Bending the curve: force health protection during the insertion phase of the Ebola outbreak response

After >10 years of enduring operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, Defence Strategic Direction is returning to a contingency posture. As the first post-Afghanistan operation, in September 2014, a UK Joint Inter-Agency Task Force deployed to Sierra Leone in response to the Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic in West Africa. The aims were expanding treatment capacity, assisting with training and supporting host nation resilience. The insertion phase of this deployment created a unique set of challenges for force health protection. In addition to the considerable risk of tropical disease and trauma, deployed personnel faced the risks of working in an EVD epidemic. This report explores how deployed medical assets overcame the difficulties of mounting a short-notice contingent operation in a region of the world with inherent major climatic and health challenges.

Education and Ebola: initiating the cascade of emergency healthcare training

In response to the 2014 Ebola virus outbreak in West Africa, the UK deployed a Joint Inter-Agency Task Force to Sierra Leone. As well as constructing Ebola treatment units, the force supported a rapidly upscaled mass programme of training for host nation healthcare workers in basic knowledge of Ebola and personal protective equipment. A bespoke training course was developed in collaboration with the WHO and other partners over a period of 2 weeks, taught to 119 trainers the following week, and then cascaded to over 4000 Ebola workers over the following month. This article describes curriculum design, content delivery and assessment of this unique Training The Trainers course delivered in austere circumstances. Key learning points are highlighted and supplementary material is provided to inform future deployed clinical education initiatives.

A systematic review and economic evaluation of the use of tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors, adalimumab and infliximab, for Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Crohn's disease (CD) is a severe, lifelong disease characterised by inflammation of the gastrointestinal mucosa. The impact on patients and society is high as ill health can be lifelong and can negatively affect patients' quality of life. Costs to the NHS are high, particularly for patients needing hospitalisation. Conventional treatment pathways are complex. More recently, a group of drugs called tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (anti-TNF-α agents) have been evaluated for their effectiveness in CD. One of these, infliximab, is currently recommended by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE; 2002) for patients with severe, active CD where patients are refractory to or intolerant of conventional treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether there is evidence for greater clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness for either adalimumab or infliximab.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Library (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) 2007 Issue 2; MEDLINE (Ovid) 2000 to May/June 2007; MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (Ovid) 4 June and 26 June 2007; EMBASE (Ovid) 2000 to May/June 2007. The European Medicines Agency, the US Food and Drug Administration and other relevant websites.

REVIEW METHODS

Standard systematic review methods were used for study identification and selection, data extraction and quality assessment. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing adalimumab or infliximab with standard treatment (placebo), RCTs comparing adalimumab with infliximab, or RCTs comparing different dosing regimens of either adalimumab or infliximab in adults and children with moderate-to-severe active CD intolerant or resistant to conventional treatment were eligible for inclusion. A systematic review of published studies on the cost and cost-effectiveness of adalimumab and infliximab was undertaken. The economic models of cost-effectiveness submitted by the manufacturers of both drugs were critically appraised and, where appropriate, rerun using parameter inputs based on the evidence identified by the authors of the technology asessment report. A de novo Markov state transition model was constructed to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for adalimumab and infliximab therapy compared with standard care.

RESULTS

Based on 11 trials, there was evidence from both induction and maintenance trials that both adalimumab and infliximab therapy were beneficial compared with placebo (standard care) for adults with moderate-to-severe CD and, for infliximab, for adults with fistulising CD; results were statistically significant for some time points. Between 6% and 24% (adalimumab), and 21% and 44% (infliximab) more patients achieved remission with anti-TNF-α antibodies than with placebo in the induction trials. Between 24% and 29% (adalimumab), and 14% and 24% (infliximab) more patients achieved remission with anti-TNF-α antibodies in the two large maintenance trials at reported follow-up. In fistulising CD, between 29% and 42% (induction trial) and 23% (maintenance trial) more patients achieved a > 50% reduction in fistulas with infliximab than with placebo at reported follow-up. There was no direct evidence to show that 'responders' were more likely to benefit from treatment than 'non-responders' in the longer term. Few differences were found between treatment and standard care arms for selected adverse events, though high proportions of scheduled crossovers resulted in a lack of a true placebo group in most of the maintenance trials. No published studies on the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab were identified. The four independently funded studies identified for infliximab suggested high cost-effectiveness ratios [all above £50,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for non-fistulising disease and all above £100,000/QALY for fistulising disease]. A budget impact assessment suggested that total cost to the NHS in England and Wales for induction in severe disease only could range between £17M and £92M and for maintenance for 1 year between £140M and £200M.

LIMITATIONS

Regarding clinical effectiveness, there were concerns about the trial design and lack of clarity, which may have affected interpretation of results. None of the trials matched exactly the licence indications or NICE guidance, which specify the use of these drugs in patients with 'severe' disease. All trials were multicentre, and applicability to UK populations, particularly in terms of standard care being provided and in terms of patients having failed or having become intolerant to conventional treatment, was uncertain. The published economic models relied heavily on little information and data from small samples.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-TNF therapy with adalimumab or infliximab may have a beneficial effect compared with standard care on outcome measures for induction and maintenance. The findings were that for induction, both adalimumab and infliximab are cost-effective (dominant relative to standard care) in the management of severe CD, and adalimumab (but not infliximab) is cost-effective for moderate CD, according to limits generally accepted by NICE. On the basis of the analysis presented here, neither drug is likely to be cost-effective as maintenance therapy for moderate or severe disease. Perhaps, most importantly, the analysis reflected the fact that a substantial number of patients would achieve remission under standard care and that the incidence of relapse among those in remission was such that maintenance therapy would have to show greater effectiveness than at present and/or be much less costly than it currently is in order to reach the levels of generally accepted cost-effectiveness. Any future trials need to be designed to meet the particular challenges of measuring and quantifying benefit in this patient group.

