Explore the vast range of titles available.

Approximately 35% of people with depression do not respond to 2 courses of antidepressant medications of adequate dosage, and treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is still a major clinical concern with a great impact on patients, their families, society and the health system. The present meta-analysis evaluates antidepressant efficacy of unilateral and bilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in patients with unipolar TRD. We searched for randomized controlled trials that compared rTMS with sham treatment and were published by Apr. 3, 2017. The primary outcome was improvement in depression scores measured using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The secondary outcomes were remission and response rates. Two independent review authors screened the studies and extracted the data. Twenty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of the depression scores showed a weighted mean difference (WMD) of 3.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.85–4.88) between unilateral rTMS and sham treatment. Stratified data showed that the effect was relatively higher when rTMS was used as an add-on to antidepressant medications (WMD 3.64, 95% CI 1.52–5.76) than when it was used as a stand-alone treatment (WMD 2.47, 95% CI 0.90–4.05). The WMD between bilateral rTMS and sham was 2.67 (95% CI 0.83–4.51), and all studies that contributed to this outcome used rTMS while participants were taking antidepressant medications. The pooled remission and response rates for unilateral rTMS versus sham treatment were 16.0% and 25.1% for rTMS and 5.7% and 11.0% for sham treatment, respectively. The pooled remission and response rates for bilateral rTMS versus sham treatment were 16.6% and 25.4% for rTMS and 2.0% and 6.8% for sham treatment, respectively. This study suggests that rTMS has moderate antidepressant effects and appears to be promising in the short-term treatment of patients with unipolar TRD.

The seroprevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among Canadians is estimated at 0.3% to 0.9%. Of those with chronic HCV infection, 10% to 20% will experience advanced liver disease by 30 years of infection. Targeted screening seems a plausible strategy. We aimed to estimate the health and economic effects of various screening and treatment strategies for chronic HCV infection in Canada. We used a state-transition model to examine the cost-effectiveness of 4 screening strategies: no screening; screen and treat with pegylated interferon plus ribavarin; screen and treat with pegylated interferon and ribavarin–based direct-acting antiviral agents; and screen and treat with interferon-free direct-acting antivirals. We considered Canadian residents in 2 age groups: 25–64 and 45–64 years of age. We obtained model data from the literature. We predicted deaths related to chronic HCV infection, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. We found that screening and treating would prevent at least 9 HCV-related deaths per 10 000 persons screened over the lifetime of the cohort. Screening was associated with QALY increases of 0.0032 to 0.0095 and cost increases of $124 to $338 per person, which translated to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $34 359 to $44 034 per QALY gained, relative to no screening, depending on age group screened and antiviral therapy received. A selective one-time HCV screening program for people 25–64 or 45–64 years of age in Canada would likely be cost-effective. Identification of silent cases of chronic HCV infection and the offer of treatment when appropriate could extend the lives of Canadians at reasonable cost.

Background This study aims to critically review available cost-effectiveness models for rotavirus vaccination, compare their designs using a standardized approach and compare similarities and differences in cost-effectiveness outcomes using a uniform set of input parameters. Methods We identified various models used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination. From these, results using a standardized dataset for four regions in the world could be obtained for three specific applications. Results Despite differences in the approaches and individual constituting elements including costs, QALYs Quality Adjusted Life Years and deaths, cost-effectiveness results of the models were quite similar. Differences between the models on the individual components of cost-effectiveness could be related to some specific features of the respective models. Sensitivity analysis revealed that cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination is highly sensitive to vaccine prices, rotavirus-associated mortality and discount rates, in particular that for QALYs. Conclusions The comparative approach followed here is helpful in understanding the various models selected and will thus benefit (low-income) countries in designing their own cost-effectiveness analyses using new or adapted existing models. Potential users of the models in low and middle income countries need to consider results from existing studies and reviews. There will be a need for contextualization including the use of country specific data inputs. However, given that the underlying biological and epidemiological mechanisms do not change between countries, users are likely to be able to adapt existing model designs rather than developing completely new approaches. Also, the communication established between the individual researchers involved in the three models is helpful in the further development of these individual models. Therefore, we recommend that this kind of comparative study be extended to other areas of vaccination and even other infectious disease interventions.

