A systematic review of economic evaluations of therapy in asthma

Economic evaluation of community acquired pneumonia management strategies: A systematic review of literature

BACKGROUND

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Efficient use of resources is fundamental for best use of money among the available and novel treatment options for the management of pneumonia. The objective of this study was to systematically review the economic analysis of management strategies of pneumonia.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed using Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE, EconLit, Global health, MEDLINE complete and Embase databases using specific subject headings or key words in May 2018 without restricting publication year. All search results were recorded and any type of economic evaluation for management of CAP was included for detailed review. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used for quality appraisal.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria; ten studies were trial based, five conducted analysis using model based techniques and the rest of the studies were either based on observational, record review or pre-post intervention studies. Most of the studies conducted cost-effectiveness analysis (n = 15) and compared different combinations of antimicrobials. Most were based on developed countries (n = 17), considered adult age groups (n = 16) and used a provider perspective (n = 14). Nine studies reported dominant alternatives (lower cost with higher benefit). Sensitivity analysis was performed by the majority of studies (n = 15). Fourteen studies were assessed as either being excellent, very good or good quality, with no relationship found between publication year and study quality. Methodological variation, type of microbial used, perspective, costs and outcome measures limit the compatibility among the results of the included studies.

CONCLUSION

Economic evaluation of interventions for management of CAP to date supports cost-effectiveness of studied interventions. However, evidence relates largely to antimicrobials choice in older populations in developed countries. Parallel economic evaluation of different management strategies of CAP is recommended for both developed and developing countries to support rigorous and robust comparative economic analysis within health care systems. PROSPERO registration no: CRD42018097174.

A pilot randomized controlled trial on the impact of text messaging check-ins and a web-based asthma action plan versus a written action plan on asthma exacerbations

OBJECTIVE

We compared electronic asthma action plans (eAAP) supported by automated text messaging service (SMS) with written asthma action plans (AAP) on assessing acceptability and asthma control improvement. We hypothesized that the patients in eAAP group would have more improvements in their quality of life, asthma control and decreased asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

Patients with physician-diagnosed asthma having at least one asthma exacerbation in the previous 12 months were recruited. Participants received individualized action plans and were randomly assigned into either the intervention (eAAP) or control (AAP) group. Intervention participants received weekly SMS, triggering assessment of asthma control and viewing their eAAP. We assessed applicability of Telehealth platform on asthma exacerbations, asthma control, and quality of life over a 12-month period.

RESULTS

106 patients were enrolled (eAAP = 52, AAP = 54). The cumulative response rate to all weekly SMS check-ins was 68.4%. Overall, 28% of patients checked into their eAAP during the intervention period. There were fewer exacerbations in the eAAP group (18%) compared to the AAP group (RR = 0.82 [95%CI 0.49, 1.36]), (P = 0.44). The mean scores for asthma control and quality of life were higher in the eAAP group compared to the AAP group by 4% (RR = 1.04 [95%CI 0.83, 1.30]), (P =  0.73) and 5.5% (RR = 1.06 [95%CI 0.87, 1.28]), (P = 0.59), respectively, but were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that the eAAP presented improved asthma control outcomes, but as expected the sample size was inadequate to show a significant difference, but based on this pilot study we plan a larger appropriately powered randomized controlled trial (RCT).

Cost Effectiveness of Pharmacological Treatments for Asthma: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article was to summarize the findings of all the available studies on alternative pharmacological treatments for asthma and assess their methodological quality, as well as to identify the main drivers of the cost effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for the disease.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature in seven electronic databases was conducted in order to identify all the available health economic evidence on alternative pharmacological treatments for asthma published up to April 2017. The reporting quality of the included studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.

