Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25209407›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2014

Comparison of an effect-model-law-based method versus traditional clinical practice guidelines for optimal treatment decision-making: application to statin treatment in the French population.

Riad Kahoul, François Gueyffier, Emmanuel Amsallem, Margaret Haugh, Ivanny Marchant, François-Henri Boissel, Jean-Pierre Boissel

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 86% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. In Silico Clinical Trials: Is It Possible?Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Riad KahoulNovadiscovery SAS, 60 Avenue Rockefeller, 69008 Lyon, France UMR 5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, CNRS, UCB Lyon 1 - Bât. Grégor Mendel, 43 bd du 11 novembre 1918, 69622 Villeurbanne cedex, France riad.kahoul@novadiscovery.com.
François GueyffierUMR 5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, CNRS, UCB Lyon 1 - Bât. Grégor Mendel, 43 bd du 11 novembre 1918, 69622 Villeurbanne cedex, France Service de Pharmacologie Clinique et Essais Thérapeutiques, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Faculté de Médecine Laennec, Rue Guillaume Paradin, BP8071, 69376 Lyon cedex 08, France.
Emmanuel AmsallemCETAF, 67 Avenue Rochetaillée, 42100 Saint-Etienne, France.
Margaret HaughNovadiscovery SAS, 60 Avenue Rockefeller, 69008 Lyon, France.
Ivanny MarchantDepartamento de Pre-clínicas, Escuela de Medicina, Universidad de Valparaíso, Errázuriz 1834, Valparaíso, Quinta Región de Valparaíso, Chile.
François-Henri BoisselNovadiscovery SAS, 60 Avenue Rockefeller, 69008 Lyon, France.
Jean-Pierre BoisselNovadiscovery SAS, 60 Avenue Rockefeller, 69008 Lyon, France UMR 5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, CNRS, UCB Lyon 1 - Bât. Grégor Mendel, 43 bd du 11 novembre 1918, 69622 Villeurbanne cedex, France Service de Pharmacologie Clinique et Essais Thérapeutiques, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Faculté de Médecine Laennec, Rue Guillaume Paradin, BP8071, 69376 Lyon cedex 08, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRHospices Civils de Lyon · FRRoche (France) · FRUniversity of Valparaíso · CL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Healthcare authorities make difficult decisions about how to spend limited budgets for interventions that guarantee the best cost-efficacy ratio. We propose a novel approach for treatment decision-making, OMES-in French: Objectif thérapeutique Modèle Effet Seuil (in English: Therapeutic Objective-Threshold-Effect Model; TOTEM). This approach takes into consideration results from clinical trials, adjusted for the patients' characteristics in treatment decision-making. We compared OMES with the French clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of dyslipidemia with statin in a computer-generated realistic virtual population, representing the adult French population, in terms of the number of all-cause deaths avoided (number of avoided events: NAEs) under treatment and the individual absolute benefit. The total budget was fixed at the annual amount reimbursed by the French social security for statins. With the CPGs, the NAEs was 292 for an annual cost of 122.54 M€ compared with 443 with OMES. For a fixed NAEs, OMES reduced costs by 50% (60.53 M€ yr(-1)). The results demonstrate that OMES is at least as good as, and even better than, the standard CPGs when applied to the same population. Hence the OMES approach is a practical, useful alternative which will help to overcome the limitations of treatment decision-making based uniquely on CPGs.

Indexed as

DyslipidemiasModels, BiologicalModels, EconometricAdultClinical Trials as TopicComputer SimulationCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleFranceHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMalePractice Guidelines as TopicHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitorscardiovascular diseasesclinical practice guidelineseffect modelpersonalized medicinetreatment decision-making

Identifiers

PMID25209407
PMCPMC4191119
OpenAlexW2143564697

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
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.