Does industry funding and study location impact findings from randomized controlled trials of spinal cord stimulation? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE

Concerns have been raised that effects observed in studies of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) funded by industry have not been replicated in non-industry-funded studies and that findings may differ based on geographical location where the study was conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of industry funding and geographical location on pain intensity, function, health-related quality of life and adverse events reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SCS.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Systematic review conducted using MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE and WikiStim databases until September 2022. Parallel-group RCTs evaluating SCS for patients with neuropathic pain were included. Results of studies were combined in random-effects meta-analysis using the generic-inverse variance method. Subgroup meta-analyses were conducted according to funding source and study location. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool.

FINDINGS

Twenty-nine reports of 17 RCTs (1823 participants) were included. For the comparison of SCS with usual care, test for subgroup differences indicate no significant differences (p=0.48, moderate certainty evidence) in pain intensity score at 6 months for studies with no funding or funding not disclosed (pooled mean difference (MD) -1.96 (95% CI -3.23 to -0.69; 95% prediction interval (PI) not estimable, I2=0%, τ2=0)), industry funding (pooled MD -2.70 (95% CI -4.29 to -1.11; 95% PI -8.75 to 3.35, I2=97%, τ2=2.96) or non-industry funding (MD -3.09 (95% CI -4.47 to -1.72); 95% PI, I2 and τ2 not applicable). Studies with industry funding for the comparison of high-frequency SCS (HF-SCS) with low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS) showed statistically significant advantages for HF-SCS compared to LF-SCS while studies with no funding showed no differences between HF-SCS and LF-SCS (low certainty evidence).

CONCLUSION

All outcomes of SCS versus usual care were not significantly different between studies funded by industry and those independent from industry. Pain intensity score and change in pain intensity from baseline for comparisons of HF-SCS to LF-SCS seem to be impacted by industry funding.

Post-Discharge Risk of Mortality in Children under 5 Years of Age in Western Kenya: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Limited evidence suggests that children in sub-Saharan Africa hospitalized with all-cause severe anemia or severe acute malnutrition (SAM) are at high risk of dying in the first few months after discharge. We aimed to compare the risks of post-discharge mortality by health condition among hospitalized children in an area with high malaria transmission in western Kenya. We conducted a retrospective cohort study among recently discharged children aged < 5 years using mortality data from a health and demographic surveillance system that included household and pediatric in-hospital surveillance. Cox regression was used to compare post-discharge mortality. Between 2008 and 2013, overall in-hospital mortality was 2.8% (101/3,639). The mortality by 6 months after discharge (primary outcome) was 6.2% (159/2,556) and was highest in children with SAM (21.6%), followed by severe anemia (15.5%), severe pneumonia (5.6%), "other conditions" (5.6%), and severe malaria (0.7%). Overall, the 6-month post-discharge mortality in children hospitalized with SAM (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.95, 2.60-6.00, P < 0.001) or severe anemia (HR = 2.55, 1.74-3.71, P < 0.001) was significantly higher than that in children without these conditions. Severe malaria was associated with lower 6-month post-discharge mortality than children without severe malaria (HR = 0.33, 0.21-0.53, P < 0.001). The odds of dying by 6 months after discharge tended to be higher than during the in-hospital period for all children, except for those admitted with severe malaria. The first 6 months after discharge is a high-risk period for mortality among children admitted with severe anemia and SAM in western Kenya. Strategies to address this risk period are urgently needed.

Diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of MRI-based technologies for patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: systematic review and economic evaluation

Background

Magnetic resonance imaging-based technologies are non-invasive diagnostic tests that can be used to assess non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

Objectives

The study objectives were to assess the diagnostic test accuracy, clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of two magnetic resonance imaging-based technologies (LiverMultiScan and magnetic resonance elastography) for patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease for whom advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis had not been diagnosed and who had indeterminate results from fibrosis testing, or for whom transient elastography or acoustic radiation force impulse was unsuitable, or who had discordant results from fibrosis testing.

Data sources

The data sources searched were MEDLINE, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Database of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Assessment.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted using established methods. Diagnostic test accuracy estimates were calculated using bivariate models and a summary receiver operating characteristic curve was calculated using a hierarchical model. A simple decision-tree model was developed to generate cost-effectiveness results.

Results

The diagnostic test accuracy review (13 studies) and the clinical impact review (11 studies) only included one study that provided evidence for patients who had indeterminate or discordant results from fibrosis testing. No studies of patients for whom transient elastography or acoustic radiation force impulse were unsuitable were identified. Depending on fibrosis level, relevant published LiverMultiScan diagnostic test accuracy results ranged from 50% to 88% (sensitivity) and from 42% to 75% (specificity). No magnetic resonance elastography diagnostic test accuracy data were available for the specific population of interest. Results from the clinical impact review suggested that acceptability of LiverMultiScan was generally positive. To explore how the decision to proceed to biopsy is influenced by magnetic resonance imaging-based technologies, the External Assessment Group presented cost-effectiveness analyses for LiverMultiScan plus biopsy versus biopsy only. Base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year gained results for seven of the eight diagnostic test strategies considered showed that LiverMultiScan plus biopsy was dominated by biopsy only; for the remaining strategy (Brunt grade ≥2), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life year gained was £1,266,511. Results from threshold and scenario analyses demonstrated that External Assessment Group base-case results were robust to plausible variations in the magnitude of key parameters.

Limitations

Diagnostic test accuracy, clinical impact and cost-effectiveness data for magnetic resonance imaging-based technologies for the population that is the focus of this assessment were limited.

Conclusions

Magnetic resonance imaging-based technologies may be useful to identify patients who may benefit from additional testing in the form of liver biopsy and those for whom this additional testing may not be necessary. However, there is a paucity of diagnostic test accuracy and clinical impact data for patients who have indeterminate results from fibrosis testing, for whom transient elastography or acoustic radiation force impulse are unsuitable or who had discordant results from fibrosis testing. Given the External Assessment Group cost-effectiveness analyses assumptions, the use of LiverMultiScan and magnetic resonance elastography for assessing non-alcoholic fatty liver disease for patients with inconclusive results from previous fibrosis testing is unlikely to be a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources compared with liver biopsy only.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021286891.