RESULTS

A total of 72 studies were included in the review, classified as follows: medications for acute asthma treatment (n = 5, 6.9%); inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) administered alone or in conjunction with long-acting β-agonists (LABA) or tiotropium for chronic asthma treatment (n = 38, 52.8%); direct comparisons between different combinations of ICS, ICS/LABA, leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA), and sodium cromoglycate for chronic asthma treatment (n = 14, 19.4%); and omalizumab for chronic asthma treatment (n = 15, 20.8%). ICS were reported to be cost effective when compared with LTRA for the management of persistent asthma. In patients with inadequately controlled asthma taking ICS, the addition of long-acting β-agonist (LABA) preparations has been demonstrated to be cost effective, especially when combinations of ICS/LABA containing formoterol are used for both maintenance and reliever therapy. In patients with uncontrolled severe persistent allergic asthma, omalizumab therapy could be cost effective in a carefully selected subgroup of patients with the more severe forms of the disease. The quality of reporting in the studies, according to the CHEERS checklist, was very uneven. The main cost-effectiveness drivers identified were the cost or rate of asthma exacerbations, the cost or rate of the use of asthma medications, the asthma mortality risk, and the rate of utilization of health services for asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings are in line with the pharmacological recommendations for stepwise management of asthma given in the most recent evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the disease. The identified reporting quality of the available health economic evidence is useful for identifying aspects where there is room for improvement in future asthma cost-effectiveness studies.

Asthma Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: Are We Using the Recommended Outcomes in Estimating Value?

BACKGROUND

Asthma medication cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) lack the qualitative assessment regarding whether they capture the National Institutes for Health (NIH) 2012 recommended outcomes necessary to allow robust cross-study comparisons.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the current asthma outcomes used in CEAs and recommend a direction for improvement.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search using electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Tufts CEA registry, Cochrane, and NHSEED from January 2010 through December 2015. Key words included (1) cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, economic evaluation, health economics, or cost-benefit AND (2) asthma. All CEA studies evaluating 1 or more asthma medication were included. Authors assessed each CEA study with respect to asthma-specific NIH outcome recommendations including core (hospitalizations, emergency department visits, outpatient visits, medication, interventions costs), supplemental (visit categories and work/school absence), and emerging (academic/job-related) asthma outcomes. Besides outcomes of each CEA, issues that could prevent robust cross-study comparison were identified and thematically summarized.

RESULTS

A total of 12 pre-NIH and 14 post-NIH recommendation CEAs were included. Eleven (91.7%) and 14 (100%) of the pre-/post-NIH studies included at least 1 core outcome, respectively. Of the 26 total studies, 7 (26.9%) included asthma-specific outpatient visit categories, 6 (23.1%) included asthma school or work absences, 5 (19.2%) included respiratory health care use, and none of the studies included emerging outcomes. Other issues that hamper cross-study comparison include lack of standardized cost data, time frames, quality-of-life measures, and incorporation of adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the use of NIH-recommended asthma core outcomes has improved, there is still room for improvement in using supplemental and emerging outcomes. To allow robust cross-study comparisons, future work should focus on further standardizing of data sources and methods.

Children and Adults With Frequent Hospitalizations for Asthma Exacerbation, 2012-2013: A Multicenter Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Earlier studies reported that many patients were frequently hospitalized for asthma exacerbation. However, there have been no recent multicenter studies to characterize this patient population with high morbidity and health care utilization.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the proportion and characteristics of children and adults with frequent hospitalizations for asthma exacerbation.

METHODS

A multicenter chart review study of patients aged 2 to 54 years who were hospitalized for asthma exacerbation at 1 of 25 hospitals across 18 US states during the period 2012 to 2013 was carried out. The primary outcome was frequency of hospitalizations for asthma exacerbation in the past year (including the index hospitalization).