Most patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) have no symptoms, and many are unaware of the infection. However, HBV can reactivate with immunosuppression; chemotherapy causes reactivation in 22 % of hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients. HBV reactivation can be fatal. HBV reactivation can be prevented, provided that HBV is recognized prior to chemotherapy. The objective of this study is to estimate the health and economic effects of HBV screening strategies in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. We developed a state-transition microsimulation model to examine the cost-effectiveness of three HBV screening strategies: (1) “No screening”; (2) “Screen-and-Treat to prevent reactivation” (screen-all) with either lamivudine/tenofovir (LAM/TDF) or entecavir (ETV); and (3) “Screen-and-Treat high-risk only” (screen-HR) and treat with either LAM/TDF or ETV. Model data were obtained from the published literature. We used a payer’s perspective, a lifetime horizon, and a 5 % discount rate for the analysis. “Screen-all” would prevent at least 38 severe reactivations per 100,000 persons screened over the lifetime of the cohort. “Screen-all” was associated with an increase of 0.0034–0.0035 QALYs and an additional cost of C$164–C$266 per person, which translated into an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of C$47,808/QALY–C$76,527/QALY gained compared with “No screening” depending on the antiviral therapy received. “Screen-all” was the most cost-effective strategy, while “Screen-HR” was inferior in all scenarios tested. HBV screening before adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer patients would prevent a significant number of reactivations, would likely be moderately cost-effective, and may extend the lives of breast cancer patients.

Economic evaluations of hepatitis A vaccination are important to assist national and international policy makers in different jurisdictions on making effective decisions. Up to now, a comprehensive review of the potential health and economic benefits on hepatitis A vaccination in middle-income countries (MICs) has not been performed yet. In this study, we reviewed the literature on the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis A vaccination in MICs. Most of the studies confirmed that hepatitis A vaccination was cost effective or even cost saving under certain conditions. We found that vaccine price, medical costs, incidence and discount rate were the most influential parameters on the sensitivity analyses. Vaccine price has been shown as a barrier for MICs in implementing universal vaccination of hepatitis A. Given their relatively limited financial resources, implementation of single-dose vaccination could be considered. Despite our findings, we argue that further economic evaluations in MICs are still required in the near future.

► Rotavirus vaccination using RotaTeq® is cost-effective in Vietnam. ► GAVI's support for rotavirus vaccination in developing countries is crucial. ► Mass universal rotavirus vaccination and no vaccination were compared. Rotavirus is the most common cause of severe diarrhoea worldwide. Vietnam is situated in the region of high rotavirus infection incidence and eligible for financial support to introduce rotavirus vaccines into the Expanded Program of Immunization (EPI) from the GAVI. This study was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness of rotavirus immunization in Vietnam, explicitly the use of Rotateq® and to assess the affordability of implementing universal rotavirus immunization based on GAVI-subsidized vaccine price in the context of Vietnamese healthcare system for the next 5 years. An age-structured cohort model was developed for the 2009 birth cohort in Vietnam. Two strategies were compared: one being the current situation without vaccination, and the other being mass universal rotavirus vaccination. The time horizon of the model was 5 years with time cycles of 1 month for children less than 1 year of age and annual analysis thereafter. Outcomes included mild, moderate, severe cases and death. Multiple outcomes per rotavirus infection are possible in the model. Monte Carlo simulations were used to examine the acceptability and affordability of the rotavirus vaccination. All costs were expressed in 2009 US$. Rotavirus vaccination would not completely protect young children against rotavirus infection due to partial nature of vaccine immunity, however, would effectively reduce severe cases of rotavirus by roughly 55% during the first 5 years of life. Under GAVI-subsidized vaccine price (US$ 0.3/dose), the vaccine cost would amount to US$ 5.5 million per annum for 3-dose of the Rotateq® vaccine. In the base-case, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) was US$ 665 from the health system perspective, much lower than per-capita GDP of ∼US$ 1150 in 2009. Affordability results showed that at the GAVI-subsidized vaccine price, rotavirus vaccination could be affordable for Vietnamese health system. Rotavirus vaccination in Vietnam would be a cost-effective health intervention. Vaccination only becomes affordable if the country receives GAVI's financial support due to the current high market vaccine price. Given the high mortality rate of under-five-year children, the results showed that rotavirus immunization is the “best hope” for prevention of rotavirus-related diarrhoeal disease in Vietnam. In the next five years, Vietnam is definitely in debt to financial support from international organizations in implementing rotavirus immunization. It is recommended that new rotavirus vaccine candidates be developed at cheaper price to speed up the introduction of rotavirus immunization in the developing world in general.