FUNDING

The research was funded by the HTA programme on behalf of NICE.

Certolizumab pegol (CIMZIA®) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of certolizumab pegol (CZP) for adults with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that have not responded adequately to treatment with conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) including methotrexate (MTX), in accordance with the licensed indication, based upon the evidence submission from the manufacturer to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. The outcome measures included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, 50 and 70 response rates and quality of life measures after 3 months and 6 months of treatment. The ERG examined the submission's search strategies and considered they appeared comprehensive and that it was unlikely that relevant studies would have been missed. Only English language studies were considered in the submission and non-English language studies relevant to the decision problem may possibly have been ignored. The ERG analysed the first submitted economic model so as to itemise in detail clarification points that were brought to the attention of the manufacturer. In response the manufacturer submitted a modified cost-effectiveness analysis. The ERG undertook further analysis of this second model and other additional submitted evidence. The clinical evidence was derived from two multicentre blinded randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CZP + MTX to placebo + MTX (the RAPID 1 and RAPID 2 trials). RAPID 1 lasted 52 weeks with 982 patients and RAPID 2 24 weeks with 619 patients. Evidence for clinical effectiveness of CZP in mono-therapy came from the 24-week FAST4WARD trial with 220 patients that compared CZP (400 mg every 4 weeks) versus placebo. The three key RCTs demonstrated statistically significant superiority of CZP + MTX versus placebo + MTX and of CZP versus placebo with respect to a variety of outcomes including ACR 20, ACR 50 and ACR 70 measures and quality of life measures at 3 and 6 months. On the basis of results from the indirect comparison meta-analyses, the manufacturer suggested that CZP may be at least as effective as other 'biological' DMARD (bDMARD) comparators and, in a few ACR measures at 3 and 6 months, more effective. CZP is an effective therapy for adult RA patients whose disease has failed to respond adequately to cDMARDs including MTX or who are intolerant of MTX. The cost-effectiveness of CZP relative to other bDMARDs is unclear because the economic modelling undertaken may have ignored relevant effectiveness data and potential differences between trial populations, and so may have included effectiveness results that were biased in favour of CZP; underestimated uncertainty in the relative effectiveness of compared DMARDs; and ignored the potential influence of differences between bDMARDs with regard to adverse events and their related costs and health impacts. The NICE guidance issued in October 2009 states that: the Committee is minded not to recommend certolizumab pegol as a treatment option for people with RA; and the Committee recommends that NICE asks the manufacturer of CZP for more information on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CZP for the treatment of people with RA. On receipt of this information and details of a patient access scheme NICE issued final guidance recommending CZP, under certain criteria, as a treatment option for people with RA.

Imatinib as adjuvant treatment following resection of KIT-positive gastrointestinal stromal tumours

This is a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adjuvant imatinib post resection of KIT-positive gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) compared with resection only in patients at significant risk of relapse. The ERG report is based on the manufacturer's submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. The bulk of the clinical evidence submitted was in the form of one randomised controlled trial (RCT), the Z9001 trial, funded by the manufacturer, which compared resection + adjuvant imatinib for 1 year to resection only. Results were immature, with median recurrence-free survival (RFS) not yet having been reached at the time of analysis. The trial did provide evidence of a delay in disease recurrence [1-year RFS rate of 98% in the imatinib arm vs 83% in the placebo arm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.53, p < 0.0001)] but no evidence of an overall survival benefit. There was no long-term evidence around the rate of imatinib resistance over time with different treatment strategies (± adjuvant treatment). The relevant patient group for this appraisal is those at significant risk of relapse. These form a subgroup of the Z9001 trial, and all information regarding this group was designated 'Commercial-in-Confidence' (CIC). Median observation time for RFS was also CIC. The manufacturer constructed a Markov model comprising 10 health states designed to estimate costs and effects of treatment over a lifetime time horizon. The manufacturer's estimate of the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 22,937 pounds/quality-adjusted life-year (subsequently amended by the manufacturer to 23,601 pounds). While the structure of the model reasonably reflected the natural history of the disease, the ERG had numerous concerns regarding the selection of, and assumptions around, input parameters (utilities, monthly probabilities of recurrence and death). Furthermore, the model was set up in such a way that any delay in recurrence translated directly into a survival benefit, an assumption that has no evidence base. A further assumption not supported by evidence was that any treatment benefit gained in the first year is carried on for a further 2 years at the same rate. Appropriate probabilistic sensitivity analysis was undertaken on the base case only, but not on scenario analyses, or choice of model used to estimate long-term survival data. The model was not amenable to changes in input values, thus limiting any additional analyses by the ERG to test assumptions. Due to the large number of uncertainties and assumptions, the estimated ICERs should be regarded as highly uncertain. The guidance issued by NICE in June 2010 as a result of the STA does not recommend imatinib as adjuvant treatment after resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumours, although individuals currently receiving adjuvant imatinib should have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinician consider it appropriate to stop.