Funding

Funding for this study was provided by the Evidence Synthesis Programme of the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Pegcetacoplan for Treating Paroxysmal Nocturnal Haemoglobinuria: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of the Single Technology Appraisal (STA) process, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited Apellis Pharmaceuticals/Sobi to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of pegcetacoplan versus eculizumab and pegcetacoplan versus ravulizumab for treating paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria (PNH) in adults whose anaemia is uncontrolled after treatment with a C5 inhibitor. The Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group at the University of Liverpool was commissioned as the Evidence Review Group (ERG). The company pursued a low incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) Fast Track Appraisal (FTA). This was a form of STA processed in a shorter time frame and designed for technologies with company base-case ICER < £10,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and most plausible ICER < £20,000 per QALY gained. This article summarises the ERG's review of the company's evidence submission, and the NICE Appraisal Committee's (AC's) final decision. The company presented clinical evidence from the PEGASUS trial that assessed the efficacy of pegcetacoplan versus eculizumab. At Week 16, patients in the pegcetacoplan arm had statistically significantly greater change from baseline in haemoglobin levels and a higher rate of transfusion avoidance than patients in the eculizumab arm. Using the PEGASUS trial and Study 302 data (a non-inferiority trial that assessed ravulizumab versus eculizumab), the company conducted an anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to indirectly estimate the efficacy of pegcetacoplan versus ravulizumab. The company identified key differences between trial designs and populations that could not be adjusted for using anchored MAIC methods. The company and ERG agreed that the anchored MAIC results were not robust and should not inform decision making. In the absence of robust indirect estimates, the company assumed that ravulizumab had equivalent efficacy to eculizumab in the PEGASUS trial population. Results from the company base-case cost-effectiveness analysis showed that treatment with pegcetacoplan dominated eculizumab and ravulizumab. The ERG considered that the long-term effectiveness of pegcetacoplan was uncertain and ran a scenario assuming that after 1 year the efficacy of pegcetacoplan would be the same as eculizumab; treatment with pegcetacoplan continued to dominate eculizumab and ravulizumab. The AC noted that treatment with pegcetacoplan had lower total costs than treatment with eculizumab or ravulizumab because it is self-administered and reduces the need for blood transfusions. If the assumption that ravulizumab has equivalent efficacy to eculizumab does not hold, then this will affect the estimate of the cost effectiveness of pegcetacoplan versus ravulizumab; however, the AC was satisfied that the assumption was reasonable. The AC recommended pegcetacoplan as an option for the treatment of PNH in adults who have uncontrolled anaemia despite treatment with a stable dose of a C5 inhibitor for ≥ 3 months. Pegcetacoplan was the first technology recommended by NICE via the low ICER FTA process.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Neuropathic Pain in England From 2010 to 2020: A Hospital Episode Statistics Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a recognized intervention for the management of chronic neuropathic pain. The United Kingdom National Institute of Health and Care Excellence has recommended SCS as a management option for chronic neuropathic pain since 2008. The aim of this study is to undertake an assessment of SCS uptake across the National Health Service in England up to 2020.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Hospital Episode Statistics were obtained for patients with neuropathic pain potentially eligible for SCS and patients receiving an SCS-related procedure. Data were retrieved nationally and per region from the years 2010-2011 to 2019-2020.

RESULTS

There were 50,288 adults in England attending secondary care with neuropathic pain in 2010-2011, increasing to 66,376 in 2019-2020. The number of patients with neuropathic pain with an SCS procedure increased on a year-to-year basis until 2018-2019. However, less than 1% of people with neuropathic pain received an SCS device with no evidence of an increase over time when considering the background increase in neuropathic pain prevalence.

CONCLUSION

Only a small proportion of patients in England with neuropathic pain potentially eligible for SCS receives this intervention. The recommendation for routine use of SCS for management of neuropathic pain has not resulted in an uptake of SCS over the last decade.

Does a Screening Trial for Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Chronic Pain of Neuropathic Origin Have Clinical Utility (TRIAL-STIM)? 36-Month Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Screening trials before full implantation of a spinal cord stimulation device are recommended by clinical guidelines and regulators, although there is limited evidence for their use. The TRIAL-STIM study showed that a screening trial strategy does not provide superior patient pain outcome at 6-month follow-up compared with not doing a screening trial and that it was not cost-effective.

OBJECTIVE

To report the long-term follow-up results of the TRIAL-STIM study.

METHODS

The primary outcome of this pragmatic randomized controlled trial was pain intensity as measured on a numerical rating scale (NRS) and secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients achieving at least 50% and 30% pain relief at 6 months, health-related quality of life, and complication rates.

RESULTS

Thirty patients allocated to the "Trial Group" (TG) and 36 patients allocated to the "No Trial Group" (NTG) completed outcome assessment at 36-month follow-up. Although there was a reduction in NRS pain and improvements in utility scores from baseline to 36 months in both groups, there was no difference in the primary outcome of pain intensity NRS between TG and NTG (adjusted mean difference: -0.60, 95% CI: -1.83 to 0.63), EuroQol-5 Dimension utility values (adjusted mean difference: -0.02, 95% CI: -0.13 to 0.10), or proportion of pain responders (33% TG vs 31% NTG). No differences were observed between the groups for the likelihood of spinal cord stimulation device explant or reporting an adverse advent up to 36-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The long-term results show no patient outcome benefit in undertaking an SCS screening trial.

Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Neurostimulation for Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Different waveforms of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) have now been evaluated for the management of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). However, no direct or indirect comparison between SCS waveforms has been performed to date.

PURPOSE

To conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of SCS for PDN.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, and WikiStim were searched from inception until December 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SCS for PDN were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Pain intensity, proportion of patients achieving at least a 50% reduction in pain intensity, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data were extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Significant reductions in pain intensity were observed for low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS) (mean difference [MD] -3.13 [95% CI -4.19 to -2.08], moderate certainty) and high-frequency SCS (HF-SCS) (MD -5.20 [95% CI -5.77 to -4.63], moderate certainty) compared with conventional medical management (CMM) alone. There was a significantly greater reduction in pain intensity on HF-SCS compared with LF-SCS (MD -2.07 [95% CI -3.26 to -0.87], moderate certainty). Significant differences were observed for LF-SCS and HF-SCS compared with CMM for the outcomes proportion of patients with at least 50% pain reduction and HRQoL (very low to moderate certainty). No significant differences were observed between LF-SCS and HF-SCS (very low to moderate certainty).

LIMITATIONS

Limited number of RCTs and no head-to-head RCTs conducted.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm the pain relief and HRQoL benefits of the addition of SCS to CMM for patients with PDN. However, in the absence of head-to-head RCT evidence, the relative benefits of HF-SCS compared with LF-SCS for patients with PDN remain uncertain.

Screening trials of spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain in England—A budget impact analysis

Screening trials of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) prior to full implantation of a device are recommended by expert guidelines and international regulators. The current study sought to estimate the budget impact of a screening trial of SCS and the costs or savings of discontinuing the use of a screening trial. A budget impact analysis was performed considering a study population that reflects the size and characteristics of a patient population with neuropathic pain in England eligible for SCS. The perspective adopted was that of the NHS with a 5-year time horizon. The base case analysis indicate that a no screening trial strategy would result in cost-savings to the NHS England of £400,000–£500,000 per year. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate different scenarios. If ≥5% of the eligible neuropathic pain population received a SCS device, cost-savings would be >£2.5 million/year. In contrast, at the lowest assumed cost of a screening trial (£1,950/patient), a screening trial prior to SCS implantation would be cost-saving. The proportion of patients having an unsuccessful screening trial would have to be ≥14.4% for current practice of a screening trial to be cost-saving. The findings from this budget impact analysis support the results of a recent UK multicenter randomized controlled trial (TRIAL-STIM) of a policy for the discontinuation of compulsory SCS screening trials, namely that such a policy would result in considerable cost-savings to healthcare systems.

