Cost-utility analysis conducted alongside randomized controlled trials: Are economic end points considered in sample size calculations and does it matter?

Clinical Trials

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 43-53

  Hollingworth, William ^a   McKell Redwood, Denise ^a   Hampson, Lisa ^b   Metcalfe, Chris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; MAGGOT THERAPY; MOLECULAR RECOGNITION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SURVIVAL RATE;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84872836639     PISSN: 17407745     EISSN: 17407753     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1740774512465358     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Ramsey S, Willke R, Briggs A, et al. Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: The ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report. Value Health. 2005 ; 8 (5). 521-33
2. Petrou S, Gray A. Economic evaluation alongside randomised controlled trials: Design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. BMJ. 2011 ; 342: d1548
3. Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Drummond M, McCabe C. Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making?. Health Econ. 2006 ; 15 (7). 677-87
4. Briggs AH, O'Brien BJ, Blackhouse G. Thinking outside the box: Recent advances in the analysis and presentation of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness studies. Annu Rev Public Health. 2002 ; 23: 377-401
5. Briggs AH, Gray AM. Power and sample size calculations for stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making. 1998 ; 18: S81-92
6. Gardiner JC, Huebner M, Jetton J, Bradley CJ. Power and sample assessments for tests of hypotheses on cost-effectiveness ratios. Health Econ. 2000 ; 9 (3). 227-34
7. O'Hagan A, Stevens JW. Bayesian assessment of sample size for clinical trials of cost-effectiveness. Med Decis Making. 2001 ; 21 (3). 219-30
8. Willan A, Kowgier M. Determining optimal sample sizes for multi-stage randomized clinical trials using value of information methods. Clin Trials. 2008 ; 5 (4). 289-300
9. Gafni A, Walter SD, Birch S, Sendi P. An opportunity cost approach to sample size calculation in cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ. 2008 ; 17 (1). 99-107
10. Torgerson DJ, Ryan M, Ratcliffe J. Economics in sample size determination for clinical trials. QJM. 1995 ; 88 (7). 517-21
11. O'Sullivan AK, Thompson D, Drummond MF. Collection of health-economic data alongside clinical trials: Is there a future for piggyback evaluations?. Value Health. 2005 ; 8 (1). 67-79
12. White IR, Thompson SG. Choice of test for comparing two groups, with particular application to skewed outcomes. Stat Med. 2003 ; 22 (8). 1205-15
13. Noble SM, Hollingworth W, Tilling K. Missing data in trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis: the current state of play. Health Econ. 2010 2010 ;:
14. Fenwick E, Marshall DA, Blackhouse G, et al. Assessing the impact of censoring of costs and effects on health-care decision-making: An example using the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study. Value Health. 2008 ; 11 (3). 365-75
15. Wiebe S, Guyatt G, Weaver B, Matijevic S, Sidwell C. Comparative responsiveness of generic and specific quality-of-life instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003 ; 56 (1). 52-60
16. Eurich DT, Johnson JA, Reid KJ, Spertus JA. Assessing responsiveness of generic and specific health related quality of life measures in heart failure. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 ; 4: 89
17. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Prices and purchasing power parities, 2011. Available at: www.oecd.org (accessed 14 April 2011).
18. McCarron CE, Pullenayegum EM, Marshall DA, Goeree R, Tarride JE. Handling uncertainty in economic evaluations of patient level data: A review of the use of Bayesian methods to inform health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 ; 25 (4). 546-54
19. Thompson SG, Barber JA. How should cost data in pragmatic randomised trials be analysed?. BMJ. 2000 ; 320 (7243). 1197-200
20. Hayes RJ, Moulton LH Cluster Randomised Trials. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC ; 2009 :
21. Campbell MK, Fayers PM, Grimshaw JM. Determinants of the intracluster correlation coefficient in cluster randomized trials: The case of implementation research. Clin Trials. 2005 ; 2 (2). 99-107
22. Soares MO, Iglesias CP, Bland JM, et al. Cost effectiveness analysis of larval therapy for leg ulcers. BMJ. 2009 ; 338: b825
23. Calvert MJ, Freemantle N, Yao G, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cardiac resynchronization therapy: Results from the CARE-HF trial. Eur Heart J. 2005 ; 26 (24). 2681-88
24. Delaney BC, Qume M, Moayyedi P, et al. Helicobacter pylori test and treat versus proton pump inhibitor in initial management of dyspepsia in primary care: Multicentre randomised controlled trial (MRC-CUBE trial). BMJ. 2008 ; 336 (7645). 651-54
25. Kendrick T, Peveler R, Longworth L, et al. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and lofepramine: Randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2006 ; 188: 337-45
