Systematic Literature Review and Critical Appraisal of Health Economic Models Used in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis: Potential for Improvements.

Pierre Johansen, Daniel Howard, Ryan Bishop, Søren Ilsøe Moreno, Kristine Buchholtz
Author Information
  1. Pierre Johansen: Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark. pirj@novonordisk.com. ORCID
  2. Daniel Howard: DRG Abacus, Manchester, UK.
  3. Ryan Bishop: DRG Abacus, Bicester, UK.
  4. Søren Ilsøe Moreno: Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
  5. Kristine Buchholtz: Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is a severe, typically progressive form of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The global prevalence of NASH is increasing, driven partly by the global increase in obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), such that NASH is now a leading cause of cirrhosis. There is currently an unmet clinical need for efficacious and cost-effective treatments for NASH; no pharmacologic agents have an approved indication for NASH.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to summarise and critically appraise published health economic models of NASH, to evaluate their quality and suitability for use in the assessment of novel treatments for NASH, and to identify knowledge gaps, challenges and opportunities for future modelling.
METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and EconLit databases to identify published health economic analyses in patients with NAFLD or NASH. Supplementary hand searches of grey literature were also performed. Articles published up to November 2019 were included in the review. Quality assessment of identified studies was also performed.
RESULTS: A total of 19 articles comprising 16 unique models including either NAFLD as a whole or NASH alone were included in the review. Structurally, most models had a state-transition component; in terms of health states, two different approaches to early disease states were used, modelling either progression through fibrosis stages or NAFLD/NASH-specific health states. Conditions that frequently co-exist with NASH, such as obesity, T2DM and cardiovascular disease were not captured in models identified here. Late-stage complications such as cirrhosis, decompensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma were consistently included, but input data (e.g. costs, utilities and transition probabilities) for late-stage complications were frequently sourced from other liver disease areas. The quality of included studies was heterogenous, and only a small proportion of studies reported internal and external validation processes.
CONCLUSION: The health economic models identified in this review are associated with limitations primarily driven by a lack of NASH-specific data. Identified models also largely overlooked the intricate association between NASH and other conditions, including obesity and T2DM, and did not capture the increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with NASH. High-quality, transparent, validated health economic models of NASH will be required to evaluate the cost effectiveness of treatments currently in development, particularly compounds that may target other non-hepatic outcomes.