The limited efficacy of psychological interventions for depression in people with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis (IPD-MA)

BACKGROUND

People with either Type 1/Type 2 diabetes experiencing anxiety or depression experience worse clinical and social outcomes. Efficacy of available psychological and pharmacological treatments for anxiety and depression is unclear. Aggregate data meta-analyses (AD-MAs) have failed to consider the clinical relevance of any change these treatments elicit. Thus, we sought to complete an individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) to evaluate this.

METHODS

Eligible RCTs of psychological treatments (PTs) and pharmacological treatments (PhTs) were systematically identified and assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool-2. IPD was requested and Jacobson's methodology was used to determine the clinical relevance of symptom-change. Traditional effect sizes were calculated to permit comparison of trials providing and not providing IPD and to compare with AD-MAs.

RESULTS

Sufficient data was obtained to conduct an IPD-MA for PTs (12/25) but not PhTs (1/5). Across PT trials, rates of 'recovery' for depression post-intervention were low. Whilst significantly more treated patients did recover (17% [95% CI 0.10, 0.25]) than controls (9% [95% CI 0.03, 0.17]), the difference was small (6% [95% CI 0.02, 0.10]).

LIMITATIONS

Only 50% of eligible trials provided IPD; we were also only able to examine outcomes immediately following the end of an intervention.

CONCLUSION

Current psychological interventions offer limited benefit in treating anxiety and depression in people with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes (83% remain depressed). More efficacious interventions are urgently needed.

Post-discharge morbidity and mortality in children admitted with severe anaemia and other health conditions in malaria-endemic settings in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Severe anaemia is associated with high in-hospital mortality among young children. In malaria-endemic areas, surviving children also remain at increased risk of mortality for several months after hospital discharge. We aimed to compare the risks of morbidity and mortality among children discharged from hospital after recovery from severe anaemia versus other health conditions in malaria-endemic settings in Africa.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central from inception to Nov 30, 2021, without language restrictions, for prospective or retrospective cohort studies and randomised controlled trials that followed up children younger than 15 years for defined periods after hospital discharge in malaria-endemic countries in Africa. We excluded the intervention groups in trials and studies or subgroups involving children with sickle cell anaemia, malignancies, or surgery or trauma, or those reporting follow-up data that were combined with the in-hospital period. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the quality and risk of bias using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale or the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. The coprimary outcomes were all-cause death and all-cause readmissions 6 months after discharge. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42017079282.

FINDINGS

Of 2930 articles identified in our search, 27 studies were included. For children who were recently discharged following hospital admission with severe anaemia, all-cause mortality by 6 months was higher than during the in-hospital period (n=5 studies; Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio 1·72, 95% CI 1·22-2·44; p=0·0020; I²=51·5%) and more than two times higher than children previously admitted without severe anaemia (n=4 studies; relative risk [RR] 2·69, 95% CI 1·59-4·53; p<0·0001; I²=69·2%). Readmissions within 6 months of discharge were also more common in children admitted with severe anaemia than in children admitted with other conditions (n=1 study; RR 3·05, 1·12-8·35; p<0·0001). Children admitted with severe acute malnutrition (regardless of severe anaemia) also had a higher 6-month mortality after discharge than those admitted for other reasons (n=2 studies; RR=3·12, 2·02-4·68; p<0·0001; I²=54·7%). Other predictors of mortality after discharge included discharge against medical advice, HIV, bacteraemia, and hypoxia.

INTERPRETATION

In malaria-endemic settings in Africa, children admitted to hospital with severe anaemia and severe acute malnutrition are at increased risk of mortality in the first 6 months after discharge compared with children admitted with other health conditions. Improved strategies are needed for the management of these high-risk groups during the period after discharge.

FUNDING

Research Council of Norway and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

138 Levetiracetam add-on for drug-resistant focal epilepsy: an updated Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of adjuvant levetiracetam in drug-resistant focal epilepsy. This is an update to the 2001 and 2012 reviews.

Methods

The search included the Cochrane Register of Studies and MEDLINE to 09/2018 for randomised, placebo-controlled trials of add-on levetiracetam in drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Two authors indepen- dently performed study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments. Outcomes included

≥50% reduction in seizure frequency (response) and adverse effects. We performed Mantel-Haenszel meta-analyses for risk ratios (RR), with 95% CI (99% for adverse effects). We assessed heterogeneity using I².

Results

This update includes 14 trials (three more than the previous update), assessing 2,452 participants (296 children). Risks of bias were predominantly low. There were important levels of heterogeneity across multiple comparisons. There were two new findings: 1) Levetiracetam at either 500 mg/day or 4000 mg/day did not perform better than placebo for response (500 mg: RR 1.60, CI 0.71–3.62; 4000 mg: RR 1.64, CI 0.59–4.57). Levetiracetam was significantly better than placebo at all other individual doses (1000–3000 mg). 2) Odds of achieving response were increased by nearly 40% (odds ratio 1.39, CI 1.23–1.58) for each 1000 mg increase in dose of levetiracetam. Somnolence remained the most common adverse effect, and changes in behaviour were negligible overall.

Conclusions

It seems reasonable to continue using levetiracetam in drug-resistant focal epilepsy,

10a2lthough a 500-mg dose may be no more effective than placebo.

mbizvogkm@gmail.com

Differences in Outcomes and Factors Associated With Mortality Among Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Cancer Compared With Those Without Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

SARS-CoV-2 infection has been associated with more severe disease and death in patients with cancer. However, the implications of certain tumor types, treatments, and the age and sex of patients with cancer for the outcomes of COVID-19 remain unclear.

Objective

To assess the differences in clinical outcomes between patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection and patients without cancer but with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to identify patients with cancer at particularly high risk for a poor outcome.

Data Sources

PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for articles published in English until June 14, 2021. References in these articles were reviewed for additional studies.

Study Selection

All case-control or cohort studies were included that involved 10 or more patients with malignant disease and SARS-CoV-2 infection with or without a control group (defined as patients without cancer but with SARS-CoV-2 infection). Studies were excluded if they involved fewer than 10 patients, were conference papers or abstracts, were preprint reports, had no full text, or had data that could not be obtained from the corresponding author.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two investigators independently performed data extraction using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The difference in mortality between patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection and control patients as well as the difference in outcomes for various tumor types and cancer treatments. Pooled case fatality rates, a random-effects model, and random-effects meta-regressions were used.