Cetuximab for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cetuximab for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), in accordance with the licensed indication, based upon the manufacturer's submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The ERG project ran between 22 January 2008 and 4 November 2008. The clinical evidence came from two unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of cetuximab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of mCRC. A third RCT submitted later compared cetuximab with irinotecan in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and folinic acid (FA) and cetuximab with oxaliplatin in combination with 5-FU and FA in patients with mCRC with liver metastases only. No published economic evaluations of cetuximab for first-line chemotherapy in mCRC were identified in the submission. A de novo model examined the cost-effectiveness of cetuximab in patients with mCRC that was epidermal growth factor receptor positive, k-ras wild type and with liver metastases. The main source of clinical effectiveness evidence came from the first two RCTs which provided follow up information for 1-2 years. Secondary information was used to estimate survival for a further 22 years. The model focused on the patients for whom the treatment had been licensed. This limited the applicability of the model to the NHS setting in which patients would be a mixture of k-ras wild type and mutations and also a mixture of patients with liver metastases and other metastases. The difference in progression-free survival for the two trials was between 0.5 to 1.2 months over a 7-10 month period. Eight months' treatment with cetuximab, given as an initial loading dose and then weekly until progression, would cost around 22,932 pounds for an average man and 18,427 pounds for an average woman. It is uncertain whether this constitutes good value for money. The guidance issued by NICE on 25 September 2008 stated that cetuximab was not recommended for the first-line treatment of mCRC and people currently receiving cetuximab for the first-line treatment of mCRC should have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinicians consider it appropriate to stop.

Azacitidine for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome, chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia and acute myeloid leukaemia

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of azacitidine (aza) compared with conventional care regimes (CCR) for higher risk patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia (CMML) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), based on the evidence submission from the manufacturer to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The patient outcomes governing relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness were defined as overall survival, time to progression (TTP) to AML, adverse events and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The clinical evidence was derived from an open-label randomised controlled trial referred to as study AZA-001. It compared aza with CCR in 358 patients with higher risk MDS, CMML and AML 20-30% blasts. The outcomes reported in AZA-001 included overall survival, TTP to AML and adverse events. No HRQoL results were reported; however, outcomes likely to impact on HRQoL were provided. The results showed that: the median overall survival was 24.5 months on aza, compared with 15.0 months in the CCR group (p = 0.0001); the response rates were low (complete remission 17% aza versus 8% CCR); the median time to transformation to AML was greater in the aza group (17.8 versus 11.5 months; p < 0.0001); and of patients who were red blood cell (RBC) transfusion-dependent at baseline, 45% of those on aza became RBC transfusion-independent during the treatment period, compared with 11.8% in the CCR group (p < 0.0001). The ERG reran the submission's search strategies after some modifications incorporating minor improvements. The ERG analysed the submitted economic model (model 1) and identified a number of inconsistencies and errors within the model. The manufacturer submitted a revised model for analysis by the ERG. Using the issues identified in the earlier analysis, the ERG conducted those repairs to the revised model that were feasible within time constraints. The ERG ran this version in probabilistic sensitivity analyses to generate cost-effectiveness acceptability frontiers. The results of these exploratory analyses indicated that: for standard-dose chemotherapy (SDC)-treated patients, of six treatment options available, best supportive care (BSC) was likely the most cost-effective option up to a threshold of 51,000 pounds/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) [beyond 51,000 pounds/QALY, aza + low-dose chemotherapy (LDC) became cost-effective]; for LDC-treated patients, of four options available, BSC was again the most cost-effective option up to a willingness-to-pay threshold of 51,000 pounds/QALY (aza + LDC became cost-effective after 51,000 pounds/QALY); for BSC-treated patients, aza + BSC became cost-effective relative to BSC at a threshold of about 52,000 pounds/QALY. The ERG considers these results exploratory and considers that they should be viewed with caution. The AZA-001 study showed that, compared with CCR, those MDS patients receiving aza had prolonged median survival, had delayed progression to AML, had reduced dependence on transfusions and had a small improvement in response rate. Given the general paucity of economic modelling work in MDS and the limitations of the submitted industry model there is an evident need for an independent cost-effectiveness analysis of aza in MDS. At the time of writing, the guidance appraisal consultation document issued by NICE on 4 March 2010 states that azacitidine is not recommended as a treatment option for people not eligible for haemopoietic stem cell transplantation with the the following conditions: intermediate-2 and high-risk MDS according to the International Prognostic Scoring System, CMML with 10-29% marrow blasts without myeloproliferative disorder, or with AML with 20-30% blasts and multilineage dysplasia, according to World Health Organization classification.

Sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of sorafenib according to its licensed indication for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The ERG report was based on the manufacturer's submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The licensed indication for sorafenib specifies advanced HCC patients for whom locoregional intervention and surgery are unsuitable or had been unsuccessful. The clinical evidence came from a multicentre randomised controlled trial (Sorafenib HCC Assessment Randomized Protocol; SHARP) of sorafenib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care, with 602 participants of a predominantly European ethnicity broadly comparable to the UK population. The submitted evidence indicated that for advanced HCC patients with Child-Pugh grade A liver function and relatively good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, sorafenib on average improves overall survival by 83 days relative to placebo, and also increases time-to-radiological disease progression. Sorafenib therapy had little or no effect on time-to-symptom progression or on quality of life as measured using a disease-specific questionnaire. Sorafenib treatment was associated with increased incidence of hypertension and of gastrointestinal and dermatological problems. However, the therapy was reasonably well tolerated and, in SHARP, withdrawals from treatment due to adverse events were similar in the sorafenib and placebo arms, although more temporary reductions in dose were required in the sorafenib than in the placebo group. In the base case, the manufacturer's submitted economic analysis generated a deterministic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 64,754 pounds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The ERG extracted individual patient data for overall survival and disease progression, reran the economic model to check the submitted cost-effectiveness results, and performed new analyses which the ERG considered relevant to the decision problem; these analyses delivered ICERs between 76,000 pounds/QALY and 86,000 pounds/QALY. The guidance issued by NICE (7 May 2009) stated that sorafenib, within its licensed indication, is not recommended for the treatment of advanced (Barcelona-Clínic Liver Cancer stage C) HCC patients for whom surgical or locoregional therapies have failed or are not suitable, and people currently receiving sorafenib for the treatment of HCC should have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinician consider it appropriate to stop. Subsequently the manufacturer submitted a patient access scheme to the Department of Health. The base-case ICER submitted by the manufacturer for this scheme was 51,899 pounds/QALY. When the ERG reran the model with inputs considered relevant to the decision problem the ICER estimates ranged between 53,000 pounds to 58,000 pounds/QALY and substantially higher values depending on the nature of the sensitivity analyses. NICE considered the impact of the patient access scheme and determined that it was not sufficient to alter the guidance.

Imatinib as adjuvant treatment following resection of KIT-positive gastrointestinal stromal tumours

This is a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adjuvant imatinib post resection of KIT-positive gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) compared with resection only in patients at significant risk of relapse. The ERG report is based on the manufacturer’s submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. The bulk of the clinical evidence submitted was in the form of one randomised controlled trial (RCT), the Z9001 trial, funded by the manufacturer, which compared resection + adjuvant imatinib for 1 year to resection only. Results were immature, with median recurrence-free survival (RFS) not yet having been reached at the time of analysis. The trial did provide evidence of a delay in disease recurrence [1-year RFS rate of 98% in the imatinib arm vs 83% in the placebo arm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.53, p < 0.0001)] but no evidence of an overall survival benefit. There was no long-term evidence around the rate of imatinib resistance over time with different treatment strategies (± adjuvant treatment). The relevant patient group for this appraisal is those at significant risk of relapse. These form a subgroup of the Z9001 trial, and all information regarding this group was designated ‘Commercial-in-Confidence’ (CIC). Median observation time for RFS was also CIC. The manufacturer constructed a Markov model comprising 10 health states designed to estimate costs and effects of treatment over a lifetime time horizon. The manufacturer’s estimate of the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £22,937/quality-adjusted life-year (subsequently amended by the manufacturer to £23,601). While the structure of the model reasonably reflected the natural history of the disease, the ERG had numerous concerns regarding the selection of, and assumptions around, input parameters (utilities, monthly probabilities of recurrence and death). Furthermore, the model was set up in such a way that any delay in recurrence translated directly into a survival benefit, an assumption that has no evidence base. A further assumption not supported by evidence was that any treatment benefit gained in the first year is carried on for a further 2 years at the same rate. Appropriate probabilistic sensitivity analysis was undertaken on the base case only, but not on scenario analyses, or choice of model used to estimate long-term survival data. The model was not amenable to changes in input values, thus limiting any additional analyses by the ERG to test assumptions. Due to the large number of uncertainties and assumptions, the estimated ICERs should be regarded as highly uncertain. The guidance issued by NICE in June 2010 as a result of the STA does not recommend imatinib as adjuvant treatment after resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumours, although individuals currently receiving adjuvant imatinib should have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinician consider it appropriate to stop.

