University of Groningen, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, A. Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry, Rob Giel Research Center, Interdisciplinary Centre for Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2022 Nov;40(11):1015-1032. doi: 10.1007/s40273-022-01185-z. Epub 2022 Sep 14.
The most appropriate next step in depression treatment after the initial treatment fails is unclear. This study explores the suitability of the Markov decision process for optimizing sequential treatment decisions for depression. We conducted a formal comparison of a Markov decision process approach and mainstream state-transition models as used in health economic decision analysis to clarify differences in the model structure. We performed two reviews: the first to identify existing applications of the Markov decision process in the field of healthcare and the second to identify existing health economic models for depression. We then illustrated the application of a Markov decision process by reformulating an existing health economic model. This provided input for discussing the suitability of a Markov decision process for solving sequential treatment decisions in depression. The Markov decision process and state-transition models differed in terms of flexibility in modeling actions and rewards. In all, 23 applications of a Markov decision process within the context of somatic disease were included, 16 of which concerned sequential treatment decisions. Most existing health economic models relating to depression have a state-transition structure. The example application replicated the health economic model and enabled additional capacity to make dynamic comparisons of more interventions over time than was possible with traditional state-transition models. Markov decision processes have been successfully applied to address sequential treatment-decision problems, although the results have been published mostly in economics journals that are not related to healthcare. One advantage of a Markov decision process compared with state-transition models is that it allows extended action space: the possibility of making dynamic comparisons of different treatments over time. Within the context of depression, although existing state-transition models are too basic to evaluate sequential treatment decisions, the assumptions of a Markov decision process could be satisfied. The Markov decision process could therefore serve as a powerful model for optimizing sequential treatment in depression. This would require a sufficiently elaborate state-transition model at the cohort or patient level.
初始治疗失败后,抑郁症治疗的下一步最佳选择尚不清楚。本研究旨在探讨马尔可夫决策过程是否适合优化抑郁症序贯治疗决策。我们对马尔可夫决策过程方法与主流状态转移模型(常用于健康经济决策分析)进行了正式比较,以阐明模型结构的差异。我们进行了两次综述:第一次是为了确定在医疗保健领域中已有应用的马尔可夫决策过程,第二次是为了确定针对抑郁症的现有健康经济模型。然后,我们通过重新制定现有的健康经济模型来说明马尔可夫决策过程的应用,为讨论马尔可夫决策过程在解决抑郁症序贯治疗决策中的适用性提供了依据。马尔可夫决策过程和状态转移模型在建模行动和奖励方面的灵活性有所不同。共纳入了 23 项躯体疾病背景下的马尔可夫决策过程应用,其中 16 项涉及序贯治疗决策。大多数与抑郁症相关的现有健康经济模型都具有状态转移结构。示例应用复制了健康经济模型,并能够在动态上比较更多干预措施在不同时间点的效果,这是传统状态转移模型无法实现的。虽然结果主要发表在与医疗保健无关的经济学期刊上,但马尔可夫决策过程已成功应用于解决序贯治疗决策问题。与状态转移模型相比,马尔可夫决策过程的一个优势是它允许扩展的行动空间:即随着时间的推移对不同治疗方法进行动态比较的可能性。在抑郁症背景下,虽然现有状态转移模型过于基础,无法评估序贯治疗决策,但马尔可夫决策过程的假设是可以满足的。因此,马尔可夫决策过程可以作为优化抑郁症序贯治疗的有力模型。这需要在队列或患者层面构建足够精细的状态转移模型。