Results

A total of 81 studies were included, involving 61 532 patients with cancer. Among 58 849 patients with available data, 30 557 male individuals (52%) were included and median age ranged from 35 to 74 years. The relative risk (RR) of mortality from COVID-19 among patients with vs without cancer when age and sex were matched was 1.69 (95% CI, 1.46-1.95; P < .001; I2 = 51.0%). The RR of mortality in patients with cancer vs control patients was associated with decreasing age (exp [b], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-0.99; P = .03). Compared with other cancers, lung cancer (RR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.45-1.94; P < .001; I2 = 32.9%), and hematologic cancer (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.31-1.54; P < .001; I2 = 6.8%) were associated with a higher risk of death. Although a higher point estimate was found for genitourinary cancer (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.00-1.24; P = .06; I2 = 21.5%), the finding was not statistically significant. Breast cancer (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.71; P < .001; I2 = 86.2%) and gynecological cancer (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.93; P = .009; I2 = 0%) were associated with a lower risk of death. Chemotherapy was associated with the highest overall pooled case fatality rate of 30% (95% CI, 25%-36%; I2 = 86.97%; range, 10%-100%), and endocrine therapy was associated with the lowest at 11% (95% CI, 6%-16%; I2 = 70.68%; range, 0%-27%).

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this study suggest that patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection had a higher risk of death than patients without cancer. Younger age, lung cancer, and hematologic cancer were also risk factors associated with poor outcomes from COVID-19.

Early Worsening of Retinopathy in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes After Rapid Improvement in Glycaemic Control: A Systematic Review

To systematically review the epidemiology of early worsening of diabetic retinopathy (EWDR) after substantial improvements in glycaemic control and evaluate characteristics including risk factors. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020158252). An electronic literature search was performed according to PRISMA guidelines using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane databases and manual reference for the articles published until 2020. Published full-text English language articles that report data on diabetic retinopathy in people with diabetes experiencing a rapid, substantial decrease in HbA1c after going through intensive therapy were included. All articles were screened, data were extracted and methodological quality was evaluated by two independent reviewers using a priori criteria. A total of 346 articles were identified after the removal of duplicates. Data were extracted from 19 full-text articles with a total of 15,588 participants. Included studies varied considerably in terms of patient selection, timing and method of assessing the eye and retinopathy classification. EWDR was reported to occur in a wide range of prevalences; 3.3-47% of participants within 3-84 months after intensification of glycaemic control. Risk factors for EWDR included long duration of diabetes, long-term uncontrolled hyperglycemia, amplitude of and baseline retinopathy severity in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The occurrence of EWDR and progression of retinopathy were found to have an association with the amplitude of HbA1c reduction. EWDR has been described in a proportion of people with intensification of glycaemic control. However, the prevalence remains unclear because of methodological differences in the identified studies. Future interventional studies should report retinopathy and visual outcomes using standardized protocols.

Cardiac autonomic neuropathy and risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality in type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis

We aimed to determine the prognostic association between cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) and cardiovascular disease events (CVE) and mortality in type 1 and type 2 diabetes through a systematic review and meta-analysis. This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020216305) and was conducted with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodological criteria. CAN was defined on the basis of 1 (early/possible CAN) or ≥2 (definite CAN) positive autonomic function tests as per the Toronto Consensus guidelines. Studies included those with prospective CVE or mortality data. Methodological variables/risk of bias were assessed using ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) and RoB-2 (Risk-Of-Bias tool for randomized trials) appraisal tools. Electronic database searches yielded 18 467 articles; 84 articles were screened full-text, 26 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria for quantitative synthesis. Sixteen studies from patients with (n=2875) and without (n=11 722) CAN demonstrated a pooled relative risk (RR) of 3.16 (95%CI 2.42 to 4.13; p<0.0001) of future CVE in favour of CAN. Nineteen studies provided all-cause mortality data from patients with (n=3679) and without (n=12 420) CAN, with a pooled RR of 3.17 (95%CI 2.11 to 4.78; p<0.0001) in favour of CAN. The risk of both future CVE and mortality was higher in type 1 compared with type 2 diabetes and with a definite CAN (vs possible CAN) diagnosis. Three studies were considered to have risk of serious bias. This study confirms the significant association between CAN and CVE and all-cause mortality. The implementation of population-based CAN screening will identify a subgroup with disproportionately higher cardiovascular and mortality risk that will allow for earlier targeted intervention.

Spinal cord stimulation for the management of painful diabetic neuropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient and aggregate data

ABSTRACT

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been suggested as a treatment option for patients with painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). We conducted a systematic review and undertook a meta-analysis on individual patient data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effectiveness of SCS for the management of PDN. Electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2020 for RCTs of SCS for PDN. Searches identified 2 eligible RCTs (total of 93 patients with PDN) and 2 long-term follow-up studies of one of the RCTs. Individual patient data were obtained from the authors of one of these RCTs. Meta-analysis showed significant and clinically meaningful reductions in pain intensity for SCS compared with best medical therapy alone, pooled mean difference (MD) -3.13 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.19 to -2.08) on a 10-point scale at the 6-month follow-up. More patients receiving SCS achieved at least a 50% reduction in pain intensity compared with best medical therapy, pooled risk ratio 0.08 (95% CI: 0.02-0.38). Increases were observed for health-related quality of life assessed as EQ-5D utility score (pooled MD 0.16, 95% CI: 0.02-0.30) and visual analogue scale (pooled MD 11.21, 95% CI: 2.26-20.16). Our findings demonstrate that SCS is an effective therapeutic adjunct to best medical therapy in reducing pain intensity and improving health-related quality of life in patients with PDN. Large well-reported RCTs with long-term follow-up are required to confirm these results.

Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Machine Learning Algorithms for Classifying Pain Intensity, Phenotype or Treatment Outcomes Using Electroencephalogram Data

Recent attempts to utilize machine learning (ML) to predict pain-related outcomes from Electroencephalogram (EEG) data demonstrate promising results. The primary aim of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of ML algorithms for predicting pain intensity, phenotypes or treatment response from EEG. Electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library were searched. A total of 44 eligible studies were identified, with 22 presenting attempts to predict pain intensity, 15 investigating the prediction of pain phenotypes and seven assessing the prediction of treatment response. A meta-analysis was not considered appropriate for this review due to heterogenos methods and reporting. Consequently, data were narratively synthesized. The results demonstrate that the best performing model of the individual studies allows for the prediction of pain intensity, phenotypes and treatment response with accuracies ranging between 62 to 100%, 57 to 99% and 65 to 95.24%, respectively. The results suggest that ML has the potential to effectively predict pain outcomes, which may eventually be used to assist clinical care. However, inadequate reporting and potential bias reduce confidence in the results. Future research should improve reporting standards and externally validate models to decrease bias, which would increase the feasibility of clinical translation. PERSPECTIVE: This systematic review explores the state-of-the-art machine learning methods for predicting pain intensity, phenotype or treatmentresponse from EEG data. Results suggest that machine learning may demonstrate clinical utility, pending further research and development. Areas for improvement, including standardized processing, reporting and the need for better methodological assessment tools, are discussed.

