Literature DB >> 25209407

Comparison of an effect-model-law-based method versus traditional clinical practice guidelines for optimal treatment decision-making: application to statin treatment in the French population.

Riad Kahoul1, François Gueyffier2, Emmanuel Amsallem3, Margaret Haugh4, Ivanny Marchant5, François-Henri Boissel4, Jean-Pierre Boissel6.   

Abstract

Healthcare authorities make difficult decisions about how to spend limited budgets for interventions that guarantee the best cost-efficacy ratio. We propose a novel approach for treatment decision-making, OMES-in French: Objectif thérapeutique Modèle Effet Seuil (in English: Therapeutic Objective-Threshold-Effect Model; TOTEM). This approach takes into consideration results from clinical trials, adjusted for the patients' characteristics in treatment decision-making. We compared OMES with the French clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of dyslipidemia with statin in a computer-generated realistic virtual population, representing the adult French population, in terms of the number of all-cause deaths avoided (number of avoided events: NAEs) under treatment and the individual absolute benefit. The total budget was fixed at the annual amount reimbursed by the French social security for statins. With the CPGs, the NAEs was 292 for an annual cost of 122.54 M€ compared with 443 with OMES. For a fixed NAEs, OMES reduced costs by 50% (60.53 M€ yr(-1)). The results demonstrate that OMES is at least as good as, and even better than, the standard CPGs when applied to the same population. Hence the OMES approach is a practical, useful alternative which will help to overcome the limitations of treatment decision-making based uniquely on CPGs.
© 2014 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cardiovascular diseases; clinical practice guidelines; effect model; personalized medicine; treatment decision-making

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25209407      PMCID: PMC4191119          DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2014.0867

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J R Soc Interface        ISSN: 1742-5662            Impact factor:   4.118


  16 in total

1.  A method to describe physician decision thresholds and its application in examining the diagnosis of coronary artery disease based on exercise treadmill testing.

Authors:  C M Plasencia; B W Alderman; A E Barón; R T Rolfs; E J Boyko
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1992 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  An effect model for the assessment of drug benefit: example of antiarrhythmic drugs in postmyocardial infarction patients.

Authors:  J P Boissel; J P Collet; M Lievre; P Girard
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Pharmacol       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 3.105

3.  A mathematical model for the determination of the optimum value of the treatment threshold for a continuous risk factor.

Authors:  M Cucherat; J P Boissel
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 8.082

4.  Contribution of modeling approaches and virtual populations in transposing the results of clinical trials into real life and in enlightening public health decisions.

Authors:  François Gueyffier; Catherine Brun Strang; Gilles Berdeaux; Lionel Riou França; Patrick Blin; Jacques Massol
Journal:  Therapie       Date:  2012-11-01       Impact factor: 2.070

5.  [The MONICA project. A WHO research project in cardiovascular diseases].

Authors:  J L Richard
Journal:  Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.019

6.  SCORE should be preferred to Framingham to predict cardiovascular death in French population.

Authors:  Ivanny Marchant; Jean-Pierre Boissel; Behrouz Kassaï; Theodora Bejan; Jacques Massol; Chrystelle Vidal; Emmanuel Amsallem; Florence Naudin; Pilar Galan; Sébastien Czernichow; Patrice Nony; François Gueyffier
Journal:  Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil       Date:  2009-10

7.  Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project.

Authors:  R M Conroy; K Pyörälä; A P Fitzgerald; S Sans; A Menotti; G De Backer; D De Bacquer; P Ducimetière; P Jousilahti; U Keil; I Njølstad; R G Oganov; T Thomsen; H Tunstall-Pedoe; A Tverdal; H Wedel; P Whincup; L Wilhelmsen; I M Graham
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 29.983

8.  An evidence based approach to individualising treatment.

Authors:  P P Glasziou; L M Irwig
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-11-18

9.  The global risk approach should be better applied in French hypertensive patients: a comparison between simulation and observation studies.

Authors:  Ivanny Marchant; Patrice Nony; Michel Cucherat; Jean-Pierre Boissel; S Randall Thomas; Theodora Bejan-Angoulvant; Alexandra Laugerotte; Riad Kahoul; François Gueyffier
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Revisiting the relationship between baseline risk and risk under treatment.

Authors:  Hao Wang; Jean-Pierre Boissel; Patrice Nony
Journal:  Emerg Themes Epidemiol       Date:  2009-02-17
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Effect model law: an approach for the implementation of personalized medicine.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Boissel; Riad Kahoul; Draltan Marin; François-Henri Boissel
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2013-08-15

2.  Solving the Evidence Interpretability Crisis in Health Technology Assessment: A Role for Mechanistic Models?

Authors:  Eulalie Courcelles; Jean-Pierre Boissel; Jacques Massol; Ingrid Klingmann; Riad Kahoul; Marc Hommel; Emmanuel Pham; Alexander Kulesza
Journal:  Front Med Technol       Date:  2022-02-24
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.