RESULTS

The cohort included 369 children (aged 2-17 years) and 555 adults (aged 18-54 years) hospitalized for asthma exacerbation. Over the 12-month period, 36% of the children and 42% of the adults had 2 or more (frequent) hospitalizations for asthma exacerbation. Among patients with frequent hospitalizations, guideline-recommended outpatient management was suboptimal. For example, among adults, 32% were not on inhaled corticosteroids at the time of index hospitalization and 75% had no evidence of a previous evaluation by an asthma specialist. At hospital discharge, among adults with frequent hospitalizations who had used no controller medications previously, 37% were not prescribed inhaled corticosteroids. Likewise, during a 3-month postdischarge period, 64% of the adults with frequent hospitalizations were not referred to an asthma specialist. Although the proportion of patients who did not receive these guideline-recommended outpatient care appeared higher in adults, these preventive measures were still underutilized in children; for example, 38% of the children with frequent hospitalizations were not referred to asthma specialist after the index hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter study of US patients hospitalized with asthma exacerbation demonstrated a disturbingly high proportion of patients with frequent hospitalizations and ongoing evidence of suboptimal longitudinal asthma care.

Potential savings from increasing adherence to inhaled corticosteroid therapy in Medicaid-enrolled children

BACKGROUND

Many asthma-related exacerbations could be prevented by consistent use of daily inhaled corticosteroid therapy (ICS-Rx).

OBJECTIVES

We sought to measure the potential cost savings that could accrue from increasing ICS-Rx adherence in children.

STUDY DESIGN

We measured observed costs for a cohort of 43,156 Medicaid-enrolled children in 14 southern states whose initial ICS-Rx was prescribed in 2007.

METHODS

Adherence rates and associated costs were calculated from Medicaid claims. Children were categorized as high or low adherence based on the ratio of ICS-Rx claims filled to total asthma drug claims. Branching tree simulation was used to project the potential cost savings achieved by increasing the proportion of children with ICS-Rx to total asthma Rx ratios greater than 0.5 to 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, and 100%.

RESULTS

Increasing the proportion of children who maintain higher adherence after initial ICS-Rx to 40% would generate savings of $95 per child per year. An intervention costing $10 per member per month that resulted in even half of the children maintaining high adherence would generate a 98% return on investment for managed care plans or state Medicaid programs. Net costs decreased incrementally at each level of increase in ICS-Rx adherence. The projected Medicaid cost savings for these 14 states in 2007 ranged from $8.2 million if 40% of the children achieved high adherence, to $57.5 million if 80% achieved high adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

If effective large-scale interventions can be found, there are substantial cost savings to be gained from even modest increases in real-world adherence to ICS-Rx among Medicaid-enrolled children with asthma.

Cost-effectiveness of initiating extrafine- or standard size-particle inhaled corticosteroid for asthma in two health-care systems: a retrospective matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Real-life studies are needed to determine the cost-effectiveness of asthma therapies in clinical practice.

AIM

To compare the cost-effectiveness of extrafine-particle inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) with standard size-particle ICS in the United Kingdom (UK) and United States (US).

METHODS

These retrospective matched cohort analyses used large electronic databases to study asthma-related outcomes for patients in the UK (12-60 years old; n=1730) and US (12-80 years; n=10,312) prescribed extrafine beclomethasone or fluticasone as their first ICS therapy for asthma. Patients were matched on demographic characteristics and asthma severity during 1 baseline year, and asthma control and asthma-related costs were compared during 1 outcome year.

RESULTS

In both the UK and US, adjusted odds of risk-domain asthma control were similar, whereas the odds of overall control (no hospitalisation or oral steroids for asthma, no antibiotics for lower respiratory infection, limited reliever use) were greater for extrafine ICS in both countries (UK odds ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.50). Asthma-related annual costs, adjusted for baseline, were significantly lower for extrafine-particle ICS cohorts in both countries (UK difference, -£66 (95% CI,-93 to -37)). Cost-effectiveness analyses using the two measures of asthma control found 92 and 98% probabilities of extrafine-particle ICS being the preferred treatment strategy (less costly and more effective than standard size-particle ICS) in the UK, and 84 and 100% probabilities in the US.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiating ICS therapy for asthma as extrafine-particle ICS seems the dominant treatment option (less costly and more effective) compared with standard size-particle ICS in both the UK and the US.

