PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Zhixiao Wang

Publications and source records attributed to Zhixiao Wang.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Are decisions using cost-utility analyses robust to choice of SF-36/SF-12 preference-based algorithm?

BACKGROUND: Cost utility analysis (CUA) using SF-36/SF-12 data has been facilitated by the development of several preference-based algorithms. The purpose of this study was to illustrate how decision-making could be affected by the choice of preference-based algorithms for the SF-36 and SF-12, and provide some guidance on selecting an appropriate algorithm. METHODS: Two sets of data were used: (1) a clinical trial of adult asthma patients; and (2) a longitudinal study of post-stroke patients. Incremental costs were assumed to be 2000 dollars per year over standard treatment, and QALY gains realized over a 1-year period. Ten published algorithms were identified, denoted by first author: Brazier (SF-36), Brazier (SF-12), Shmueli, Fryback, Lundberg, Nichol, Franks (3 algorithms), and Lawrence. Incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) for each algorithm, stated in dollars per quality-adjusted life year (dollars/QALY), were ranked and compared between datasets. RESULTS: In the asthma patients, estimated ICURs ranged from Lawrence's SF-12 algorithm at 30,769 dollars/QALY (95% CI: 26,316 to 36,697) to Brazier's SF-36 algorithm at 63,492 dollars/QALY (95% CI: 48,780 to 83,333). ICURs for the stroke cohort varied slightly more dramatically. The MEPS-based algorithm by Franks et al. provided the lowest ICUR at 27,972 dollars/QALY (95% CI: 20,942 to 41,667). The Fryback and Shmueli algorithms provided ICURs that were greater than 50,000 dollars/QALY and did not have confidence intervals that overlapped with most of the other algorithms. The ICUR-based ranking of algorithms was strongly correlated between the asthma and stroke datasets (r = 0.60). CONCLUSION: SF-36/SF-12 preference-based algorithms produced a wide range of ICURs that could potentially lead to different reimbursement decisions. Brazier's SF-36 and SF-12 algorithms have a strong methodological and theoretical basis and tended to generate relatively higher ICUR estimates, considerations that support a preference for these algorithms over the alternatives. The "second-generation" algorithms developed from scores mapped from other indirect preference-based measures tended to generate lower ICURs that would promote greater adoption of new technology. There remains a need for an SF-36/SF-12 preference-based algorithm based on the US general population that has strong theoretical and methodological foundations.

Adult↗

[Pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of KC-404 sustained release tablets in healthy volunteers].

OBJECTIVE: To study the pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of KC-404 sustained release tablets and capsules in healthy volunteers. METHODS: The concentration of KC-404 in serum was determined by HPLC method after a single oral dose (20 mg) of tablet or capsule was administered to 19 healthy male volunteers respectively in an open randomized cross-over test. RESULTS: After being processed by 3P87 pharmacokinetics program, the experiment data showed that the pharmacokinetic parameters of the tablets and the capsules were AUC0-->infinity: 740.12 ng.h/ml and 724.04 ng.h/ml; tmax: 5.37 h and 5.11 h; Cmax: 46.98 ng/ml and 46.29 ng/ml; T1/2: 7.4 h and 7.0 h; MRT0-->infinity: 14.78 h and 14.39 h respectively. There were no significant differences in AUC, tmax, Cmax, T1/2 and MRT0-->infinity between these two preparations (P > 0.05). The relative bioavailability of KC-404 sustained release tablets was 102.6%. CONCLUSION: These two preparations are bioequivalent.

Adult↗

Cost-effectiveness analysis and the formulary decision-making process.

BACKGROUND: Faced with high drug expenditures in an environment of cost containment, drug formulary systems, particularly in managed care, have become more dependent on pharmacoeconomic evaluations to assess the value of new products. Within pharmacoeconomics (PE), cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is the most commonly used method. However, current methodological concerns about CEA have limited its practical contribution to the formulary process. Advances in analysis are likely to improve the relevance of CEA over time. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to review CEA, its limitations, and its applications in formulary decision making in order to promote greater utility of CEA for managed care pharmacists. SUMMARY: Enhancements to CEA, such as the development of modeling software, rank-order stability analysis, cost-consequence analysis (CCA), and budget impact analysis are discussed. A combined method of CCA-CEA and standardized guidelines are suggested to improve the impact of CEA in the drug formulary process. CONCLUSION: Along with advances in its methodology and relevant standardized guidelines, CEA will gain increased importance in formulary decision making, helping to assure the goal of cost containment while ensuring quality of care.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