Background The concept of early health technology assessment, discussed well over a decade, has now been collaboratively implemented by industry, government, and academia to select and expedite the development of emerging technologies that may address the needs of patients and health systems. Early economic evaluation is essential to assess the value of emerging technologies, but empirical data to inform the current practice of early evaluation is limited. We propose a systematic review of early economic evaluation studies in order to better understand the current practice. Methods/design This protocol describes a systematic review of economic evaluation studies of regulated health technologies in which the evaluation is conducted prior to regulatory approval and when the technology effectiveness is not well established. Included studies must report an economic evaluation, defined as the comparative analysis of alternatives with respect to their associated costs and health consequences, and must evaluate some regulated health technology such as pharmaceuticals, biologics, high-risk medical devices, or biomarkers. We will conduct the literature search on multiple databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination Databases, and EconLit. Additional citations will be identified via scanning reference lists and author searching. We suspect that many early economic evaluation studies are unpublished, especially those conducted for internal use only. Additionally, we use a chain-referral sampling approach to identify authors of unpublished studies who work in technology discovery and development, starting out with our contact lists and authors who published relevant studies. Citation screening and full-text review will be conducted by pairs of reviewers. Abstracted data will include those related to the decision context and decision problem of the early evaluation, evaluation methods (e.g., data sources, methods, and assumptions used to identify, measure, and value the likely effectiveness and the costs and consequences of the new technology, handling of uncertainty), and whether the study results adequately address the main study question or objective. Data will be summarized overall and stratified by publication status. Discussion This study is timely to inform early economic evaluation practice, given the international trend in early health technology assessment initiatives.

Background To update a cost-effectiveness analysis of rotavirus vaccination in the Netherlands previously published in 2011. Methods The rotavirus burden of disease and the indirect protection of older children and young adults (herd protection) were updated. Results When updated data was used, routine infant rotavirus vaccination in the Netherlands would potentially become an even more cost-effective strategy than previously estimated with the incremental cost per QALY at only €3,000-4,000. Break-even total vaccination costs were indicated at €92–122, depending on the applied threshold. Conclusions We concluded that the results on potentially favourable cost-effectiveness in the previous study remained valid, however, the new data suggested that previous results might represent an underestimation of the economic attractiveness of rotavirus vaccination.

Diarrhea is a leading cause of mortality for children under 5 years of age, and rotavirus is identified as the main cause of severe diarrhea worldwide. Since 2006, two rotavirus vaccines, Rotarix and Rotateq, have been available in the market. These vaccines have proved to have high efficacy in developed countries. Clinical trials are being undertaken in Asia and Africa, and early clinical results found that the vaccine significantly reduces severe diarrhea episodes due to rotavirus (48.3% for Asia and 30.2% for Africa). The WHO recommended that rotavirus immunization be included in all national immunization programs. Based on WHO's recommendations, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization decided to provide financial support for rotavirus immunization in the developing world. In this article, we attempted to ascertain the cost-effectiveness of universal rotavirus immunization in developing countries. After an extensive literature search, we identified and evaluated 15 cost-effectiveness studies conducted in the developing world. The results from these studies showed that rotavirus immunization is a cost-effective strategy and one of the best interventions to prevent rotavirus-related diarrheal disease. However, rotavirus vaccines are expensive and the vaccine price appears to be the most challenging and crucial factor for decision-makers regarding whether to introduce this vaccine into developing countries' immunization schedules. All the studies concluded that rotavirus immunization is cost effective but may not be affordable for the developing world at present. Developing countries will definitely rely on financial support from international organizations to introduce rotavirus vaccination. It is recommended that more research on cost-effective rotavirus immunization with updated data be conducted and new rotavirus vaccine candidates be developed at a cheaper price to speed up the introduction of rotavirus immunization to the developing world.

The BCG vaccine was introduced in 1921 and remains the only licensed vaccine for the prevention of TB worldwide. Despite its extensive use, the BCG vaccine lacks the ability to fully control the TB-endemic and -pandemic situations. The BCG vaccine is most effective in preventing pediatric TB, in particular, miliary TB and tuberculous meningitis. However, it has a limited effect in preventing pulmonary TB, which occurs more frequently in adults. BCG vaccination has now been implemented in more than 157 countries worldwide. For various countries, the benefits of vaccination are only limited and potentially not cost effective. The International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases had set the criteria for discontinuation of BCG vaccination in 1994. This decision, however, was not based on economic considerations. Many developed countries have met the criteria set by the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease and stopped universal BCG vaccination. For developing countries, the BCG vaccine is still an effective intervention in protecting young children from TB infection. A lot of effort has been spent on R&D of new TB vaccines, the first of which are expected to be available within 5-7 years from now. Novel TB vaccines are expected to be better and more effective than the current BCG vaccine and should provide a viable strategy in controlling TB morbidity and mortality. In this review, the aim is to explore economic evaluations that have been carried out for vaccination against TB worldwide. In addition to epidemiological evidence, economic evidence can play a crucial role in supporting the governments of countries in making proper public health decisions on BCG vaccination policies, in particular, to implement, continue, or discontinue.