Certolizumab pegol (CIMZIA®) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of certolizumab pegol (CZP) for adults with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that have not responded adequately to treatment with conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) including methotrexate (MTX), in accordance with the licensed indication, based upon the evidence submission from the manufacturer to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. The outcome measures included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, 50 and 70 response rates and quality of life measures after 3 months and 6 months of treatment. The ERG examined the submission’s search strategies and considered they appeared comprehensive and that it was unlikely that relevant studies would have been missed. Only English language studies were considered in the submission and non-English language studies relevant to the decision problem may possibly have been ignored. The ERG analysed the first submitted economic model so as to itemise in detail clarification points that were brought to the attention of the manufacturer. In response the manufacturer submitted a modified cost-effectiveness analysis. The ERG undertook further analysis of this second model and other additional submitted evidence. The clinical evidence was derived from two multicentre blinded randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CZP + MTX to placebo + MTX (the RAPID 1 and RAPID 2 trials). RAPID 1 lasted 52 weeks with 982 patients and RAPID 2 24 weeks with 619 patients. Evidence for clinical effectiveness of CZP in mono-therapy came from the 24-week FAST4WARD trial with 220 patients that compared CZP (400 mg every 4 weeks) versus placebo. The three key RCTs demonstrated statistically significant superiority of CZP + MTX versus placebo + MTX and of CZP versus placebo with respect to a variety of outcomes including ACR 20, ACR 50 and ACR 70 measures and quality of life measures at 3 and 6 months. On the basis of results from the indirect comparison meta-analyses, the manufacturer suggested that CZP may be at least as effective as other ‘biological’ DMARD (bDMARD) comparators and, in a few ACR measures at 3 and 6 months, more effective. CZP is an effective therapy for adult RA patients whose disease has failed to respond adequately to cDMARDs including MTX or who are intolerant of MTX. The cost-effectiveness of CZP relative to other bDMARDs is unclear because the economic modelling undertaken may have ignored relevant effectiveness data and potential differences between trial populations, and so may have included effectiveness results that were biased in favour of CZP; underestimated uncertainty in the relative effectiveness of compared DMARDs; and ignored the potential influence of differences between bDMARDs with regard to adverse events and their related costs and health impacts. The NICE guidance issued in October 2009 states that: the Committee is minded not to recommend certolizumab pegol as a treatment option for people with RA; and the Committee recommends that NICE asks the manufacturer of CZP for more information on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CZP for the treatment of people with RA. On receipt of this information and details of a patient access scheme NICE issued final guidance recommending CZP, under certain criteria, as a treatment option for people with RA.

Cetuximab for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cetuximab for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), in accordance with the licensed indication, based upon the manufacturer’s submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The ERG project ran between 22 January 2008 and 4 November 2008. The clinical evidence came from two unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of cetuximab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of mCRC. A third RCT submitted later compared cetuximab with irinotecan in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and folinic acid (FA) and cetuximab with oxaliplatin in combination with 5-FU and FA in patients with mCRC with liver metastases only. No published economic evaluations of cetuximab for first-line chemotherapy in mCRC were identified in the submission. A de novo model examined the cost-effectiveness of cetuximab in patients with mCRC that was epidermal growth factor receptor positive, k-ras wild type and with liver metastases. The main source of clinical effectiveness evidence came from the first two RCTs which provided follow up information for 1–2 years. Secondary information was used to estimate survival for a further 22 years. The model focused on the patients for whom the treatment had been licensed. This limited the applicability of the model to the NHS setting in which patients would be a mixture of k-ras wild type and mutations and also a mixture of patients with liver metastases and other metastases. The difference in progress-free survival for the two trials was between 0.5 to 1.2 months over a 7–10 month period. Eight months’ treatment with cetuximab, given as an initial loading dose and then weekly until progression, would cost around £22,932 for an average man and £18,427 for an average woman. It is uncertain whether this constitutes good value for money. The guidance issued by NICE on 25 September 2008 stated that cetuximab was not recommended for the first-line treatment of mCRC and people currently receiving cetuximab for the first-line treatment of mCRC should have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinicians consider it appropriate to stop.

Sorafenib for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of sorafenib according to its licensed indication for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The ERG report was based on the manufacturer’s submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The licensed indication for sorafenib specifies advanced HCC patients for whom locoregional intervention and surgery are unsuitable or had been unsuccessful. The clinical evidence came from a multicentre randomised controlled trial (Study of Heart and Renal Protection; SHARP) of sorafenib plus best supportive care versus placebo plus best supportive care, with 602 participants of a predominantly European ethnicity broadly comparable to the UK population. The submitted evidence indicated that for advanced HCC patients with Child–Pugh grade A liver function and relatively good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, sorafenib on average improves overall survival by 83 days relative to placebo, and also increases time-to-radiological disease progression. Sorafenib therapy had little or no effect on time-to-symptom progression or on quality of life as measured using a disease-specific questionnaire. Sorafenib treatment was associated with increased incidence of hypertension and of gastrointestinal and dermatological problems. However, the therapy was reasonably well tolerated and, in SHARP, withdrawals from treatment due to adverse events were similar in the sorafenib and placebo arms, although more temporary reductions in dose were required in the sorafenib than in the placebo group. In the base case, the manufacturer’s submitted economic analysis generated a deterministic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £64,754 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The ERG extracted individual patient data for overall survival and disease progression, reran the economic model to check the submitted cost-effectiveness results, and performed new analyses which the ERG considered relevant to the decision problem; these analyses delivered ICERs between £76,000/QALY and £86,000/QALY. The guidance issued by NICE (7 May 2009) stated that sorafenib, within its licensed indication, is not recommended for the treatment of advanced (Barcelona-Clínic Liver Cancer stage C) HCC patients for whom surgical or locoregional therapies have failed or are not suitable, and people currently receiving sorafenib for the treatment of HCC should have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinician consider it appropriate to stop. Subsequently the manufacturer submitted a patient access scheme to the Department of Health. The base-case ICER submitted by the manufacturer for this scheme was £51,899/QALY. When the ERG reran the model with inputs considered relevant to the decision problem the ICER estimates ranged between £53,000 to £58,000/QALY and substantially higher values depending on the nature of the sensitivity analyses. NICE considered the impact of the patient access scheme and determined that it was not sufficient to alter the guidance.