Prevalence of peripheral neuropathy in pre-diabetes: a systematic review

There is growing evidence of excess peripheral neuropathy in pre-diabetes. We aimed to determine its prevalence, including the impact of diagnostic methodology on prevalence rates, through a systematic review conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive electronic bibliographic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to June 1, 2020. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. An evaluation was undertaken by method of neuropathy assessment. After screening 1784 abstracts and reviewing 84 full-text records, 29 studies (9351 participants) were included. There was a wide range of prevalence estimates (2%-77%, IQR: 6%-34%), but the majority of studies (n=21, 72%) reported a prevalence ≥10%. The three highest prevalence estimates of 77% (95% CI: 54% to 100%), 71% (95% CI: 55% to 88%) and 66% (95% CI: 53% to 78%) were reported using plantar thermography, multimodal quantitative sensory testing and nerve conduction tests, respectively. In general, studies evaluating small nerve fiber parameters yielded a higher prevalence of peripheral neuropathy. Due to a variety of study populations and methods of assessing neuropathy, there was marked heterogeneity in the prevalence estimates. Most studies reported a higher prevalence of peripheral neuropathy in pre-diabetes, primarily of a small nerve fiber origin, than would be expected in the background population. Given the marked rise in pre-diabetes, further consideration of targeting screening in this population is required. Development of risk-stratification tools may facilitate earlier interventions.

Encorafenib with Binimetinib for the Treatment of Patients with BRAF V600 Mutation-Positive Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of the Single Technology Appraisal process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited Pierre Fabre to submit evidence for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of encorafenib with binimetinib (Enco + Bini) versus dabrafenib with trametinib (Dab + Tram) as a first-line treatment for advanced (unresectable or metastatic) BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma. The Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group at the University of Liverpool was commissioned as the Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article summarises the ERG's review of the company's evidence submission (CS), and the Appraisal Committee's (AC's) final decision. The main clinical evidence in the CS was derived from the COLUMBUS trial and focused on the efficacy of Enco + Bini (encorafenib 450 mg per day plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily) compared to vemurafenib. The company conducted network meta-analyses (NMAs) to indirectly estimate the relative effects of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events (AEs) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for Enco + Bini versus Dab + Tram. None of the results from the NMAs demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the treatment regimens for any outcomes. The ERG advised caution when interpreting the results from the company's NMAs due to limitations relating to the methods. The ERG considered that use of the OS and PFS hazard ratios (HRs) generated by the company's NMAs to model the relative effectiveness of Enco + Bini versus Dab + Tram in the company model was inappropriate as these estimates were not statistically significantly different. The ERG amended the company's economic model to include estimates of equivalent efficacy, safety and HRQoL for Enco + Bini and Dab + Tram. The ERG considered use of different estimates of relative dose intensity to be inappropriate and used the same estimate for both drug combinations. The ERG also concluded that as only the prices of drug combinations were different, a cost comparison was an appropriate method of economic analysis. Using this approach (combined with confidential discounted drug prices for Enco + Bini and Dab + Tram), treatment with Enco + Bini was more cost effective than treatment with Dab + Tram. The AC raised concerns that an absence of evidence of a difference in outcomes between Enco + Bini and Dab + Tram did not constitute evidence of absence. However, as the numerical differences in outcomes generated by the company's networks were small, the AC did not have a preferred approach and considered that both the company's and the ERG's methods of incorporating outcome estimates into the economic model were suitable for decision making. The NICE AC recommended Enco + Bini as a first-line treatment for unresectable or metastatic melanoma with a BRAF V600 mutation.

The prevalence of cardiac autonomic neuropathy in prediabetes: a systematic review

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is independently associated with silent myocardial ischaemia, major cardiovascular events, myocardial dysfunction and cardiovascular mortality. Several studies have highlighted the increased prevalence of CAN in prediabetes (impaired glucose tolerance and/or impaired fasting glucose). Considering the exponential rise of prediabetes, we aimed to determine the prevalence of CAN through a systematic literature review.

METHODS

This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019125447). An electronic literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane databases. Published full text, English language articles that provide CAN prevalence data of studies in individuals with prediabetes and aged over 18 years were included. Prevalence data for normal glucose tolerance and diabetes were also extracted from the selected articles, if present. All articles were screened by two independent reviewers using a priori criteria. Methodological quality and risk of bias were evaluated using a critical appraisal tool.

RESULTS

Database searches found 4500 articles; subsequently, 199 full text articles were screened, 11 of which fulfilled the inclusion criteria (4431 total participants, 1730 people with prediabetes, 1999 people with normal glucose tolerance [NGT] and 702 people with predominantly type 2 diabetes). Six of the selected studies reported definite CAN prevalence data (9-39%). Only a single large population-based study by Ziegler et al (KORA S4 study, 1332 participants) determined definite CAN based on two or more positive autonomic function tests (AFTs), with a mean prevalence of 9% in all prediabetes groups (isolated impaired glucose tolerance 5.9%; isolated impaired fasting glucose 8.1%; impaired fasting glucose plus impaired glucose tolerance 11.4%), which was higher than NGT (4.5%). This study is most likely to provide a reliable population-specific estimate of CAN in prediabetes. There was a higher than expected prevalence of CAN in prediabetes (9-38%) when compared with normal glucose tolerance (0-18%) within the same studies (n = 8). There was a wide prevalence of possible CAN based on one positive AFT (n = 5). There was heterogeneity between the studies with variations in the definition of CAN, methodology and characteristics of the populations, which likely contributed to the diversity of prevalence estimates. The overall risk of bias was low.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

There is a higher than expected prevalence of CAN in prediabetes. Early detection of CAN in prediabetes through population screening needs careful consideration in view of the excess morbidity and mortality risk associated with this condition. Graphical abstract.

Prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There is growing evidence of a higher than expected prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes. This paper presents the protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of retinopathy in prediabetes. The aim of the review is to estimate the prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes and to summarise the current data.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol is developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A comprehensive electronic bibliographic search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies will report prevalence data for retinopathy on fundus photography in adults with prediabetes. No time restrictions will be placed on the date of publication. Screening for eligible studies and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, using predefined inclusion criteria and prepiloted data extraction forms. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion, and if required, a third (senior) reviewer will arbitrate.The primary outcome is the prevalence of any standard features of diabetic retinopathy (DR) on fundus photography, as per International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (ICDRSS) classification. Secondary outcomes are the prevalence of (1) any retinal microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography that are not standard features of DR as per ICDRSS classification and (2) any macular microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography, including but not limited to the presence of macular exudates, microaneurysms and haemorrhages. Risk of bias for included studies will be assessed using a validated risk of bias tool for prevalence studies. Pooled estimates for the prespecified outcomes of interest will be calculated using random effects meta-analytic techniques. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I² statistic.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required as this is a protocol for a systematic review and no primary data are to be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international meetings including Diabetes UK, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, American Diabetes Association and International Diabetes Federation conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020184820.

Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for prevention and time to depressive relapse: Systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the long-term effectiveness of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) with available strategies for prevention and time to depressive relapse.

METHODS

Seven electronic databases were searched up to June 2019. Studies evaluated MBCT for the management of depression-related outcomes and follow-up assessments occurred at 12 months or longer.

