Economic and clinical impact of a novel, light-based, at-home antiviral treatment on mild-to-moderate COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

Antiviral treatments for early intervention in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 are needed as a complement to vaccination. We sought to estimate the impact on COVID-19 cases, deaths, and direct healthcare costs over 12 months following introduction of a novel, antiviral treatment, RD-X19, a light-based, at-home intervention designed for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

A time-dependent, state transition (semi-Markov) cohort model was developed to simulate infection progression in individuals with COVID-19 in 3 US states with varying levels of vaccine uptake (Alabama, North Carolina, and Massachusetts) and at the national level between 1 June 2020 and 31 May 2021. The hypothetical cohort of patients entering the model progressed through subsequent health states after infection. Costs were assigned to each health state. Number of infections/vaccinations per day were incorporated into the model. Simulations were run to estimate outcomes (cases by severity, deaths, and direct healthcare costs) at various levels of adoption of RD-X19 (5%, 10%, 25%) in eligible infected individuals at the state and national levels and across three levels of clinical benefit based on the results from an early feasibility study of RD-X19. The clinical benefit reflects a decline in the duration of symptomatic disease by 1.2, 2.4 (base case), and 3.6 days.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis with 10% adoption, simulated infections/deaths/direct healthcare costs were reduced by 10,059/275/$69 million in Alabama, 21,092/545/$135 million in North Carolina, and 16,670/415/$102 million in Massachusetts over 12 months. At the national level, 10% adoption reduced total infections/deaths/direct healthcare costs by 686,722/17,748/$4.41 billion.

CONCLUSION

At-home, antiviral treatment with RD-X19 or other interventions with similar efficacy that decrease both symptomatic days and transmission probabilities can be used in concert with vaccines to reduce COVID-19 cases, deaths, and direct healthcare costs.

The Neoclassical Growth Model and the Labor Share Decline

The labor share may be declining in the data, but it is often assumed constant in neoclassical growth models (NGM). We assess the quantitative importance of this discrepancy by comparing alternative calibration approaches featuring constant and declining labor shares. We find little difference in model performance. Our results derive from strong general equilibrium effects: while a declining labor share mechanically lowers wage growth, the investment response pushes wages back up. Hence, different models deliver nearly identical paths of macro aggregates. Numerous robustness checks (including a CES production function, different time periods, and calculations of the labor share) reinforce the similarity of performance across model specifications. We conclude that the NGM with a constant labor share is still an appropriate choice to study many standard macro aggregates.

Evaluation of Consistency of Treatment Response Across Regions-the LEADER Trial in Relation to the ICH E17 Guideline

The US Food and Drug Administration in 2008 required new type 2 diabetes (T2D) medications to be subject to cardiovascular outcomes safety requirements. Accordingly, the global LEADER trial investigated cardiovascular outcomes of T2D treatment with liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist. LEADER (NCT01179048) was a multiregional clinical trial (MRCT) conducted from 2010 to 2016, thus completed before publication of the International Council for Harmonization (ICH) E17 guideline on MRCTs in 2017. Novo Nordisk pre-specified analysis of regional cardiovascular outcomes of LEADER participants. This paper assesses the pre-specified regional outcomes based on the ICH E17 guidelines on consistency evaluation. Regional LEADER participant numbers were broadly aligned with ICH E17 guidance and equally balanced across Europe, Asia, North America, and rest of the world. Overall primary major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) composite outcome for the trial: hazard ratio (HR) (95% CI) 0.87 (0.78; 0.97); regional results varied, ranging from HR (95% CI) 0.62 (0.37; 1.04) (Asia) to 1.01 (0.84; 1.22) (North America). However, pre-specified Cox proportional-hazard regression analyses did not show clear evidence of interaction between regions and primary outcome (p = 0.20). Furthermore, post hoc analysis of the US population in the North American region found that adjusting for extrinsic or intrinsic factors did not account for this difference [HR (95% CI) 1.03 (0.84; 1.25)]. LEADER data evaluation demonstrated general consistency in cardiovascular safety across regions, except for US participants. Discrepancies in the North American region may relate to drug exposure or chance, but, as these were post hoc findings, the overall primary result is valid, aligned with ICH E17 guidelines.

Structure-activity relationship of novel acridone derivatives as antiproliferative agents

Unlike other DNA topoisomerase II (topo II) inhibitors, our recently identified acridone derivative E17 exerted strong cytotoxic activity by inhibiting topo II without causing topo II degradation and DNA damage, which promoted us to explore more analogues of E17 by expanding its chemical diversification and enrich the structure-activity relationship (SAR) outcomes of acridone-oriented chemotypes. To achieve this goal, 42 novel acridone derivatives were synthesized and evaluated for their antiproliferative efficacies. SAR investigations revealed that orientation and spatial topology of R³ substituents make greater contributions to the bioactivity, exemplified by compounds E24, E25 and E27, which has provided valuable information for guiding further development of acridone derivatives as promising drug candidates.

