Considerations and preliminary proposals for defining a reference case for economic evaluations in ankylosing spondylitis.

Since healthcare resources are scarce, choices have to be made on how they will be allocated. The use of economic evaluations using cost-effectiveness analyses has increased rapidly as policymakers have realized their value in maximizing the population's benefits (in terms of length of life and health status) within a given budget. Following efforts by OMERACT to create reference case definitions for the conduct of economic evaluation in rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, and osteoarthritis, we review various methodological areas and research decisions that could benefit from a consensus between researchers, clinicians, and drug developers in terms of an ankylosing spondylitis (AS) reference case. Ten methodological issues are presented that will be important for future development of evaluations. Tentative proposals to define the issues in a reference case for AS are made, along with recommendations for further research.

[1]  M. Drummond,et al.  Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making? , 2006, Health economics.

[2]  M. Taşkaynatan,et al.  Effect of ankylosing spondylitis on health-related quality of life and different aspects of social life in young patients , 2006, Clinical Rheumatology.

[3]  H. Dagfinrud,et al.  The Cochrane review of physiotherapy interventions for ankylosing spondylitis. , 2005, The Journal of rheumatology.

[4]  K O Kong,et al.  The unmet need for anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy in ankylosing spondylitis. , 2005, Rheumatology.

[5]  H. Zeidler,et al.  TNF-blocking therapy in rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis: Why is cost-effectiveness a major issue? , 2005, Current rheumatology reports.

[6]  S. van der Linden,et al.  Markov model into the cost-utility over five years of etanercept and infliximab compared with usual care in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis , 2005, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[7]  Mark Sculpher,et al.  Common Methodological Flaws in Economic Evaluations , 2005, Medical care.

[8]  Karl Claxton,et al.  Establishing the cost-effectiveness of new pharmaceuticals under conditions of uncertainty--when is there sufficient evidence? , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[9]  Paul Wordsworth,et al.  BSR guidelines for prescribing TNF-alpha blockers in adults with ankylosing spondylitis. Report of a working party of the British Society for Rheumatology. , 2005, Rheumatology.

[10]  M. Dougados,et al.  Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs reduce radiographic progression in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized clinical trial. , 2005, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[11]  H. Dagfinrud,et al.  Health status of patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a comparison with the general population , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[12]  J. Braun,et al.  Impact of anti-tumour necrosis factor α treatment on admissions to hospital and days of sick leave in patients with ankylosing spondylitis , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[13]  N. Tandon,et al.  PAR11 A COST EFFICACY ANALYSIS ON ANTI-TNF THERAPY IN ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS , 2004 .

[14]  M Sculpher,et al.  Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. , 2004, Health technology assessment.

[15]  J. Braun,et al.  Biological therapies in the spondyloarthritides--the current state. , 2004, Rheumatology.

[16]  A. Calin,et al.  The burden of ankylosing spondylitis and the cost-effectiveness of treatment with infliximab (Remicade). , 2004, Rheumatology.

[17]  S. van der Linden,et al.  Which patients with ankylosing spondylitis should be treated with tumour necrosis factor inhibiting therapy? A survey among Dutch rheumatologists , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[18]  David J Spiegelhalter,et al.  Bayesian approaches to multiple sources of evidence and uncertainty in complex cost‐effectiveness modelling , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[19]  A. Tosteson,et al.  Towards a reference case for economic evaluation of osteoporosis treatments. , 2003, The Journal of rheumatology. Supplement.

[20]  M. Dougados,et al.  Initiation of biological agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: results of a Delphi study by the ASAS Group , 2003, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[21]  M. Dougados,et al.  Costs of ankylosing spondylitis in three European countries: the patient’s perspective , 2003, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[22]  M. Dougados,et al.  Direct costs of ankylosing spondylitis and its determinants: an analysis among three European countries , 2003, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[23]  J. Braun,et al.  Six-month results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of etanercept treatment in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis. , 2003, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[24]  M. Drummond,et al.  Economic evaluation of programs or interventions in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: defining a consensus-based reference case. , 2003, The Journal of rheumatology.

[25]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[26]  A. Boonen,et al.  Ankylosing spondylitis: an overview , 2002, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[27]  T. Pincus,et al.  Mortality, course of disease and prognosis of patients with ankylosing spondylitis. , 2002, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[28]  S. van der Linden,et al.  Cost effectiveness of combined spa-exercise therapy in ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized controlled trial. , 2002, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[29]  M. Dougados,et al.  Work status and productivity costs due to ankylosing spondylitis: comparison of three European countries , 2002, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[30]  M. Drummond,et al.  Progress towards an OMERACT-ILAR guideline for economic evaluations in rheumatology , 2002, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[31]  S. van der Linden,et al.  Employment, work disability, and work days lost in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a cross sectional study of Dutch patients , 2001, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[32]  H. Zeidler,et al.  Development of a matrix of cost domains in economic evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis. , 2001, The Journal of rheumatology.

[33]  J. Braun,et al.  Disability and handicap in rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis--results from the German rheumatological database. German Collaborative Arthritis Centers. , 2000, The Journal of rheumatology.

[34]  M. Dougados,et al.  Defining disease activity in ankylosing spondylitis: is a combination of variables (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index) an appropriate instrument? , 1999, Rheumatology.

[35]  M. Ward,et al.  Health-related quality of life in ankylosing spondylitis: a survey of 175 patients. , 1999, Arthritis care and research : the official journal of the Arthritis Health Professions Association.

[36]  M. Mcgrath.  Cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. , 1998 .

[37]  Gordon B. Hazen,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis and the Expected Value of Perfect Information , 1998, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[38]  A. Calin,et al.  A new approach to defining disease status in ankylosing spondylitis: the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index. , 1994, The Journal of rheumatology.

[39]  J. Gran,et al.  The epidemiology of ankylosing spondylitis. , 1993, Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.

[40]  M. Dougados,et al.  The SF-6D differentiates less in the lower ranges of the patient's utility when compared with the EQ-5D but has a better reliability and sensitivity to change , 2005 .

[41]  M. Sculpher,et al.  Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra. , 2005, Health economics.

[42]  M. Ward.  Functional disability predicts total costs in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. , 2002, Arthritis and rheumatism.