RESULTS

Twenty-three publications were included, 17 of which were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data from 14 RCTs including 2077 participants contributed to meta-analysis (MA) and NMA to assess relapse of depression and 13 RCTs with 2017 participants contributed to MA and NMA for time to relapse of depression. NMAs showed statistically significant advantages for MBCT over treatment as usual (TAU) for relapse of depression (RR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.98) and for MBCT over TAU and placebo for time to relapse of depression (MBCT vs TAU: HR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.88; MBCT vs placebo: HR = 0.23, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.67). Subgroup meta-analysis of relapse of depression by previous number of depressive episodes showed similar results between subgroups. Subgroup meta-analysis by the use or not of booster sessions suggests these may lead to improved effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

MBCT is more effective than TAU in the long-term in preventing relapse of depression and has statistically significant advantages over TAU and placebo for time to relapse of depression. No statistically significant differences were observed between MBCT and active treatment strategies for rate of relapse or time to relapse of depression.

Seizure first aid training for people with epilepsy attending emergency departments and their significant others: the SAFE intervention and feasibility RCT

Background

No seizure first aid training intervention exists for people with epilepsy who regularly attend emergency departments and their significant others, despite such an intervention’s potential to reduce clinically unnecessary and costly visits.

Objectives

The objectives were to (1) develop Seizure first Aid training For Epilepsy (SAFE) by adapting a broader intervention and (2) determine the feasibility and optimal design of a definitive randomised controlled trial to test SAFE’s efficacy.

Design

The study involved (1) the development of an intervention informed by a co-design approach with qualitative feedback and (2) a pilot randomised controlled trial with follow-ups at 3, 6 and 12 months and assessments of treatment fidelity and the cost of SAFE’s delivery.

Setting

The setting was (1) third-sector patient support groups and professional health-care organisations and (2) three NHS emergency departments in England.

Participants

Participants were (1) people with epilepsy who had visited emergency departments in the prior 2 years, their significant others and emergency department, paramedic, general practice, commissioning, neurology and nursing representatives and (2) people with epilepsy aged ≥ 16 years who had been diagnosed for ≥ 1 year and who had made two or more emergency department visits in the prior 12 months, and one of their significant others. Emergency departments identified ostensibly eligible people with epilepsy from attendance records and patients confirmed their eligibility.

Interventions

Participants in the pilot randomised controlled trial were randomly allocated 1 : 1 to SAFE plus treatment as usual or to treatment as usual only.

Main outcome measures

Consent rate and availability of routine data on emergency department use at 12 months were the main outcome measures. Other measures of interest included eligibility rate, ease with which people with epilepsy could be identified and routine data secured, availability of self-reported emergency department data, self-reported emergency department data’s comparability with routine data, SAFE’s effect on emergency department use, and emergency department use in the treatment as usual arm, which could be used in sample size calculations.

Results

(1) Nine health-care professionals and 23 service users provided feedback that generated an intervention considered to be NHS feasible and well positioned to achieve its purpose. (2) The consent rate was 12.5%, with 53 people with epilepsy and 38 significant others recruited. The eligibility rate was 10.6%. Identifying people with epilepsy from attendance records was resource intensive for emergency department staff. Those recruited felt more stigmatised because of epilepsy than the wider epilepsy population. Routine data on emergency department use at 12 months were secured for 94.1% of people with epilepsy, but the application process took 8.5 months. Self-reported emergency department data were available for 66.7% of people with epilepsy, and people with epilepsy self-reported more emergency department visits than were captured in routine data. Most participants (76.9%) randomised to SAFE received the intervention. The intervention was delivered with high fidelity. No related serious adverse events occurred. Emergency department use at 12 months was lower in the SAFE plus treatment as usual arm than in the treatment as usual only arm, but not significantly so. Calculations indicated that a definitive trial would need ≈ 674 people with epilepsy and ≈ 39 emergency department sites.

Limitations

Contrary to patient statements on recruitment, routine data secured at the pilot trial’s end indicated that ≈ 40% may not have satisfied the inclusion criterion of two or more emergency department visits.

Conclusions

An intervention was successfully developed, a pilot randomised controlled trial conducted and outcome data secured for most participants. The consent rate did not satisfy a predetermined ‘stop/go’ level of ≥ 20%. The time that emergency department staff needed to identify eligible people with epilepsy is unlikely to be replicable. A definitive trial is currently not feasible.

Future work

Research to more easily identify and recruit people from the target population is required.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13871327.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 39. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Systematic review of factors associated with quality of life of asylum seekers and refugees in high-income countries

The stressful experiences that many asylum seekers and refugees (AS&R) are exposed to during forced migration, and during resettlement in host countries, can have a profound impact on their mental health. Comparatively less research attention has been allocated to exploring other indices of quality of life (QoL) in AS&R populations. This review aimed to (i) synthesize the predictors and correlates of QoL of AS&R populations in high-income countries, and (ii) to identify the methodological strengths and weaknesses of this body of research. Fourteen databases were systematically searched (Medline, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment, National Health Service Economic Evaluation, Educational Resource Index and Abstracts, BiblioMap, Scopus, Social Sciences Citation Index, Evidence Aid, DARE, Web of Science and PubMed). Eligibility criteria included: adults seeking asylum or refuge in a high-income country, primary quantitative data, the use of a measure based on the WHO's definition of QoL, published in a peer-reviewed journal. A narrative synthesis approach was used, and the quality was assessed using the AXIS tool for cross-sectional studies and the CASP tool for longitudinal studies. Of the 13.656 papers identified, 23 met the eligibility criteria. A wide range of factors were found to have significant associations with QoL. Both positive and negative correlates of QoL were largely dominated by social (e.g. social networks) and mental health factors (e.g. depression). Although all of the cross-sectional studies met over half of the quality criteria, only 12 met 75% or more of these criteria. For the longitudinal studies, for all but one study lacked statistical precision and the results cannot be applied to the local population. Key findings across the various forms of QoL (overall, physical, psychological, social and environmental) were that having established social networks and social integration were associated with higher QoL, whereas having mental disorders (i.e. PTSD or depression) was strongly associated with reduced QoL. More research is needed into physical and environmental predictors and correlates of QoL. The findings of the review can be used to inform policies and interventions aimed at supporting AS&R and promoting the integration and wellbeing of these populations.

Seizure First Aid Training For people with Epilepsy (SAFE) frequently attending emergency departments and their significant others: results of a UK multi-centre randomised controlled pilot trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility and optimal design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of Seizure First Aid Training For Epilepsy (SAFE).

DESIGN

Pilot RCT with embedded microcosting.

SETTING

Three English hospital emergency departments (EDs).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged ≥16 with established epilepsy reporting ≥2 ED visits in the prior 12 months and their significant others (SOs).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients (and their SOs) were randomly allocated (1:1) to SAFE plus treatment-as-usual (TAU) or TAU alone. SAFE is a 4-hour group course.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Two criteria evaluated a definitive RCT's feasibility: (1) ≥20% of eligible patients needed to be consented into the pilot trial; (2) routine data on use of ED over the 12 months postrandomisation needed securing for ≥75%. Other measures included eligibility, ease of obtaining routine data, availability of self-report ED data and comparability, SAFE's effect and intervention cost.