An estimate of asthma prevalence in Africa: a systematic analysis

Aim

To estimate and compare asthma prevalence in Africa in 1990, 2000, and 2010 in order to provide information that will help inform the planning of the public health response to the disease.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of Medline, EMBASE, and Global Health for studies on asthma published between 1990 and 2012. We included cross-sectional population based studies providing numerical estimates on the prevalence of asthma. We calculated weighted mean prevalence and applied an epidemiological model linking age with the prevalence of asthma. The UN population figures for Africa for 1990, 2000, and 2010 were used to estimate the cases of asthma, each for the respective year.

Results

Our search returned 790 studies. We retained 45 studies that met our selection criteria. In Africa in 1990, we estimated 34.1 million asthma cases (12.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.2-16.9) among children <15 years, 64.9 million (11.8%; 95% CI 7.9-15.8) among people aged <45 years, and 74.4 million (11.7%; 95% CI 8.2-15.3) in the total population. In 2000, we estimated 41.3 million cases (12.9%; 95% CI 8.7-17.0) among children <15 years, 82.4 million (12.5%; 95% CI 5.9-19.1) among people aged <45 years, and 94.8 million (12.0%; 95% CI 5.0-18.8) in the total population. This increased to 49.7 million (13.9%; 95% CI 9.6-18.3) among children <15 years, 102.9 million (13.8%; 95% CI 6.2-21.4) among people aged <45 years, and 119.3 million (12.8%; 95% CI 8.2-17.1) in the total population in 2010. There were no significant differences between asthma prevalence in studies which ascertained cases by written and video questionnaires. Crude prevalences of asthma were, however, consistently higher among urban than rural dwellers.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest an increasing prevalence of asthma in Africa over the past two decades. Due to the paucity of data, we believe that the true prevalence of asthma may still be under-estimated. There is a need for national governments in Africa to consider the implications of this increasing disease burden and to investigate the relative importance of underlying risk factors such as rising urbanization and population aging in their policy and health planning responses to this challenge.

Omalizumab, an anti-immunoglobulin E antibody: state of the art

A large number of trials show that the anti-immunoglobulin (Ig) E antibody omalizumab is very effective in patients with severe allergic asthma. This is acknowledged in consensus documents. The drug also has a good safety profile and a pharmacoeconomic advantage due to a reduction in the number of hospitalizations for asthma attacks. In recent years, some studies have shown that omalizumab is effective also in nonallergic asthma. Effects on the complex signaling mechanisms leading to activation of effector cells and to mediator release may account for this outcome. Indeed, omalizumab has been reported to be effective in a number of IgE-mediated and non-IgE-mediated disorders. Concerning the former, clinical efficacy has been observed in rhinitis, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, latex allergy, atopic dermatitis, allergic urticaria, and anaphylaxis. In addition, omalizumab has been demonstrated to be able to prevent systemic reactions to allergen immunotherapy, thus enabling completion of treatment in patients who otherwise would have to stop it. Concerning non-IgE-mediated disorders, omalizumab has been reported to be effective in nasal polyposis, autoimmune urticaria, chronic idiopathic urticaria, physical urticaria, idiopathic angioedema, and mastocytosis. Current indications for treatment with omalizumab are confined to severe allergic asthma. Consequently, any other prescription can only be off-label. However, it is reasonable to expect that the use of omalizumab will be approved for particularly important indications, such as anaphylaxis, in the near future.

Impacts of online peer support for children with asthma and allergies: It just helps you every time you can't breathe well"

Children with asthma and allergies experience social isolation and gaps in social support particularly from peers. The objective of this pilot study was to design and test an accessible online support intervention for these children. Support was delivered by peer mentors with asthma and allergies and a professional. Weekly support groups were conducted over 8 weeks using Go to Meeting and Club Penguin. Quantitative measures and a qualitative interview were administered. Significant increases in perceived support and support-seeking coping and trends in decreased loneliness emerged at post-test. Participants also reported increased self-confidence and satisfaction with the intervention.

