Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25124747›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2014

Evaluating disease-modifying agents: a simulation framework for Alzheimer's disease.

Shien Guo, Denis Getsios, Nikhil Revankar, Peng Xu, Gwilym Thompson, Joel Bobula, Loretto Lacey, Maren Gaudig

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Shien GuoEvidera, 430 Bedford Street, Suite 300, Lexington Office Park, Lexington, MA, 02420, USA, shien.guo@evidera.com.
Denis Getsios
Nikhil Revankar
Peng Xu
Gwilym Thompson
Joel Bobula
Loretto Lacey
Maren Gaudig
Ithaka Harbors · USEVRAZ (United Kingdom) · GBJanssen (Belgium) · BEJanssen (Ireland) · IEJanssen (United Kingdom) · GBPfizer (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConsiderable advances have been made in modeling Alzheimer's disease (AD), with a move towards individual-level rather than cohort models and simulations that consider multiple dimensions when evaluating disease severity. However, the possibility that disease-modifying agents (DMAs) may emerge requires an update of existing modeling frameworks.

objectivesThe aim of this study was to develop a simulation allowing for economic evaluation of DMAs in AD.

methodsThe model was developed based on a previously published, well-validated, discrete event simulation which measures disease severity on the basis of cognition, behaviour, and function, and captures the interrelated changes in these measures for individuals. The updated model adds one more domain, patient dependence, in addition to cognition, behaviour, and function to better characterize disease severity. Furthermore, the model was modified to have greater flexibility in assessing the impact of various important assumptions, such as the long-term effectiveness of DMAs and their impact on survival, on model outcomes. A validation analysis was performed to examine how well the model predicted change in disease severity among patients not receiving DMA treatment by comparing model results to those observed in two recent phase III clinical trials of bapineuzumab. In addition, various hypothetical scenarios were tested to demonstrate the improved features of the model.

resultsValidation results show that the model closely predicts the mean changes in disease severity over 18 months. Results from different hypothetical scenarios show that the model allows for credible assessment of those major uncertainties surrounding the long-term effectiveness of DMAs, including the potential impact of improved survival with DMA treatment. They also indicate that varying these assumptions could have a major impact on the value of DMAs.

conclusionsThe updated economic model has good predictive power, but validation against longer-term outcomes is still needed. Our analyses also demonstrate the importance of designing a model with sufficient flexibility such that the model allows for assessment of the impact of key sources of uncertainty on the value of DMAs.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationCost-Benefit AnalysisModels, EconomicAlzheimer DiseaseAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCost of IllnessDisease ProgressionDrug CostsHealth Care CostsHumansAntibodies, Monoclonal, Humanizedbapineuzumab

Identifiers

PMID25124747
OpenAlexW2090247786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.