona M Walter; Greg Rubin; Richard D Neal
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Cost Effectiveness of Case Detection Strategies for the Early Detection of COPD.

Authors:  Kate M Johnson; Mohsen Sadatsafavi; Amin Adibi; Larry Lynd; Mark Harrison; Hamid Tavakoli; Don D Sin; Stirling Bryan
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 2.561

4.  Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Antonieta Medina-Lara; Bogdan Grigore; Ruth Lewis; Jaime Peters; Sarah Price; Paolo Landa; Sophie Robinson; Richard Neal; William Hamilton; Anne E Spencer
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 4.014

5.  The Use of Expert Elicitation among Computational Modeling Studies in Health Research: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Christopher J Cadham; Marie Knoll; Luz María Sánchez-Romero; K Michael Cummings; Clifford E Douglas; Alex Liber; David Mendez; Rafael Meza; Ritesh Mistry; Aylin Sertkaya; Nargiz Travis; David T Levy
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-10-25       Impact factor: 2.749

6.  Development of a conceptual model for evaluating new non-curative and curative therapies for sickle cell disease.

Authors:  Kate M Johnson; Boshen Jiao; M A Bender; Scott D Ramsey; Beth Devine; Anirban Basu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 3.752

7.  Use of health economic evaluation in the implementation and improvement science fields-a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Sarah Louise Elin Roberts; Andy Healey; Nick Sevdalis
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 7.327

8.  A competing risk analysis of sequential complication development in Asian type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.

Authors:  Li-Jen Cheng; Jeng-Huei Chen; Ming-Yen Lin; Li-Chia Chen; Chun-Huan Lao; Hsing Luh; Shang-Jyh Hwang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  The Melanoma MAICare Framework: A Microsimulation Model for the Assessment of Individualized Cancer Care.

Authors:  Elisabeth van der Meijde; Alfons J M van den Eertwegh; Sabine C Linn; Gerrit A Meijer; Remond J A Fijneman; Veerle M H Coupé
Journal:  Cancer Inform       Date:  2016-06-15

10.  Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses of a colorectal cancer screening programme in a high adenoma prevalence scenario using MISCAN-Colon microsimulation model.

Authors:  Arantzazu Arrospide; Isabel Idigoras; Javier Mar; Harry de Koning; Miriam van der Meulen; Myriam Soto-Gordoa; Jose Miguel Martinez-Llorente; Isabel Portillo; Eunate Arana-Arri; Oliver Ibarrondo; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-04-25       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.