Dexamethasone can reduce mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients needing oxygen and ventilation by 18% and 36%, respectively. Here, we estimate the potential number of lives saved and life years gained if this treatment were to be rolled out in the UK and globally, as well as the cost-effectiveness of implementing this intervention. Assuming SARS-CoV-2 exposure levels of 5% to 15%, we estimate that, for the UK, approximately 12,000 (4,250 - 27,000) lives could be saved between July and December 2020. Assuming that dexamethasone has a similar effect size in settings where access to oxygen therapies is limited, this would translate into approximately 650,000 (240,000 - 1,400,000) lives saved globally over the same time period. If dexamethasone acts differently in these settings, the impact could be less than half of this value. To estimate the full potential of dexamethasone in the global fight against COVID-19, it is essential to perform clinical research in settings with limited access to oxygen and/or ventilators, for example in low- and middle-income countries.

Personalized medicine, with the aim of safely, effectively, and cost-effectively targeting treatment to a prespecified patient population, has always been a long-time goal within health care. It is often argued that personalizing treatment will inevitably improve clinical outcomes for patients and help achieve more effective use of health care resources. Demand is increasing for demonstrable evidence of clinical and cost-effectiveness to support the use of personalized medicine in health care. This paper begins with an overview of the existing challenges in conducting economic evaluations of genetics- and genomics-targeted technologies, as an example of personalized medicine. Our paper illustrates the complexity of the challenges faced by these technologies by highlighting the variations in the issues faced by diagnostic tests for somatic variations, generally referring to genetic variation in a tumor, and germline variations, generally referring to inherited genetic variation in enzymes involved in drug metabolic pathways. These tests are typically aimed at stratifying patient populations into subgroups on the basis of clinical effectiveness (response) or safety (avoidance of adverse events). The paper summarizes the data requirements for economic evaluations of genetics and genomics-based technologies while outlining that the main challenges relating to data requirements revolve around the availability and quality of existing data. We conclude by discussing current developments aimed to address the challenges of assessing the cost-effectiveness of genetics and genomics-based technologies, which revolve around two central issues that are interlinked: the need to adapt available evaluation methods and identifying who is responsible for generating evidence for these technologies.

This review identified wide ranges in the utility values reported for broad categories of specific chemotherapy-related ADEs. There were difficulties in comparing the values directly as various study-specific definitions were used for these ADEs and most studies did not make the vignettes used in the valuation exercises available. It is recommended that a basic minimum requirement be developed for the transparent reporting of study designs eliciting utility values, incorporating key criteria such as reporting how the vignettes were developed and presenting the vignettes used in the valuation tasks as well as valuing and reporting the utility values of the ADE-free base states. It is also recommended, in the future, for studies valuing the utilities of chemotherapy-related ADEs to define the ADEs according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) definitions for chemotherapy-related ADEs as the use of the same definition across studies would ease the comparison and selection of utility values and make the overall inclusion of adverse events within economic models of chemotherapy agents much more straightforward.

Offering BRCA mutation testing to early-stage breast cancer patients identified using a locally-validated risk-assessment tool may be cost effective compared to RCS in Malaysia.

Background Strong association was documented between human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B*15:02 and carbamazepine-induced severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) in Asians. Beyond Asia, the HLA testing is potentially valuable in many countries with increasingly diverse communities of Asian ancestry, to facilitate an early recognition of patient susceptibility to SCARs. Objective To determine the cost-effectiveness of universal HLA-B*15:02 screening in preventing carbamazepine-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome/ toxic epidermal necrolysis in an ethnically-diverse Malaysian population. Methods A hybrid model of a decision tree and Markov model was developed to evaluate three strategies for treating newly-diagnosed epilepsy among adults - (i) carbamazepine initiation without HLA-B*15:02 screening (current practice); (ii) universal HLA-B*15:02 screening prior to carbamazepine initiation; and (iii) alternative treatment [sodium valproate (VPA)] prescribing without HLA-B*15:02 screening. From a societal perspective, base-case analysis and sensitivity analyses were performed over lifetime time horizon. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. Results In the base-case analysis, both universal HLA-B*15:02 screening and VPA prescribing were dominated by current practice. Compared to current practice, universal HLA-B*15:02 screening resulted in 0.0255 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) loss at an additional cost of USD707, while VPA prescribing resulted in 0.2622 QALYs loss at an additional cost of USD4,127, due to estimated differences in antiepileptic treatment efficacy. Conclusions This study suggests that universal HLA-B*15:02 screening is unlikely to be a cost-effective intervention in Malaysia compared to current practice. However, with the emergence of an ethnically-diverse population in many other countries, this may render HLA-B*15:02 screening a potentially viable intervention when an increasing proportion of the population is at risk and an equally effective yet safer antiepileptic drug is available.