26. Shenfine J, McNamee P, Steen N, Bond J, Griffin SM. A pragmatic randomised controlled trial of the cost-effectiveness of palliative therapies for patients with inoperable oesophageal cancer. Health Technol Assess. 2005 ; 9 (5). 1-121
27. Ramsey SD, Berry K, Etzioni R, et al. Cost effectiveness of lung-volume-reduction surgery for patients with severe emphysema. N Engl J Med. 2003 ; 348 (21). 2092-102
28. Sach TH, Foss AJ, Gregson RM, et al. Falls and health status in elderly women following first eye cataract surgery: An economic evaluation conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007 ; 91 (12). 1675-79
29. Sculpher M, Manca A, Abbott J, et al. Cost effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with standard hysterectomy: Results from a randomised trial. BMJ. 2004 ; 328 (7432). 134
30. Garry R, Fountain J, Mason S, et al. The eVALuate study: Two parallel randomised trials, one comparing laparoscopic with abdominal hysterectomy, the other comparing laparoscopic with vaginal hysterectomy. BMJ. 2004 ; 328 (7432). 129
31. Noyes K, Dick AW, Holloway RG. Pramipexole v. levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson's disease: A randomized clinical-economic trial. Med Decis Making. 2004 ; 24 (5). 472-85
32. Patel A, Knapp M, Perez I, Evans A, Kalra L. Alternative strategies for stroke care: Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses from a prospective randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 2004 ; 35 (1). 196-203
33. Rivero-Arias O, Campbell H, Gray A, et al. Surgical stabilisation of the spine compared with a programme of intensive rehabilitation for the management of patients with chronic low back pain: Cost utility analysis based on a randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2005 1239 ; 330 ( 7502 ):
34. Torrance G, Walker V, Grossman R, et al. Economic evaluation of ciprofloxacin compared with usual antibacterial care for the treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis in patients followed for 1 year. Pharmacoeconomics. 1999 ; 16 (5 Pt 1). 499-520
35. Wonderling D, Vickers AJ, Grieve R, McCarney R. Cost effectiveness analysis of a randomised trial of acupuncture for chronic headache in primary care. BMJ. 2004 ; 328 (7442). 747
36. United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: Cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. BMJ. 2004 1381 ; 329 ( 7479 ):
37. Barton GR, Sach TH, Jenkinson C, et al. Lifestyle interventions for knee pain in overweight and obese adults aged > or = 45: Economic evaluation of randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2009 ; 339: b2273
38. Ratcliffe J, Thomas KJ, MacPherson H, Brazier J. A randomised controlled trial of acupuncture care for persistent low back pain: Cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ. 2006 ; 333 (7569). 626
39. Rivero-Arias O, Gray A, Frost H, Lamb SE, Stewart-Brown S. Cost-utility analysis of physiotherapy treatment compared with physiotherapy advice in low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 ; 31 (12). 1381-87
40. Williams NH, Edwards RT, Linck P, et al. Cost-utility analysis of osteopathy in primary care: Results from a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Fam Pract. 2004 ; 21 (6). 643-50
41. Barber JA, Thompson SG. Analysis and interpretation of cost data in randomised controlled trials: Review of published studies. BMJ. 1998 ; 317 (7167). 1195-200
42. Backhouse ME. Use of randomised controlled trials for producing cost-effectiveness evidence: Potential impact of design choices on sample size and study duration. Pharmacoeconomics. 2002 ; 20 (15). 1061-77
43. Glick HA. Sample size and power for cost-effectiveness analysis (part 1). Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 ; 29 (3). 189-98
44. Kind P. Size matters: EQ-5D in transition. Med Care. 2007 ; 45 (9). 809-11
45. Longworth L, Bryan S. An empirical comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D in liver transplant patients. Health Econ. 2003 ; 12 (12). 1061-67
46. EuroQol Group. EQ-5D-5L, 2009. Available at: http://www.webcitation.org/ 5xiiCO2Xg (18 April 2011).
47. Hollinghurst S, Sharp D, Ballard K, et al. Randomised controlled trial of Alexander technique lessons, exercise, and massage (ATEAM) for chronic and recurrent back pain: Economic evaluation. BMJ. 2008 ; 337: a2656
48. Claxton K. The irrelevance of inference: A decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ. 1999 ; 18 (3). 341-64
49. Griffin SC, Claxton KP, Palmer SJ, Sculpher MJ. Dangerous omissions: The consequences of ignoring decision uncertainty. Health Econ. 2011 ; 20 (2). 212-24
50. Willan AR, Pinto EM. The value of information and optimal clinical trial design. Stat Med. 2005 ; 24 (12). 1791-806
51. Colbourn TE, Asseburg C, Bojke L, et al. Preventive strategies for group B streptococcal and other bacterial infections in early infancy: Cost effectiveness and value of information analyses. BMJ. 2007 ; 335 (7621). 655
52. Willan AR. Optimal sample size determinations from an industry perspective based on the expected value of information. Clin Trials. 2008 ; 5 (6). 587-94