Azacitidine for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome, chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia and acute myeloid leukaemia

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of azacitidine (aza) compared with conventional care regimes (CCR) for higher risk patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia (CMML) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), based on the evidence submission from the manufacturer to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The patient outcomes governing relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness were defined as overall survival, time to progression (TTP) to AML, adverse events and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The clinical evidence was derived from open label randomised controlled trial referred to as study AZA-001. It compared aza with CCR in 358 patients with higher risk MDS, CMML and AML 20–30% blasts. The outcomes reported in AZA-001 included overall survival, TTP to AML and adverse events. No HRQoL results were reported; however, outcomes likely to impact on HRQoL were provided. The results showed that: the median overall survival was 24.5 months on aza, compared with 15.0 months in the CCR group (p = 0.0001); the response rates were low (complete remission 17% aza versus 8% CCR); the median time to transformation to AML was greater in the aza group (17.8 versus 11.5 months; p < 0.0001); and of patients who were red blood cell (RBC) transfusion-dependent at baseline, 45% of those on aza became RBC transfusion-independent during the treatment period, compared with 11.8% in the CCR group (p < 0.0001). The ERG reran the submission’s search strategies after some modifications incorporating minor improvements. The ERG analysed the submitted economic model (model 1) and identified a number of inconsistencies and errors within the model. The manufacturer submitted a revised model for analysis by the ERG. Using the issues identified in the earlier analysis, the ERG conducted those repairs to the revised model that were feasible within time constraints. The ERG ran this version in probabilistic sensitivity analyses to generate cost-effectiveness acceptability frontiers. The results of these exploratory analyses indicated that: for standard-dose chemotherapy (SDC)-treated patients, of six treatment options available, best supportive care (BSC) was likely the most cost-effective option up to a threshold of £51,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) [beyond £51,000/QALY, aza + low-dose chemotherapy (LDC) became cost-effective]; for LDC-treated patients, of four options available, BSC was again the most cost-effective option up to a willingness-to-pay threshold of £51,000/QALY (aza + LDC became cost-effective after £51,000/QALY); for BSC-treated patients, aza + BSC became cost-effective relative to BSC at a threshold of about £52,000/QALY. The ERG considers these results exploratory and considers that they should be viewed with caution. The AZA-001 study showed that, compared with CCR, those MDS patients receiving aza had prolonged median survival, had delayed progression to AML, had reduced dependence on transfusions and had a small improvement in response rate. Given the general paucity of economic modelling work in MDS and the limitations of the submitted industry model there is an evident need for an independent cost-effectiveness analysis of aza in MDS. At the time of writing, the guidance appraisal consultation document issued by NICE on 4 March 2010 states that azacitidine is not recommended as a treatment option for people not eligible for haemopoietic stem cell transplantation with the the following conditions: intermediate-2 and high-risk MDS according to the International Prognostic Scoring System, CMML with 10-29% marrow blasts without myeloproliferative disorder, or with AML with 20-30% blasts and multilineage dysplasia, according to World Health Organization classification.

Early N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide measurements predict clinically significant ductus arteriosus in preterm infants

We report a blinded, prospective study of the diagnostic utility of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) measurements for predicting clinically significant patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) and assessing closure.

METHODS

Plasma NTproBNP was measured during the first week in 100 preterm babies (mean gestation 28.8 +/- 2.9 weeks; mean birth weight 1224 +/- 512 g). Echocardiography was performed between days 5 and 7 by operators, blinded to NTproBNP concentration.

RESULTS

NTproBNP peaked on days 2 and 3, declined by day 7. Twenty babies, later treated for PDA, had significantly higher NTproBNP levels throughout. Areas under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were 0.896, 0.897 and 0.931 on days 2, 3 and 7, respectively (p < 0.0001). A concentration > 2850 pmol/L had diagnostic sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 89% (95% CI: 68, 99; likelihood ratio 8.10). Ductal closure was associated with a fall in mean NTproBNP from 3003 to 839 pmol/L (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

N-terminal pro B-type brain natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) concentrations peaked and then declined in the first week but remained higher in preterm babies whose PDA required treatment. NTproBNP on day 3 predicted whether a neonatal physician blinded to results would treat a PDA. Fall in plasma NTproBNP indicated closure.

The natural history of developmental dysplasia of the hip after early supervised treatment in the Pavlik harness. A prospective, longitudinal follow-up

Between June 1988 and December 1997, we treated 332 babies with 546 dysplastic hips in a Pavlik harness for primary developmental dysplasia of the hip as detected by the selective screening programme in Southampton. Each was managed by a strict protocol including ultrasonic monitoring of treatment in the harness. The group was prospectively studied during a mean period of 6.5 +/- 2.7 years with follow-up of 89.9%. The acetabular index (AI) and centre-edge angle of Wiberg (CEA) were measured on annual radiographs to determine the development of the hip after treatment and were compared with published normal values. The harness failed to reduce 18 hips in 16 patients (15.2% of dislocations, 3.3% of DDH). These required surgical treatment. The development of those hips which were successfully treated in the harness showed no significant difference from the normal values of the AI for the left hips of girls after 18 months of age. Of those dysplastic hips which were successfully reduced in the harness, 2.4% showed persistent significant late dysplasia (CEA <20 degrees) and 0.2% persistent severe late dysplasia (CEA <15 degrees). All could be identified by an abnormal CEA (<20 degrees) at five years of age, and many from the progression of the AI by 18 months. Dysplasia was considered to be sufficient to require innominate osteotomy in five (0.9%). Avascular necrosis was noted in 1% of hips treated in the harness. We conclude that, using our protocol, successful initial treatment of DDH with the Pavlik harness appears to restore the natural development of the hip to normal. We suggest that regular radiological surveillance up to five years of age is a safe and effective practice.