RESULTS

Of ED attendees with a suspected seizure, 424 (10.6%) patients were eligible; 53 (12.5%) patients and 38 SOs consented. Fifty-one patients (and 37 SOs) were randomised. Routine data on ED use at 12 months were secured for 94.1% patients. Self-report ED data were available for 66.7% patients. Patients reported more visits compared with routine data. Most (76.9%) patients randomised to SAFE received it and no related serious adverse events occurred. ED use at 12 months was lower in the SAFE+TAU arm compared with TAU alone, but not significantly (rate ratio=0.62, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.17). A definitive trial would need ~674 patient participants and ~39 recruitment sites. Obtaining routine data was challenging, taking ~8.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

In satisfying only one predetermined 'stop/go' criterion, a definitive RCT is not feasible. The low consent rate in the pilot trial raises concerns about a definitive trial's finding's external validity and means it would be expensive to conduct. Research is required into how to optimise recruitment from the target population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13871327.

Lead-I ECG for detecting atrial fibrillation in patients with an irregular pulse using single time point testing: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common type of cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with an increased risk of stroke and congestive heart failure. Lead-I electrocardiogram (ECG) devices are handheld instruments that can be used to detect AF at a single time point in people who present with relevant signs or symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the diagnostic test accuracy, clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of using single time point lead-I ECG devices for the detection of AF in people presenting to primary care with relevant signs or symptoms, and who have an irregular pulse compared with using manual pulse palpation (MPP) followed by a 12-lead ECG in primary or secondary care.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print and MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Database of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Assessment Database.

METHODS

The systematic review methods followed published guidance. Two reviewers screened the search results (database inception to April 2018), extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy were calculated using bivariate models. An economic model consisting of a decision tree and two cohort Markov models was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lead-I ECG devices.

RESULTS

No studies were identified that evaluated the use of lead-I ECG devices for patients with signs or symptoms of AF. Therefore, the diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact results presented are derived from an asymptomatic population (used as a proxy for people with signs or symptoms of AF). The summary sensitivity of lead-I ECG devices was 93.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 86.2% to 97.4%] and summary specificity was 96.5% (95% CI 90.4% to 98.8%). One study reported limited clinical outcome data. Acceptability of lead-I ECG devices was reported in four studies, with generally positive views. The de novo economic model yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The results of the pairwise analysis show that all lead-I ECG devices generated ICERs per QALY gained below the £20,000-30,000 threshold. Kardia Mobile (AliveCor Ltd, Mountain View, CA, USA) is the most cost-effective option in a full incremental analysis.

LIMITATIONS

No published data evaluating the diagnostic accuracy, clinical impact or cost-effectiveness of lead-I ECG devices for the population of interest are available.

CONCLUSIONS

Single time point lead-I ECG devices for the detection of AF in people with signs or symptoms of AF and an irregular pulse appear to be a cost-effective use of NHS resources compared with MPP followed by a 12-lead ECG in primary or secondary care, given the assumptions used in the base-case model.

FUTURE WORK

Studies assessing how the use of lead-I ECG devices in this population affects the number of people diagnosed with AF when compared with current practice would be useful.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018090375.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Lead-I ECG for detecting atrial fibrillation in patients attending primary care with an irregular pulse using single-time point testing: A systematic review and economic evaluation

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common type of cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with increased risk of stroke and congestive heart failure. Lead-I electrocardiogram (ECG) devices are handheld instruments that can detect AF at a single-time point.

Purpose

To assess the diagnostic test accuracy, clinical impact and cost effectiveness of single-time point lead-I ECG devices compared with manual pulse palpation (MPP) followed by a 12-lead ECG for the detection of AF in symptomatic primary care patients with an irregular pulse.

Methods

Electronic databases (MEDLINE, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print and MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Databases of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Database of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment Database) were searched to March 2018. Two reviewers screened the search results, extracted data and assessed study quality. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy were calculated using bivariate models. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an economic model consisting of a decision tree and two cohort Markov models.

Results

Diagnostic accuracy

The diagnostic accuracy (13 publications reporting on nine studies) and clinical impact (24 publications reporting on 19 studies) results are derived from an asymptomatic population (used as a proxy for people with signs or symptoms of AF). The summary sensitivity of lead-I ECG devices was 93.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86.2% to 97.4%) and summary specificity was 96.5% (95% CI: 90.4% to 98.8%).

Cost effectiveness

The de novo economic model yielded incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The results of the pairwise analysis show that all lead-I ECG devices generate ICERs per QALY gained below the £20,000-£30,000 threshold. Kardia Mobile is the most cost effective option in a full incremental analysis. Lead-I ECG tests may identify more AF cases than the standard diagnostic pathway. This comes at a higher cost but with greater patient benefit in terms of mortality and quality of life.

Limitations

No published data evaluating the diagnostic accuracy, clinical impact or cost effectiveness of lead-I ECG devices for the target population are available.

Conclusions

The use of single-time point lead-I ECG devices in primary care for the detection of AF in people with signs or symptoms of AF and an irregular pulse appears to be a cost effective use of NHS resources compared with MPP followed by a 12-lead ECG, given the assumptions used in the base case model.

Registration

The protocol for this review is registered on PROSPERO as CRD42018090375.

Cenegermin for Treating Neurotrophic Keratitis: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of the Single Technology Appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of cenegermin (OXERVATE^®, Dompé) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of cenegermin for neurotrophic keratitis (NK). The Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group (LRiG) at the University of Liverpool was commissioned to act as the Evidence Review Group (ERG). This article summarises the ERG's review of the evidence submitted by the company and provides a summary of the Appraisal Committee's (AC) final decision. Clinical-effectiveness evidence from two phase II randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of cenegermin found cenegermin to improve corneal healing after 8 weeks compared with vehicle, considered a proxy for artificial tears. Longer-term data and comparisons with other relevant comparators were insufficient to draw conclusions. The company developed a de novo economic model that found cenegermin to be dominant when compared with artificial tears, except in one of seven scenarios. However, the ERG considered that the model had a major structural flaw in that it failed to allow patients to enter a 'sustained healing' state from 'standard of care (SoC) non-healing' and 'SoC deteriorating' states, or to move into an 'SoC deteriorating' state from an 'SoC non-healing' state. Following the first AC meeting, the company submitted a revised model with a revised model structure that removed the 'SoC deteriorating' state and introduced an 'SoC healed' state to sit alongside the existing 'sustained healing' and 'SoC non-healing' states from the original model. However, the ERG continued to express concerns, which included (1) extrapolation of the treatment effect of cenegermin over a patient's lifetime; (2) the assumption that patients had two specialist visits a month; (3) the assumption that artificial tears, autologous serum eye drops and contact lenses continued for a lifetime after healing; (4) the simplified modelling of costs and utilities; and (5) the underlying uncertainty in the utility values. The ERG therefore considered the company's model could not produce a robust incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The ERG did however present an alternative ICER by amending the use and cost of autologous serum eye drops, contact lenses and artificial tears in the 'healed' and 'non-healed' states. Applying these changes produced an ICER of £302,717 per QALY gained. Because of uncertainties with the clinical- and cost-effectiveness evidence, the AC concluded that cenegermin cannot be recommended within its marketing authorisation for NK.

