Eric Jutkowitz1, Fernando Alarid-Escudero2, Hyon K Choi3, Karen M Kuntz2, Hawre Jalal4. 1. Department of Health Services, Policy and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, 121 S. Main Street, 6th Floor, Box G-S121-6, Providence, RI, 02912, USA. Eric_Jutkowitz@Brown.edu. 2. Division of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 3. Division of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology, Department of Medicine, Gout and Crystal Arthropathy Center, Clinical Epidemiology and Health Outcomes, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Division of Health Policy and Management, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to quantify the value of conducting additional research and reducing uncertainty regarding the cost effectiveness of allopurinol and febuxostat for the management of gout. METHODS: We used a previously developed Markov model that evaluated the cost effectiveness of nine urate-lowering strategies: no treatment, allopurinol-only fixed dose (300 mg), allopurinol-only dose escalation (up to 800 mg), febuxostat-only fixed dose (80 mg), febuxostat-only dose escalation (up to 120 mg), allopurinol-febuxostat sequential therapy fixed dose, allopurinol-febuxostat sequential therapy dose escalation, febuxostat-allopurinol sequential therapy fixed dose, and febuxostat-allopurinol sequential therapy dose escalation. Each strategy was evaluated over the lifetime of a hypothetical gout patient. We calculated population expected value of perfect information (EVPI). We used a linear regression meta-modeling approach to calculate population expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI), and a Gaussian approximation to calculate the population expected value of sample information for parameters (EVSI) and the expected net benefit of sampling (ENBS) for four potential study designs: (1) an allopurinol efficacy trial; (2) a febuxostat efficacy trial; (3) a prospective observational study evaluating health utilities; and (4) a comprehensive study evaluating the efficacy of allopurinol and febuxostat and health utilities. A 5-year decision time horizon was used in the base-case analysis. RESULTS: EVPI varied by a decision maker's willingness-to-pay (WTP) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and was $US900 million for WTP of $US60,000 per QALY. Population EVPPI was highest across all WTP values for study design #4. For study design #4 and a WTP of $US60,000 per QALY, the optimal sample size was 735 patients per study arm. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of allopurinol and febuxostat dose escalation.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to quantify the value of conducting additional research and reducing uncertainty regarding the cost effectiveness of allopurinol and febuxostat for the management of gout. METHODS: We used a previously developed Markov model that evaluated the cost effectiveness of nine urate-lowering strategies: no treatment, allopurinol-only fixed dose (300 mg), allopurinol-only dose escalation (up to 800 mg), febuxostat-only fixed dose (80 mg), febuxostat-only dose escalation (up to 120 mg), allopurinol-febuxostat sequential therapy fixed dose, allopurinol-febuxostat sequential therapy dose escalation, febuxostat-allopurinol sequential therapy fixed dose, and febuxostat-allopurinol sequential therapy dose escalation. Each strategy was evaluated over the lifetime of a hypothetical goutpatient. We calculated population expected value of perfect information (EVPI). We used a linear regression meta-modeling approach to calculate population expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI), and a Gaussian approximation to calculate the population expected value of sample information for parameters (EVSI) and the expected net benefit of sampling (ENBS) for four potential study designs: (1) an allopurinol efficacy trial; (2) a febuxostat efficacy trial; (3) a prospective observational study evaluating health utilities; and (4) a comprehensive study evaluating the efficacy of allopurinol and febuxostat and health utilities. A 5-year decision time horizon was used in the base-case analysis. RESULTS: EVPI varied by a decision maker's willingness-to-pay (WTP) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and was $US900 million for WTP of $US60,000 per QALY. Population EVPPI was highest across all WTP values for study design #4. For study design #4 and a WTP of $US60,000 per QALY, the optimal sample size was 735 patients per study arm. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of allopurinol and febuxostat dose escalation.
Authors: Dinesh Khanna; John D Fitzgerald; Puja P Khanna; Sangmee Bae; Manjit K Singh; Tuhina Neogi; Michael H Pillinger; Joan Merill; Susan Lee; Shraddha Prakash; Marian Kaldas; Maneesh Gogia; Fernando Perez-Ruiz; Will Taylor; Frédéric Lioté; Hyon Choi; Jasvinder A Singh; Nicola Dalbeth; Sanford Kaplan; Vandana Niyyar; Danielle Jones; Steven A Yarows; Blake Roessler; Gail Kerr; Charles King; Gerald Levy; Daniel E Furst; N Lawrence Edwards; Brian Mandell; H Ralph Schumacher; Mark Robbins; Neil Wenger; Robert Terkeltaub Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Puja P Khanna; George Nuki; Thomas Bardin; Anne-Kathrin Tausche; Anna Forsythe; Amir Goren; Jeffrey Vietri; Dinesh Khanna Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2012-09-22 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Leslie R Harrold; Susan E Andrade; Becky A Briesacher; Marsha A Raebel; Hassan Fouayzi; Robert A Yood; Ira S Ockene Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2009-03-27 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: K Claxton; S Palmer; L Longworth; L Bojke; S Griffin; C McKenna; M Soares; E Spackman; J Youn Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2012 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Natalia Kunst; Natasha K Stout; Grace O'Brien; Kurt D Christensen; Pamela M McMahon; Ann Chen Wu; Lisa R Diller; Jennifer M Yeh Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-05-09 Impact factor: 11.816