References

  1. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019 Nov;37(11):1305-1312 [PMID: 31347104]
  2. Value Health. 2018 Jun;21(6):724-731 [PMID: 29909878]
  3. Hepatology. 2012 Dec;56(6):2172-9 [PMID: 22707355]
  4. J Hepatol. 2018 Feb;68(2):238-250 [PMID: 29154966]
  5. Health Technol Assess. 2015 Jan;19(9):1-409, v-vi [PMID: 25633908]
  6. Clin Liver Dis. 2018 Feb;22(1):133-140 [PMID: 29128053]
  7. Value Health. 2012 Sep-Oct;15(6):804-11 [PMID: 22999129]
  8. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016 Mar;111(3):446 [PMID: 27018125]
  9. Frontline Gastroenterol. 2014 Jul;5(3):211-218 [PMID: 25018867]
  10. Hepatology. 2017 Apr;65(4):1156-1164 [PMID: 27880977]
  11. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Mar;47(5):631-644 [PMID: 29271504]
  12. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Apr;13(4):643-54.e1-9; quiz e39-40 [PMID: 24768810]
  13. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2017 Nov;11 Suppl 1:S209-S216 [PMID: 28017631]
  14. BMC Med. 2017 Feb 28;15(1):45 [PMID: 28241825]
  15. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Nov;7(11):1224-9, 1229.e1-2 [PMID: 19559819]
  16. Can J Gastroenterol. 2013 Mar;27(3):149-58 [PMID: 23516679]
  17. BMJ Open. 2016 Sep 20;6(9):e010507 [PMID: 27650757]
  18. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Feb 1;2(2):e190047 [PMID: 30794300]
  19. J Hepatol. 2019 Oct;71(4):823-833 [PMID: 31300231]
  20. Value Health. 2012 Sep-Oct;15(6):796-803 [PMID: 22999128]
  21. Hepatology. 2016 Jul;64(1):73-84 [PMID: 26707365]
  22. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2015 Feb;41(3):301-9 [PMID: 25429853]
  23. J Hepatol. 2016 Sep;65(3):589-600 [PMID: 27212244]
  24. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Apr;96(17):e6585 [PMID: 28445256]
  25. Gastroenterology. 2015 Aug;149(2):367-78.e5; quiz e14-5 [PMID: 25865049]
  26. Dig Dis Sci. 2016 Jul;61(7):2108-17 [PMID: 26825843]
  27. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015 Sep;90(9):1233-46 [PMID: 26219858]
  28. Hepatology. 2018 Jul;68(1):361-371 [PMID: 29222911]
  29. Gastroenterology. 2015 Aug;149(2):389-97.e10 [PMID: 25935633]
  30. Hepatology. 2018 Jan;67(1):328-357 [PMID: 28714183]
  31. Hepatology. 2009 Jun;49(6):1904-12 [PMID: 19434741]
  32. Gut. 2017 Jun;66(6):1138-1153 [PMID: 28314735]
  33. BMJ Open. 2017 Jul 5;7(6):e015659 [PMID: 28679676]
  34. Eur Radiol. 2015 Nov;25(11):3282-94 [PMID: 25994191]
  35. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 Apr;34(4):349-61 [PMID: 26660529]
  36. Value Health. 2012 Sep-Oct;15(6):843-50 [PMID: 22999134]
  37. Hepatology. 2016 Nov;64(5):1577-1586 [PMID: 27543837]
  38. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2019 May;49(9):1205-1213 [PMID: 30854694]
  39. Pharmacoecon Open. 2020 Sep;4(3):403-418 [PMID: 31428938]
  40. Health Technol Assess. 2004 Sep;8(36):iii-iv, ix-xi, 1-158 [PMID: 15361314]
  41. BMC Gastroenterol. 2019 Jul 11;19(1):122 [PMID: 31296161]
  42. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2008 Feb;10(1):73-80 [PMID: 18417046]
  43. Gastroenterology. 2016 Jun;150(8):1769-77 [PMID: 26928243]
  44. Liver Int. 2019 Nov;39(11):2052-2060 [PMID: 31332938]
  45. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019 Feb;37(2):267-278 [PMID: 30430467]
  46. Gastroenterology. 2013 Sep;145(3):574-82.e1 [PMID: 23727264]
  47. Hepatology. 2011 Jul;54(1):344-53 [PMID: 21520200]
  48. Hepatology. 2008 Aug;48(2):418-31 [PMID: 18563841]
  49. PLoS One. 2016 Feb 23;11(2):e0147237 [PMID: 26905872]
  50. Lancet. 2015 Mar 14;385(9972):956-65 [PMID: 25468160]
  51. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2015 Nov 01;15(19):1-58 [PMID: 26664666]

MeSH Term

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Fatty Liver
Humans
Models, Economic
Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
Treatment Outcome

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0NASHmodelshealthdiseaseeconomicreviewincludedNAFLDobesityT2DMcirrhosistreatmentspublishedperformedalsoidentifiedstudiesstatesliverglobaldrivencurrentlyevaluatequalityassessmentidentifymodellingliteratureincludingeitherfrequentlycardiovascularcomplicationsdataassociatedBACKGROUND:Non-alcoholicsteatohepatitisseveretypicallyprogressiveformnon-alcoholicfattyprevalenceincreasingpartlyincreasetype2diabetesmellitusnowleadingcauseunmetclinicalneedefficaciouscost-effectivepharmacologicagentsapprovedindicationOBJECTIVE:objectivesummarisecriticallyappraisesuitabilityusenovelknowledgegapschallengesopportunitiesfutureMETHODS:systematicusingMEDLINEEmbaseCochraneLibraryEconLitdatabasesanalysespatientsSupplementaryhandsearchesgreyArticlesNovember2019QualityRESULTS:total19articlescomprising16uniquewholealoneStructurallystate-transitioncomponenttermstwodifferentapproachesearlyusedprogressionfibrosisstagesNAFLD/NASH-specificConditionsco-existcapturedLate-stagedecompensatedhepatocellularcarcinomaconsistentlyinputegcostsutilitiestransitionprobabilitieslate-stagesourcedareasheterogenoussmallproportionreportedinternalexternalvalidationprocessesCONCLUSION:limitationsprimarilylackNASH-specificIdentifiedlargelyoverlookedintricateassociationconditionscaptureincreasedriskeventsHigh-qualitytransparentvalidatedwillrequiredcosteffectivenessdevelopmentparticularlycompoundsmaytargetnon-hepaticoutcomesSystematicLiteratureReviewCriticalAppraisalHealthEconomicModelsUsedCost-EffectivenessAnalysesNon-AlcoholicSteatohepatitis:PotentialImprovements

Similar Articles

Cited By