Eribulin for Treating Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer After One Chemotherapy Regimen: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

Eribulin is a recommended treatment option for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (LABC/MBC) in adults whose disease has progressed after at least two chemotherapy regimens. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of eribulin (Halaven^®; Eisai Ltd) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of eribulin for treating LABC/MBC after one chemotherapy regimen in accordance with the institute's Single Technology Appraisal (STA) process. This article presents a summary of the company's evidence, Evidence Review Group (ERG) review and resulting NICE guidance (TA515), issued 28 March 2018. Clinical evidence for eribulin versus capecitabine in LABC/MBC was derived from a subgroup of 392 patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2)-negative disease which had progressed after only one prior chemotherapy regimen for LABC/MBC in the phase III, randomised, controlled Study 301 (n = 1102). Overall survival (OS) but not progression-free survival (PFS) was improved for patients treated with eribulin versus capecitabine in this subgroup. Using the discounted patient access scheme price for eribulin, the company developed a de novo economic model. In the base case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for eribulin versus capecitabine was £36,244 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. However, the ERG identified several problematic issues relating to modelling OS and PFS, drug costing and utility values, and made ten revisions to the company model. The overall impact of all ten revisions was to increase the ICER per QALY gained by £46,499. The Appraisal Committee (AC) accepted all changes made by the ERG except for the change to utility values; the AC considered that the value should be mid-way between the company's and the ERG's preferred values. A modified model was submitted by the company that included this utility value, but maintained some elements of the base case that the AC had been critical of (differential PFS between treatment arms and application of treatment cap). The new model also included a 'blended' comparator (capecitabine and vinorelbine). The AC noted there was no evidence to support a 'blended' comparator, differential PFS between treatment arms or a treatment cap. The AC therefore concluded that the most plausible ICER was likely to be £69,843 per QALY gained (derived from an ERG sensitivity analysis using the AC's preferred utility value, no differential PFS and no treatment cap). Therefore, eribulin was not recommended for treating LABC/MBC in adults who have had only one chemotherapy regimen.

Cladribine Tablets for the First-Line Treatment of Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of the single technology appraisal process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence invited Merck to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of cladribine tablets (cladribine) for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Rapidly evolving severe (RES) and sub-optimally treated (SOT) RRMS were specified by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence as subgroups of interest. The Liverpool Reviews and Implementation Group at the University of Liverpool was the Evidence Review Group. This article summarises the Evidence Review Group's review of the company's evidence submission for cladribine and the Appraisal Committee's final decision. The final scope issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence listed the following disease-modifying treatments as comparators: alemtuzumab, daclizumab, fingolimod and natalizumab. At the time of the company submission, a licence was anticipated for low-dose cladribine. The main clinical evidence (the CLARITY trial) in the company submission focused on the efficacy of low-dose cladribine vs. placebo. The CLARITY trial showed a statistically significant reduction in relapse rate for cladribine in the RES-RRMS subgroup (n = 50) but not in the SOT-RRMS subgroup (n = 19). Cladribine showed a numerical, but not a statistically significant, advantage in delaying disability progression at 6 months in the RES-RRMS subgroup. Disability progression benefits could not be estimated for those in the SOT-RRMS subgroup because of few events. The Evidence Review Group's main concern regarding the clinical evidence was the small sample size of the subgroups. To compare the effectiveness of cladribine to other disease-modifying treatments, the company conducted network meta-analyses, which showed cladribine and its comparators to be equally effective. The Evidence Review Group considered the results of the disease-modifying treatments to be unreliable because few trials were in the network. The company's cost-effectiveness evidence showed cladribine to be cheaper and more effective than other disease-modifying treatments in the RES-RRMS arm and the SOT-RRMS arm. The results were most sensitive to treatment effect on disability progression at 6 months. The Evidence Review Group was concerned that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that cladribine was superior to placebo in delaying disability progression. The Evidence Review Group amended the company's economic model to allow alternative estimates for the treatment effect of cladribine and its comparators on relapse rate and disability progression at 6 months. The Evidence Review Group made other changes to the company model. After implementing all the amendments, cladribine remained cost effective in the RES-RRMS and SOT-RRMS subgroups. The Appraisal Committee recognised the uncertainty in the available data but concluded that cladribine could be considered a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources.

Will the real Moebius syndrome please stand up? A systematic review of the literature and statistical cluster analysis of clinical features

Moebius syndrome is a highly variable syndrome with abducens and facial nerve palsy as core features. Strict diagnostic criteria do not exist and the inconsistency of the associated features makes determination difficult. To determine what features are associated with Moebius syndrome we performed a systematic literature review resulting in a composite case series of 449 individuals labeled with Moebius syndrome. We applied minimum criteria (facial and abducens palsy) to determine the prevalence of associated clinical features in this series. Additionally, we performed statistical cluster analysis to determine which features tended to occur together. Our study comprises the largest series of patients with Moebius syndrome and the first to apply statistical methodology to elucidate clinical relationships. We present evidence for two groups within the Moebius diagnosis. Type 1: exhibiting micrognathia, limb anomalies and feeding/swallowing difficulty that tend to occur together. Type 2: phenotypically diverse but more associated with radiologically detectable neurologic abnormalities and developmental delay.

Resource implications of preparing individual participant data from a clinical trial to share with external researchers

BACKGROUND

Demands are increasingly being made for clinical trialists to actively share individual participant data (IPD) collected from clinical trials using responsible methods that protect the confidentiality and privacy of clinical trial participants. Clinical trialists, particularly those receiving public funding, are often concerned about the additional time and money that data-sharing activities will require, but few published empirical data are available to help inform these decisions. We sought to evaluate the activity and resources required to prepare anonymised IPD from a clinical trial in anticipation of a future data-sharing request.

METHODS

Data from two UK publicly funded clinical trials were used for this exercise: 2437 participants with epilepsy recruited from 90 hospital outpatient clinics in the SANAD trial and 146 children with neuro-developmental problems recruited from 18 hospitals in the MENDS trial. We calculated the time and resources required to prepare each anonymised dataset and assemble a data pack ready for sharing.

RESULTS

The older SANAD trial (published 2007) required 50 hours of staff time with a total estimated associated cost of £3185 whilst the more recently completed MENDS trial (published 2012) required 39.5 hours of staff time with total estimated associated cost of £2540.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical trial researchers, funders and sponsors should consider appropriate resourcing and allow reasonable time for preparing IPD ready for subsequent sharing. This process would be most efficient if prospectively built into the standard operational design and conduct of a clinical trial. Further empirical examples exploring the resource requirements in other settings is recommended.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

SANAD: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Registry: ISRCTN38354748 . Registered on 25 April 2003.

MENDS

EU Clinical Trials Register Eudract 2006-004025-28 . Registered on 16 May 2007. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Registry: ISRCTN05534585 /MREC 07/MRE08/43. Registered on 26 January 2007.