Cargando…

Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party

INTRODUCTION: Biologic therapies are efficacious but costly. A number of health economic models have been developed to determine the most cost-effective way of using them in the treatment pathway. These models have produced conflicting results, driven by differences in assumptions, model structure,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Madan, Jason, Ades, Tony, Barton, Pelham, Bojke, Laura, Choy, Ernest, Helliwell, Philip, Jobanputra, Paresh, Stein, Ken, Stevens, Andrew, Tosh, Jonathan, Verstappen, Suzanne, Wailoo, Allan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4883267/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27747536
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40744-015-0020-0
_version_ 1782434238928257024
author Madan, Jason
Ades, Tony
Barton, Pelham
Bojke, Laura
Choy, Ernest
Helliwell, Philip
Jobanputra, Paresh
Stein, Ken
Stevens, Andrew
Tosh, Jonathan
Verstappen, Suzanne
Wailoo, Allan
author_facet Madan, Jason
Ades, Tony
Barton, Pelham
Bojke, Laura
Choy, Ernest
Helliwell, Philip
Jobanputra, Paresh
Stein, Ken
Stevens, Andrew
Tosh, Jonathan
Verstappen, Suzanne
Wailoo, Allan
author_sort Madan, Jason
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Biologic therapies are efficacious but costly. A number of health economic models have been developed to determine the most cost-effective way of using them in the treatment pathway. These models have produced conflicting results, driven by differences in assumptions, model structure, and data, which undermine the credibility of funding decisions based on modeling studies. A Consensus Working Party met to discuss recommendations and approaches for future models of biologic therapies. METHODS: Our working party consisted of clinical specialists, modelers, and policy makers. Two 1-day meetings were held for members to arrive at consensus positions on model structure, assumptions, and appropriate data sources. These views were guided by clinical aspects of rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis and the principles of evidence-based medicine. Where opinions differed, we sought to identify a research agenda that would generate the evidence needed to reach consensus. RESULTS: We gained consensus in four areas of model development: initial response to treatment; long-term disease progression; lifetime costs and benefits; and model structure. Consensus was also achieved on some key parameters such as choices of outcome measures, methods for extrapolation beyond trial data, and treatment switching. A research agenda to support further consensus was also identified. CONCLUSION: Consensus guidance that fully reflects current evidence and clinical understanding was gained successfully. In addition, research needs have been identified. Such guidance can be updated as evidence develops and policy questions change and need not be prescriptive as long as deviations from consensus are clearly explained and justified. FUNDING: Arthritis Research UK and the UK Medical Research Council Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40744-015-0020-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4883267
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48832672016-08-19 Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party Madan, Jason Ades, Tony Barton, Pelham Bojke, Laura Choy, Ernest Helliwell, Philip Jobanputra, Paresh Stein, Ken Stevens, Andrew Tosh, Jonathan Verstappen, Suzanne Wailoo, Allan Rheumatol Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: Biologic therapies are efficacious but costly. A number of health economic models have been developed to determine the most cost-effective way of using them in the treatment pathway. These models have produced conflicting results, driven by differences in assumptions, model structure, and data, which undermine the credibility of funding decisions based on modeling studies. A Consensus Working Party met to discuss recommendations and approaches for future models of biologic therapies. METHODS: Our working party consisted of clinical specialists, modelers, and policy makers. Two 1-day meetings were held for members to arrive at consensus positions on model structure, assumptions, and appropriate data sources. These views were guided by clinical aspects of rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis and the principles of evidence-based medicine. Where opinions differed, we sought to identify a research agenda that would generate the evidence needed to reach consensus. RESULTS: We gained consensus in four areas of model development: initial response to treatment; long-term disease progression; lifetime costs and benefits; and model structure. Consensus was also achieved on some key parameters such as choices of outcome measures, methods for extrapolation beyond trial data, and treatment switching. A research agenda to support further consensus was also identified. CONCLUSION: Consensus guidance that fully reflects current evidence and clinical understanding was gained successfully. In addition, research needs have been identified. Such guidance can be updated as evidence develops and policy questions change and need not be prescriptive as long as deviations from consensus are clearly explained and justified. FUNDING: Arthritis Research UK and the UK Medical Research Council Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40744-015-0020-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Healthcare 2015-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4883267/ /pubmed/27747536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40744-015-0020-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Madan, Jason
Ades, Tony
Barton, Pelham
Bojke, Laura
Choy, Ernest
Helliwell, Philip
Jobanputra, Paresh
Stein, Ken
Stevens, Andrew
Tosh, Jonathan
Verstappen, Suzanne
Wailoo, Allan
Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party
title Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party
title_full Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party
title_fullStr Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party
title_full_unstemmed Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party
title_short Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party
title_sort consensus decision models for biologics in rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis: recommendations of a multidisciplinary working party
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4883267/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27747536
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40744-015-0020-0
work_keys_str_mv AT madanjason consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT adestony consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT bartonpelham consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT bojkelaura consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT choyernest consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT helliwellphilip consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT jobanputraparesh consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT steinken consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT stevensandrew consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT toshjonathan consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT verstappensuzanne consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty
AT wailooallan consensusdecisionmodelsforbiologicsinrheumatoidandpsoriaticarthritisrecommendationsofamultidisciplinaryworkingparty