The natural history of developmental dysplasia of the hip after early supervised treatment in the Pavlik harness

Between June 1988 and December 1997, we treated 332 babies with 546 dysplastic hips in a Pavlik harness for primary developmental dysplasia of the hip as detected by the selective screening programme in Southampton. Each was managed by a strict protocol including ultrasonic monitoring of treatment in the harness. The group was prospectively studied during a mean period of 6.5 ± 2.7 years with follow-up of 89.9%. The acetabular index (AI) and centre-edge angle of Wiberg (CEA) were measured on annual radiographs to determine the development of the hip after treatment and were compared with published normal values.

The harness failed to reduce 18 hips in 16 patients (15.2% of dislocations, 3.3% of DDH). These required surgical treatment. The development of those hips which were successfully treated in the harness showed no significant difference from the normal values of the AI for the left hips of girls after 18 months of age. Of those dysplastic hips which were successfully reduced in the harness, 2.4% showed persistent significant late dysplasia (CEA < 20°) and 0.2% persistent severe late dysplasia (CEA < 15°). All could be identified by an abnormal CEA (< 20°) at five years of age, and many from the progression of the AI by 18 months. Dysplasia was considered to be sufficient to require innominate osteotomy in five (0.9%). Avascular necrosis was noted in 1% of hips treated in the harness.

We conclude that, using our protocol, successful initial treatment of DDH with the Pavlik harness appears to restore the natural development of the hip to normal. We suggest that regular radiological surveillance up to five years of age is a safe and effective practice.

Isolation and characterization of the activated B-cell factor 1 homolog in Caenorhabditis elegans

Members of the basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) family of transcription factors regulate a wide array of developmental processes in many cell types, including cell fate specification, differentiation and morphogenesis. Our studies describe the cloning of a gene from the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans that is closely related to the vertebrate-activated B-cell factor (ABF) gene. The nematode gene product CeABF-1 was detected by northern blot analysis from RNA isolated from pooled nematodes representing different developmental stages. The developmental expression profile of CeABF-1 was shown by RT-PCR analysis to be predominantly expressed in the larval stages L3 and L4, with lower levels observed in the L2 larval stage and adult. We also show that CeABF-1 is capable of forming heterodimers with E2A proteins and binding E-box target sites. Mammalian cells transfected with CeABF-1 expression plasmids were capable of blocking E2A-mediated gene transcription, but full repression activity required the presence of two conserved amino acid residues found within the first helix of the CeABF-1 bHLH domain. These results suggest a conserved mechanism of gene repression between certain class II bHLH and class I bHLH proteins found in vertebrates and invertebrates.

Characterization of a basic helix-loop-helix protein, ABF-1: nuclear localization, transcriptional properties, and interaction with Id-2

The activated B-cell factor (ABF)-1 cDNA was initially isolated from Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-infected B cells and codes for a DNA-binding protein belonging to the basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) family of transcription factors. In this study, we characterized the nuclear localization signal of ABF-1, mapped two distinct transcriptional repression domains, and identified one ABF-1-interacting protein, Id-2. By examining the subcellular location of deletion mutants of ABF-1 fused to green fluorescent protein (GFP), critical regions involved in nuclear localization were determined. Analysis of GFP-tagged ABF-1 deletion mutants revealed two separate regions capable of directing nuclear localization. One region mapped to the N-terminal amino acids 71 to 103, whereas the second region localized to the C-terminal bHLH domain. Transient transfection of ABF-1 deletion mutants demonstrated that the N-terminal amino acids 1 to 40 and the bHLH domain function together to achieve maximum repression of E2A activity. Taken together, these results indicate that ABF-1 is a nuclear transcriptional repressor with two distinct regions that function in a synergistic fashion to attenuate E2A-mediated gene activation.

A clinical evaluation of a direct radioimmunoassay of testosterone

We report the evaluation of a commercial coated tube kit (Medgenix) to the measurement of testosterone in plasma/serum samples. The accuracy, precision, specificity and recovery of the assay and the affinity of antibody for ligand were established. The range of concentrations of testosterone providing satisfactory analyses was 0.48-48 nmol/l, which is appropriate for general clinical use. Results of analysis of male and female samples obtained from the routine hospital laboratory in endocrinologically-defined groups were also reviewed. In all groups of male subjects and in normal females, the kit provided results in close agreement to those of an extraction method. With samples from women with various reproductive disorders, as well as with some samples obtained from external quality controls, the kit showed a small but significant negative bias relative to the results of the extraction method. There was, however, no evidence of bias with samples from a separate group of volunteer women with the polycystic ovary syndrome. No interference due to SHBG was detected. Clinical sensitivities using the kit were equivalent to those obtained using the extraction RIA. There was no evidence of spuriously high results in samples from females which has been a common problem with direct radioimmunoassay of testosterone.

