ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF INTRAVENOUS IODINATED CONTRAST MEDIA IN ITALY

Efficacy and Safety of Iodixanol in Computed Coronary Tomographic Angiography and Cardiac Catheterization

Iodixanol is an iso-osmolar non-ionic dimeric hydrophilic contrast agent with a higher viscosity than the monomeric agents. It is the only Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved iso-osmolar agent in the United States, and it is the only contrast agent with an FDA-approved indication for use in cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA), to assist in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with suspected coronary artery disease. In clinical studies, it has been noted to have fewer side effects and similar image quality when compared to low-osmolar contrast media. This can be attributed to the pharmacological properties of iodixanol. These contrast agents are used for coronary computed tomography angiography and cardiac catheterization. In this article, the use, tolerability, and efficacy of iodixanol are reviewed, specifically evaluating the use of CCTA and coronary angiography, including outcome studies, randomized trials, and comparisons to other contrast agents.

Point-of-care creatinine tests to assess kidney function for outpatients requiring contrast-enhanced CT imaging: systematic reviews and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Patients with low estimated glomerular filtration rates may be at higher risk of post-contrast acute kidney injury following contrast-enhanced computed tomography imaging. Point-of-care devices allow rapid measurement of estimated glomerular filtration rates for patients referred without a recent estimated glomerular filtration rate result.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of point-of-care creatinine tests for outpatients without a recent estimated glomerular filtration rate measurement who need contrast-enhanced computed tomography imaging.

METHODS

Three systematic reviews of test accuracy, implementation and clinical outcomes, and economic analyses were carried out. Bibliographic databases were searched from inception to November 2018. Studies comparing the accuracy of point-of-care creatinine tests with laboratory reference tests to assess kidney function in adults in a non-emergency setting and studies reporting implementation and clinical outcomes were included. Risk of bias of diagnostic accuracy studies was assessed using a modified version of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Probabilities of individuals having their estimated glomerular filtration rates correctly classified were estimated within a Bayesian framework and pooled using a fixed-effects model. A de novo probabilistic decision tree cohort model was developed to characterise the decision problem from an NHS and a Personal Social Services perspective. A range of alternative point-of-care testing approaches were considered. Scenario analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies were included in the clinical reviews. Twelve studies reported diagnostic accuracy for estimated glomerular filtration rates; half were rated as being at low risk of bias, but there were applicability concerns for most. i-STAT (Abbott Point of Care, Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA) and ABL (Radiometer Ltd, Crawley, UK) devices had higher probabilities of correctly classifying individuals in the same estimated glomerular filtration rate categories as the reference laboratory test than StatSensor® devices (Nova Biomedical, Runcorn, UK). There was limited evidence for epoc® (Siemens Healthineers AG, Erlangen, Germany) and Piccolo Xpress® (Abaxis, Inc., Union City, CA, USA) devices and no studies of DRI-CHEM NX 500 (Fujifilm Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). The review of implementation and clinical outcomes included six studies showing practice variation in the management decisions when a point-of-care device indicated an abnormal estimated glomerular filtration rate. The review of cost-effectiveness evidence identified no relevant studies. The de novo decision model that was developed included a total of 14 strategies. Owing to limited data, the model included only i-STAT, ABL800 FLEX and StatSensor. In the base-case analysis, the cost-effective strategy appeared to be a three-step testing sequence involving initially screening all individuals for risk factors, point-of-care testing for those individuals with at least one risk factor, and including a final confirmatory laboratory test for individuals with a point-of-care-positive test result. Within this testing approach, the specific point-of-care device with the highest net benefit was i-STAT, although differences in net benefit with StatSensor were very small.

LIMITATIONS

There was insufficient evidence for patients with estimated glomerular filtration rates < 30 ml/minute/1.73 m2, and on the full potential health impact of delayed or rescheduled computed tomography scans or the use of alternative imaging modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

A three-step testing sequence combining a risk factor questionnaire with a point-of-care test and confirmatory laboratory testing appears to be a cost-effective use of NHS resources compared with current practice. The risk of contrast causing acute kidney injury to patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of < 30 ml/minute/1.73 m2 is uncertain. Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care testing appears largely driven by the potential of point-of-care tests to minimise delays within the current computed tomography pathway.