Effectiveness of educational interventions on asthma self-management in Punjabi and Chinese asthma patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Asthma tends to be less well controlled among ethnic minority groups, and its prevalence in new immigrants increases significantly the longer they are in Canada; mainly due to their lack of familiarity with English and difficulty understanding information regarding the disease, health literacy, cultural issues, housing conditions, and lack of access to appropriate care services.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effectiveness of different formats of culturally relevant information and its impact on asthma patients' self-management within the Punjabi, Mandarin, and Cantonese communities.

METHODS

Using a participatory approach, we developed and tested knowledge and community educational videos (with similar information, but used a different approach, i.e., scientific vs. colloquial) and a pictorial pamphlet. A total of 92 physician-diagnosed adult asthma patients (47 Chinese and 45 Punjabi) were assigned at random to three experimental groups (watched one or both videos) and one comparison group (read pictorial pamphlet) and participated in three in-person interviews and one telephone interview within a 9-month period. Patients received education on asthma self-management via videos and pamphlet and outcomes, including their knowledge of asthma triggers (environmental-related and behavioral-related triggers) and symptoms; inhaler use skills and patient-reported medication adherence were measured.

RESULTS

Knowledge of asthma symptoms, inhaler use, and understanding of physician's instructions improved significantly from pretest to 3 months post-intervention follow-up among all participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants performed significantly better at follow-up than they did at baseline assessment, with the most notable improvements observed in the group that watched both community and knowledge videos. The results suggest that short, simple, culturally, and linguistically appropriate interventions can promote knowledge gain about asthma and improve inhaler use that can be sustained over the short term. Such interventions that provide authentic learning materials that draw on patients' life experiences and sociocultural context can overcome certain limitations of conventional patient education approaches.

Omalizumab reduces corticosteroid use in patients with severe allergic asthma: real-life experience in Israel

OBJECTIVE

Approved by the FDA in 2003, omalizumab is the first recombinant humanized monoclonal anti-immunoglobulin E antibody developed for the treatment of allergic asthma. Due to the heterogeneity of asthma symptoms, investigation of the efficacy of omalizumab in patients outside controlled trials is particularly important. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of omalizumab as an add-on treatment for allergic asthma in a real-life setting in Israel.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study based on patient records and computerized database for drug dispensing, emergency room visits, and hospital admissions.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 33 individuals (18 men, 15 women; mean age 50.0 ± 12.2, range 25-79) who were treated with omalizumab for severe allergic asthma for a duration of at least 16 weeks. After the initiation of omalizumab therapy, the number of patients who used oral or injected corticosteroids decreased (p < .003, .03, respectively), as did the median dosage of oral corticosteroids (p < .02). Visits to the emergency room decreased from an incidence of 0.526 visits per person-year to an incidence of 0.246 per person-year (p < .05). No adverse reactions to omalizumab were observed.

CONCLUSION

Omalizumab as an add-on therapy reduced the use of corticosteroids and improved the control of asthma, as evidenced by reduced asthma-related emergency room visits. This study supports both controlled and uncontrolled studies that have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of omalizumab, and particularly those that demonstrated effectiveness among severe asthma patients. "Real-life" studies are important to identify patients who will most benefit from omalizumab therapy.

Update on optimal use of omalizumab in management of asthma

Omalizumab is a humanized monoclonal anti-IgE antibody recently approved for the treatment of severe allergic asthma. This drug inhibits allergic responses by binding to serum IgE, thus preventing interaction with cellular IgE receptors. Omalizumab is also capable of downregulating the expression of high affinity IgE receptors on inflammatory cells, as well as the numbers of eosinophils in both blood and induced sputum. The clinical effects of omalizumab include improvements in respiratory symptoms and quality of life, paralleled by a reduction of asthma exacerbations, emergency room visits, and use of systemic corticosteroids and rescue bronchodilators. Omalizumab is relatively well-tolerated, and only rarely induces anaphylactic reactions. Therefore, this drug represents a valid option as add-on therapy for patients with severe persistent allergic asthma inadequately controlled by high doses of standard inhaled treatments.