Studies to confirm the source of 11 beta-hydroxyandrostenedione

In a longitudinal study of 82 children we found a gradual rise in median plasma concentrations of 11 beta-hydroxyandrostenedione (11 beta-OH-A4) from 2.5 to 6.4 nmol/l during childhood which was similar in both sexes. This could reflect changes in adrenal function during the adrenarche and sexual maturation. Plasma concentrations of 11 beta-OH-A4 in adults follow the patterns of cortisol secretion. In patients with diseases of the adrenal cortex, the plasma concentrations of 11 beta-OH-A4 were consistent with the pathology of each condition. In women with polycystic ovaries (PCO) undergoing gonadotrophic stimulation for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer, 11 beta-OH-A4 (median = 3.8 nmol/l), testosterone and androstenedione, were raised when compared to women with normal ovaries (11 beta-OH-A4 median = 2.6 nmol/l). Follicular fluid has concentrations of 11 beta-OH-A4 six to twelve times greater than plasma levels and in women with PCO, 11 beta-OH-A4 concentrations were lower than in women with normal ovaries, which is consistent with an inhibition of ovarian 11 beta-hydroxylase. Granulosa cells in vitro demonstrated the production of 11 beta-OH-A4 by side chain cleavage of cortisol. These data support an adrenal source for 11 beta-OH-A4 but the raised plasma concentrations in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) may reflect the excess androgen output from the ovary. 11 beta-OH-A4 may therefore be an additional marker for ovarian dysfunction.

Reduction in IgG galactose in juvenile and adult onset rheumatoid arthritis measured by a lectin binding method and its relation to rheumatoid factor

Glycosylation changes in patients with juvenile chronic and adult onset rheumatoid arthritis have been studied using a novel binding method. Both these major types of arthritis showed decreased galactosylation of serum IgG, which confirms earlier studies using a different, more complex chemical method. No significant correlation between serum IgG, IgM, and IgA rheumatoid factors and age corrected G(o) (percentage of oligosaccharide chains lacking galactose) was found. The possibility that the less glycosylated IgG is preferentially confined to circulating IgM/IgG immune complexes cannot be excluded, however.

Diaphragm paralysis causing ventilatory failure in an adult with the rigid spine syndrome

A syndrome consisting of a rigid spine and myopathy predominantly affecting proximal limb muscles has been previously described in children, and as with most neuromuscular disorders, the respiratory muscles appear to be affected only at an advanced stage in the disease. We describe an adult male with this syndrome who presented with ventilatory failure caused by severe respiratory muscle weakness and who demonstrated profound nocturnal arterial oxygen desaturation, particularly during rapid eye movement sleep. Treatment with negative pressure ventilation initially resulted in only modest improvements in symptoms, blood gas tensions, and nocturnal desaturation. The cause of this only partial improvement was upper airway obstruction provoked by the mode of ventilatory support used. After tracheostomy there was a dramatic and sustained improvement in symptoms and blood gas tensions and complete abolition of nocturnal arterial oxygen desaturation. This is the first report of an adult with the rigid spine syndrome presenting with ventilatory failure and cor pulmonale due to severe respiratory muscle weakness.

Muscle strength in girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia

To assess whether exposure to excessive adrenal androgens increases muscle strength in girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia, eighteen girls with 21 hydroxylase type congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), aged 4.3-12.1 years were studied and compared with 78 healthy control girls aged 4-16 years. Maximum voluntary isometric strength was measured using a muscle testing chair, and the highest value from at least three attempts with each leg was recorded. Height and weight were also measured in the patients and controls. When compared with normal girls of similar age, some of the girls with CAH seemed unusually strong, but this difference was less marked when the CAH girls were compared with controls of similar weights. However, our data suggest that girls diagnosed later in childhood may have unusual muscle strength.

Corticosteroid myopathy: a clinical and pathological study

In six patients with Cushing's syndrome and three with steroid myopathy, the clinical, functional, biochemical and structural characteristics of myopathy are described. Proximal muscle weakness occurred in all the patients, preferentially affected the lower limbs and was accompanied by muscle wasting in all but one patient. Force measurements confirmed quadriceps weakness in every patient. Vastus lateralis muscle biopsies showed light microscopic abnormalities in two of three patients with steroid myopathy and one of five patients with Cushing's syndrome. Type II fibre atrophy was the commonest abnormality. Reduced type II mean fibre areas occurred in all the patients with steroid myopathy and were common in Cushing's syndrome patients. Type I mean fibre areas were also reduced in two of the former group and one of the latter group and two further patients in this group had areas at the lower end of the normal range. Abnormalities in electron microscopy, mitochondrial function tests and chemical content of skeletal muscle were frequent and are described and discussed. A plasma creatine kinase activity (CK) at the lower end of the normal range, a myopathic electromyogram (EMG) and a raised 24-h urinary 3-methylhistidine/creatinine ratio on a creatine free diet were other characteristic findings in both groups of patients.

Serum prolactin and oestradiol levels at different stages of puberty

Serum prolactin and oestradiol levels were measured in 183 children who were staged for pubertal development. Mean serum prolactin levels are higher in girls than in boys at stage 3 of pubertal development. In girls prolactin levels rise at stage 2, and are higher after menarche; in boys there is no change in prolactin levels. In this study serum oestradiol correlates with prolactin in the girls, but not in the boys.