Health Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2024 Oct;28(73):1-230. doi: 10.3310/YAPL9347.
To limit the use of antimicrobials without disincentivising the development of novel antimicrobials, there is interest in establishing innovative models that fund antimicrobials based on an evaluation of their value as opposed to the volumes used. The aim of this project was to evaluate the population-level health benefit of ceftazidime-avibactam in the NHS in England, for the treatment of severe aerobic Gram-negative bacterial infections when used within its licensed indications. The results were used to inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance in support of commercial discussions regarding contract value between the manufacturer and NHS England.
The health benefit of ceftazidime-avibactam was first derived for a series of high-value clinical scenarios. These represented uses that were expected to have a significant impact on patients' mortality risks and health-related quality of life. Patient-level costs and health-related quality of life of ceftazidime-avibactam under various usage scenarios compared with alternative management strategies in the high-value clinical scenarios were quantified using decision modelling. Results were reported as incremental net health effects expressed in quality-adjusted life-years, which were scaled to 20-year population in quality-adjusted life-years using infection number forecasts based on data from Public Health England. The outcomes estimated for the high-value clinical scenarios were extrapolated to other expected uses for ceftazidime-avibactam.
The clinical effectiveness of ceftazidime-avibactam relative to its comparators was estimated by synthesising evidence on susceptibility of the pathogens of interest to the antimicrobials in a network meta-analysis. In the base case, ceftazidime-avibactam was associated with a statistically significantly higher susceptibility relative to colistin (odds ratio 7.24, 95% credible interval 2.58 to 20.94). The remainder of the treatments were associated with lower susceptibility than colistin (odds ratio < 1). The results were sensitive to the definition of resistance and the studies included in the analysis. In the base case, patient-level benefit of ceftazidime-avibactam was between 0.08 and 0.16 quality-adjusted life-years, depending on the site of infection and the usage scenario. There was a high degree of uncertainty surrounding the benefits of ceftazidime-avibactam across all subgroups, and the results were sensitive to assumptions in the meta-analysis used to estimate susceptibility. There was substantial uncertainty in the number of infections that are suitable for treatment with ceftazidime-avibactam, so population-level results are presented for a range of scenarios for the current infection numbers, the expected increases in infections over time, and rates of emergence of resistance. The population-level benefit varied substantially across the scenarios, from 531 to 2342 quality-adjusted life-years over 20 years.
This work has provided quantitative estimates of the value of ceftazidime-avibactam within its areas of expected usage within the NHS.
Given existing evidence, the estimates of the value of ceftazidime-avibactam are highly uncertain.
Future evaluations of antimicrobials would benefit from improvements to NHS data linkages, research to support appropriate synthesis of susceptibility studies, and application of routine data and decision modelling to assess enablement value.
No registration of this study was undertaken.
This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Policy Research Programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR135592), conducted through the Policy Research Unit in Economic Methods of Evaluation in Health and Social Care Interventions, PR-PRU-1217-20401, and is published in full in ; Vol. 28, No. 73. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
为了在不抑制新型抗菌药物开发的情况下限制抗菌药物的使用,人们对建立基于抗菌药物价值而非使用量评估的创新模式感兴趣。本项目旨在评估头孢他啶-阿维巴坦在英格兰国民保健制度(NHS)中的人群健康效益,用于治疗严重需氧革兰氏阴性细菌感染,前提是在其许可的适应症内使用。结果用于为国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)的指导提供信息,以支持制造商与英格兰 NHS 之间的合同价值的商业讨论。
首先从一系列高价值临床情况下推导头孢他啶-阿维巴坦的健康效益。这些代表了预计对患者死亡率和健康相关生活质量产生重大影响的使用情况。在高价值临床情况下,使用各种使用方案下的头孢他啶-阿维巴坦的患者水平成本和健康相关生活质量与替代管理策略进行了量化,使用决策模型进行了比较。结果以质量调整生命年(QALY)表示的增量净健康效果报告,使用基于英格兰公共卫生署数据的感染数量预测,将 20 年的人口规模换算为质量调整生命年。根据高价值临床情况估计的结果被外推到头孢他啶-阿维巴坦的其他预期用途。
通过对感兴趣病原体对抗菌药物的敏感性进行网络荟萃分析,综合证据来估计头孢他啶-阿维巴坦相对于其对照药物的临床疗效。在基础情况下,头孢他啶-阿维巴坦相对于粘菌素具有统计学上更高的敏感性(优势比 7.24,95%可信区间 2.58 至 20.94)。其余治疗方法与粘菌素相比敏感性较低(优势比<1)。结果对耐药性的定义和纳入分析的研究敏感。在基础情况下,头孢他啶-阿维巴坦对患者的健康效益在 0.08 到 0.16 个质量调整生命年之间,具体取决于感染部位和使用情况。头孢他啶-阿维巴坦的益处存在高度不确定性,在所有亚组中,结果对用于估计敏感性的荟萃分析中的假设敏感。适合用头孢他啶-阿维巴坦治疗的感染数量存在很大的不确定性,因此为当前感染数量、随着时间的推移感染的预期增加以及耐药性出现的比率提供了 20 年的人群水平结果。人群水平的效益在不同情况下有很大差异,从 531 到 2342 个质量调整生命年不等。
这项工作提供了在 NHS 预期使用范围内评估头孢他啶-阿维巴坦价值的定量估计。
鉴于现有证据,头孢他啶-阿维巴坦的价值估计存在高度不确定性。
对抗菌药物的未来评估将受益于 NHS 数据链接的改进、支持适当综合敏感性研究的研究以及常规数据和决策模型的应用,以评估赋权价值。
本研究未进行注册。
该奖项由国家卫生与保健卓越研究所(NIHR)政策研究计划(NIHR 奖 REF:NIHR135592)资助,通过经济方法在健康和社会护理干预措施中的政策研究单位(PR-PRU-1217-20401)进行,并在 ; 第 28 卷,第 73 期。有关该奖项的更多信息,请访问 NIHR 资助和奖项网站。