FUTURE WORK

Studies evaluating the impact of risk-stratifying questionnaires on workflow outcomes in computed tomography patients without recent estimated glomerular filtration rate results are needed.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018115818.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The future for diagnostic tests of acute kidney injury in critical care: evidence synthesis, care pathway analysis and research prioritisation

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is highly prevalent in hospital inpatient populations, leading to significant mortality and morbidity, reduced quality of life and high short- and long-term health-care costs for the NHS. New diagnostic tests may offer an earlier diagnosis or improved care, but evidence of benefit to patients and of value to the NHS is required before national adoption.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the potential for AKI in vitro diagnostic tests to enhance the NHS care of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and identify an efficient supporting research strategy.

DATA SOURCES

We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, The Cochrane Library databases, Embase, Health Management Information Consortium, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, MEDLINE, metaRegister of Current Controlled Trials, PubMed and Web of Science databases from their inception dates until September 2014 (review 1), November 2015 (review 2) and July 2015 (economic model). Details of databases used for each review and coverage dates are listed in the main report.

REVIEW METHODS

The AKI-Diagnostics project included horizon scanning, systematic reviewing, meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity, appraisal of analytical validity, care pathway analysis, model-based lifetime economic evaluation from a UK NHS perspective and value of information (VOI) analysis.

RESULTS

The horizon-scanning search identified 152 potential tests and biomarkers. Three tests, Nephrocheck^® (Astute Medical, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA), NGAL and cystatin C, were subjected to detailed review. The meta-analysis was limited by variable reporting standards, study quality and heterogeneity, but sensitivity was between 0.54 and 0.92 and specificity was between 0.49 and 0.95 depending on the test. A bespoke critical appraisal framework demonstrated that analytical validity was also poorly reported in many instances. In the economic model the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from £11,476 to £19,324 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with a probability of cost-effectiveness between 48% and 54% when tests were compared with current standard care.

LIMITATIONS

The major limitation in the evidence on tests was the heterogeneity between studies in the definitions of AKI and the timing of testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic tests for AKI in the ICU offer the potential to improve patient care and add value to the NHS, but cost-effectiveness remains highly uncertain. Further research should focus on the mechanisms by which a new test might change current care processes in the ICU and the subsequent cost and QALY implications. The VOI analysis suggested that further observational research to better define the prevalence of AKI developing in the ICU would be worthwhile. A formal randomised controlled trial of biomarker use linked to a standardised AKI care pathway is necessary to provide definitive evidence on whether or not adoption of tests by the NHS would be of value.

STUDY REGISTRATION

The systematic review within this study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013919.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Are iso-osmolar, as compared to low-osmolar, contrast media cost-effective in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization? An economic analysis

PURPOSE

Contrast-induced acute kidney injury is a prominent complication following cardiac catheterization, though the risk has progressively decreased in recent times with appropriate risk stratification and use of safer contrast agents. Despite data supporting further lowering of risk with the iso-osmolar agent, iodixanol, uptake has lagged, perhaps due to increased upfront cost of this agent. We undertook an economic analysis to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a strategy utilizing iodixanol compared to using a low-osmolar contrast agent.

METHODS

We created a Markov model to evaluate the two strategies, and included a differential relative risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury, based on a systematic review of the literature. Downstream clinical events, including need for dialysis and mortality, were modeled using data from existing published literature. A third-party payer perspective was utilized for the analysis and presentation of the primary economic analysis.

RESULTS

The strategy of using iodixanol dominated in both the low-risk and high-risk base case analyses. However, the difference was quite small in the low-risk scenario (lifetime cost: C$678,034 vs. C$678,059 and life expectancy: 19.80 vs. 19.72 years). The difference was more marked (life expectancy 15.65 vs. 14.15 years and cost C$680,989 vs. C$682,023) in the high-risk case analysis. This was robust across most of the variables tested in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

The use of iodixanol, compared with low-osmolar contrast agents, for cardiac catheterization, results in a small benefit clinical outcomes, and in a savings in direct healthcare costs. Overall, our analysis supports the use of iodixanol for cardiac catheterization, especially in patients at high risk of acute kidney injury.

ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF INTRAVENOUS IODINATED CONTRAST MEDIA IN ITALY – ERRATUM

The affiliation listed for author Sergio Iannazzo for the article “Economic Evaluation of Intravenous Iodinated Contrast Media in Italy” was incorrect. The study and writeup were completed while Sergio Iannazzo was an IMS Health employee, and the author's correct affiliation for this paper is “IMS Health Italy.” The publisher regrets the error.