METHODS: Systematic review and NMA of randomised controlled trials were performed, and the most suitable CPA was chosen based on efficacy and the most favourable risk-benefit profile. The economic benefits of CPA alone, 3 yearly SC alone, and a combination of CPA and SC were determined using the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in the Malaysian health-care perspective. Outcomes were reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in 2018 US Dollars ($) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), and life-years (LYs) gained.
RESULTS: According to NMA, the risk-benefit profile favours the use of aspirin at very-low-dose (ASAVLD, ≤ 100 mg/day) for secondary prevention in individuals with previous ACAs. Celecoxib is the most effective CPA but the cardiovascular adverse events are of concern. According to CEA, the combination strategy (ASAVLD with 3-yearly SC) was cost-saving and dominates its competitors as the best buy option. The probability of being cost-effective for ASAVLD alone, 3-yearly SC alone, and combination strategy were 22%, 26%, and 53%, respectively. Extending the SC interval to five years in combination strategy was more cost-effective when compared to 3-yearly SC alone (ICER of $484/LY gain and $1875/QALY). However, extending to ten years in combination strategy was not cost-effective.
CONCLUSION: ASAVLD combined with 3-yearly SC in individuals with ACAs may be a cost-effective strategy for CRC prevention. An extension of SC intervals to five years can be considered in resource-limited countries.
METHODS: The algorithm was developed using data from 345 TDT patients. Spearman's rank correlation was used to evaluate the conceptual overlap between the instruments. Model specifications were chosen using a stepwise regression. Both direct and response mapping methods were attempted. Six mapping estimation methods ordinary least squares (OLS), a log-transformed response using OLS, generalized linear model (GLM), two-part model (TPM), Tobit and multinomial logistic regression (MLOGIT) were tested to determine the root mean squared error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE). Other criterion used were accuracy of the predicted utility score, proportions of absolute differences that was less than 0.03 and intraclass correlation coefficient. An in-sample, leave-one-out cross validation was conducted to test the generalizability of each model.
RESULTS: The best performing model was specified with three out of the four PedsQL GCS scales-the physical, emotional and social functioning score. The best performing estimation method for direct mapping was a GLM with a RMSE of 0.1273 and MAE of 0.1016, while the best estimation method for response mapping was the MLOGIT with a RMSE of 0.1597 and MAE of 0.0826.
CONCLUSION: The mapping algorithm developed using the GLM would facilitate the calculation of utility scores to inform economic evaluations for TDT patients when EQ-5D data is not available. However, caution should be exercised when using this algorithm in patients who have poor quality of life.
DESIGN: Two-arm cluster-randomized controlled effectiveness trial across 19 sites with follow-up at 4-week, 3-month, and 6-month.
SETTING: Stop smoking services operating in public hospitals in Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred and two smokers [mean ± standard deviation (SD), age 45.6 (13.4) years; 97.4% male] attending stop smoking services in hospital settings in Malaysia: 330 in 10 hospitals in the intervention condition and 172 in nine hospitals in the control condition.
INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The intervention consisted of training stop-smoking practitioners to deliver support and follow-up according to the NCSCT Standard Treatment Programme. The comparator was usual care (brief support and follow-up).
MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was continuous tobacco smoking abstinence up to 6 months in smokers who received smoking cessation treatment, verified by expired-air carbon monoxide (CO) concentration. Secondary outcomes were continuous CO-verified tobacco smoking abstinence up to 4 weeks and 3 months.
RESULTS: Follow-up rates at 4 weeks, 3 months and 6 months were 80.0, 70.6 and 53.3%, respectively, in the intervention group and 48.8, 30.8 and 23.3%, respectively, in the control group. At 6-month follow-up, 93 participants in the intervention group and 19 participants in the control group were abstinent from smoking, representing 28.2 versus 11.0% in an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis assuming that participants with missing data had resumed smoking, and 52.8 versus 47.5% in a follow-up-only (FUO) analysis. Unadjusted odds ratios (accounting for clustering) were 5.04, (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.22-20.77, P = 0.025) and 1.70, (95% CI = 0.25-11.53, P = 0.589) in the ITT and FUO analyses, respectively. Abstinence rates at 4 week and 3 month follow-ups were significantly higher in the intervention versus control group in the ITT but not the FUO analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: On an intention-to-treat analysis with missing-equals-smoking imputation, training Malaysian stop smoking service providers in the UK National Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training standard treatment programme appeared to increase 6 month continuous abstinence rates in smokers seeking help with stopping compared with usual care. However, the effect may have been due to increasing follow-up rates.