Reassessing the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma based on mature survival data, updated safety and lower comparator price

Aims: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab versus everolimus for second-line treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) based on mature data, updated safety and decreased everolimus price.Materials and methods: A 3-state (pre-progression/progression-free disease, progressive disease and death) Markov model was developed from the perspective of the Australian health care system. Two scenarios were tested. Scenario 1 used 30-months clinical data and scenario 2 used updated 80-months clinical data with updated everolimus price. Inputs for quality-of-life and costs were informed by the literature and government sources. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality adjusted life years (QALY) gained was reported and an ICER threshold of AU$75,000 was assumed. Threshold analysis was performed, and uncertainty was explored using one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.Results: In scenario 1, the model estimated 1.73 QALYs at a cost of AU$105,000 for nivolumab and 1.48 QALYs at AU$38,000 for everolimus with an ICER = AU$266,871/QALY gained. A rebate of 54.4% was needed for nivolumab to reach the ICER threshold. For scenario 2, 1.93 QALYs at AU$111,418 was estimated for nivolumab and 1.60 QALYs at AU$31,942 for everolimus with an ICER of AU$213,320/QALY gained. The rebate needed to reach the ICER threshold was 54.9%. One-way sensitivity analyses for both scenarios showed that the cost of nivolumab, time horizon and utilities were main drivers. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curves highlighted the differences in cost-effectiveness of the two scenarios, as well as significant uncertainty in the results.Conclusions: A 54% rebate of the published price is needed for nivolumab to be cost-effective in Australia for the treatment of RCC. At that rebate, nivolumab remains cost-effective despite severe price erosion of everolimus because of improved longer term follow-up data. We recommend that generic price erosion should be accounted for when performing cost-effectiveness analysis.

Should Contact Bans Have Been Lifted More in Germany?: A Quantitative Prediction of Its Effects

Many countries consider the lifting of restrictions of social contacts (RSC). We quantify the effects of RSC for Germany. We initially employ a purely statistical approach to predicting prevalence of Covid-19 if RSC had been upheld after 20 April. We employ these findings and feed them into our theoretical model. We find that the peak of the number of sick individuals would have been reached already end of April. The number of sick individuals would have fallen below 1000 at the beginning of July. If restrictions had been lifted completely on April 20, the number of sick should have risen quickly again from around 27 April. A balance between economic and individual costs of RSC and public health objectives consists in lifting RSC for activities that have high economic benefits but low health costs. In the absence of large-scale representative testing of CoV-2 infections, these activities can most easily be identified if federal states of Germany adopted exit strategies that differ across states.

E17 exerts anti-tumor activity through inhibiting topo II-mediated chromosomes condensation in CRC cells

Topo II inhibitors, e.g. etoposide, doxorubicin and mitoxantrone, etc., which exert their functions by trapping the covalent 'topo II-DNA cleavable complex' via intercalation into DNA base pairs, leading to DNA damage and degradation of topo II, and inducing decline of cell sensitivity and corresponding multidrug resistance (MDR). E17 is a recently identified topo II inhibitor in our lab which has validated to possess a strong topo II inhibitory activity on cell viability, colony formation, and cell migration. Especially, E17 can trigger G2/M cell cycle arrest through inhibiting chromosome condensation without causing obvious DNA damage in colorectal cancer (CRC) HCT116 cell. E17 can also induce the accumulation of topo II-DNA complex without leading to degradation of topo II, which was different from topo II inhibitors VP16 or ICRF-187, suggesting E17 might be a potential lead for further development by serving as a strong topo II inhibitor.

Economic evaluation of a pharmacogenomic multi-gene panel test to optimize anti-hypertension therapy: simulation study

AIMS

Hypertension is the strongest modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease, affecting 80 million individuals in the US and responsible for ∼360,000 deaths, at total annual costs of $93.5 billion. Antihypertension therapies guided by single genotypes are clinically more effective and may avert more adverse events than the standard of care of layering anti-hypertensive drug therapies, thus potentially decreasing costs. This study aimed to determine the economic benefits of the implementation of multi-gene panel guided therapies for hypertension from the payer perspective within a 3-year time horizon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A simulation analysis was conducted for a panel of 10 million insured patients categorized clinically as untreated, treated but uncontrolled, and treated and controlled over a 3-year treatment period. Inputs included research data; empirical data from a 11-gene panel with known functional, heart, blood vessel, and kidney genotypes; and therapy efficacy and safety estimates from literature. Cost estimates were categorized as related to genetic testing, evaluation and management, medication, or adverse events.

RESULTS

Multi-gene panel guided therapy yielding savings of $6,256,607,500 for evaluation and management, $908,160,000 for medications, and $37,467,508,716 for adverse events, after accounting for incremental genetic testing costs of $2,355,540,000. This represents total 3-year savings of $42,276,736,216, or a 47% reduction, and 3-year savings of $4,228 and annual savings of $1,409 per covered patient.

CONCLUSIONS

A precision medicine approach to genetically guided therapy for hypertension patients using a multi-gene panel reduced total 3-year costs by 47%, yielding savings exceeding $42.3 billion in an insured panel of 10 million patients. Importantly, 89% of these savings are generated by averting specific adverse events and, thus, optimizing choice of therapy in function of both safety and efficacy.