PMID- 26792792
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20170904
LR  - 20220311
IS  - 1179-2027 (Electronic)
IS  - 1170-7690 (Linking)
VI  - 34
IP  - 6
DP  - 2016 Jun
TI  - A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Models in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.
PG  - 569-85
LID - 10.1007/s40273-015-0374-8 [doi]
AB  - BACKGROUND: Critiques of cost-effectiveness modelling in type 1 diabetes mellitus 
      (T1DM) are scarce and are often undertaken in combination with type 2 diabetes 
      mellitus (T2DM) models. However, T1DM is a separate disease, and it is therefore 
      important to appraise modelling methods in T1DM. OBJECTIVES: This review 
      identified published economic models in T1DM and provided an overview of the 
      characteristics and capabilities of available models, thus enabling a discussion 
      of best-practice modelling approaches in T1DM. METHODS: A systematic review of 
      Embase((R)), MEDLINE((R)), MEDLINE((R)) In-Process, and NHS EED was conducted to 
      identify available models in T1DM. Key conferences and health technology 
      assessment (HTA) websites were also reviewed. The characteristics of each model 
      (e.g. model structure, simulation method, handling of uncertainty, incorporation 
      of treatment effect, data for risk equations, and validation procedures, based on 
      information in the primary publication) were extracted, with a focus on model 
      capabilities. RESULTS: We identified 13 unique models. Overall, the included 
      studies varied greatly in scope as well as in the quality and quantity of 
      information reported, but six of the models (Archimedes, CDM [Core Diabetes 
      Model], CRC DES [Cardiff Research Consortium Discrete Event Simulation], DCCT 
      [Diabetes Control and Complications Trial], Sheffield, and EAGLE [Economic 
      Assessment of Glycaemic control and Long-term Effects of diabetes]) were the most 
      rigorous and thoroughly reported. Most models were Markov based, and cohort and 
      microsimulation methods were equally common. All of the more comprehensive models 
      employed microsimulation methods. Model structure varied widely, with the more 
      holistic models providing a comprehensive approach to microvascular and 
      macrovascular events, as well as including adverse events. The majority of 
      studies reported a lifetime horizon, used a payer perspective, and had the 
      capability for sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Several models have been 
      developed that provide useful insight into T1DM modelling. Based on a review of 
      the models identified in this study, we identified a set of 'best in class' 
      methods for the different technical aspects of T1DM modelling.
FAU - Henriksson, Martin
AU  - Henriksson M
AD  - PAREXEL International, Stockholm, Sweden.
AD  - Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linkoping University, Linkoping, 
      Sweden.
FAU - Jindal, Ramandeep
AU  - Jindal R
AD  - PAREXEL International, Chandigarh, India.
FAU - Sternhufvud, Catarina
AU  - Sternhufvud C
AD  - Global Medicines Development | Global Payer Evidence and Pricing, AstraZeneca, 
      SE-431 83, Molndal, Sweden. Catarina.Sternhufvud@astrazeneca.com.
FAU - Bergenheim, Klas
AU  - Bergenheim K
AD  - Global Medicines Development | Global Payer Evidence and Pricing, AstraZeneca, 
      SE-431 83, Molndal, Sweden.
FAU - Sorstadius, Elisabeth
AU  - Sorstadius E
AD  - Global Medicines Development | Global Payer Evidence and Pricing, AstraZeneca, 
      SE-431 83, Molndal, Sweden.
FAU - Willis, Michael
AU  - Willis M
AD  - The Swedish Institute for Health Economics, IHE, Lund, Sweden.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Review
PT  - Systematic Review
PL  - New Zealand
TA  - Pharmacoeconomics
JT  - PharmacoEconomics
JID - 9212404
RN  - 0 (Hypoglycemic Agents)
MH  - Computer Simulation
MH  - Cost-Benefit Analysis
MH  - Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/*drug therapy/economics
MH  - Humans
MH  - Hypoglycemic Agents/*administration & dosage/economics
MH  - Markov Chains
MH  - *Models, Economic
EDAT- 2016/01/23 06:00
MHDA- 2017/09/05 06:00
CRDT- 2016/01/22 06:00
PHST- 2016/01/22 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2016/01/23 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2017/09/05 06:00 [medline]
AID - 10.1007/s40273-015-0374-8 [pii]
AID - 10.1007/s40273-015-0374-8 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 Jun;34(6):569-85. doi: 10.1007/s40273-015-0374-8.