Oncology Modeling for Fun and Profit! Key Steps for Busy Analysts in Health Technology Assessment
In evaluating new oncology medicines, two common modeling approaches are state transition (e.g., Markov and semi-Markov) and partitioned survival. Partitioned survival models have become more prominent in oncology health technology assessment processes in recent years. Our experience in conducting and evaluating models for economic evaluation has highlighted many important and practical pitfalls. As there is little guidance available on best practices for those who wish to conduct them, we provide guidance in the form of ‘Key steps for busy analysts,’ who may have very little time and require highly favorable results. Our guidance highlights the continued need for rigorous conduct and transparent reporting of economic evaluations regardless of the modeling approach taken, and the importance of modeling that better reflects reality, which includes better approaches to considering plausibility, estimating relative treatment effects, dealing with post-progression effects, and appropriate characterization of the uncertainty from modeling itself.
JB and JSH provided the original inspiration and key content for this work. DH led the writing of the manuscript including the drafting of the outline and manuscript and is the guarantor of this work. All authors approved the outline of the work, helped to write and revise the manuscript, and read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
No funding was received for the preparation of this work. All authors provided in-kind contributions.
Conflict of interest
All authors have signed conflict of interest forms and read information regarding disclosure of potential conflict of interest at http://www.springer.com/us/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/before-you-start and declare the following: accepting consulting fees from medical device and pharmaceutical companies who may have interest in the work (DH, NH); no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work (JB, KKWC, JSH). All authors declare a significant interest in improving the state of the art of oncology health technology assessment.
- 3.Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.Google Scholar
- 11.Woods B, Sideriis E, Palmer S, Latimer N, Soares M. Nice DSU technical support document 19: partitioned survival analysis for decision modelling in health care. A critical review. Decision Support Unit, ScHARR, University of Sheffield; 2017. http://scharr.dept.shef.ac.uk/nicedsu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/06/Partitioned-Survival-Analysis-final-report.pdf. Accessed 3 Nov 2017.
- 16.Woods B. Partitioned survival analysis: a critical review of the approach and application to decision modelling in health care. Smdm; 2016. Available from: http://smdm.confex.com/smdm/16BEC/webprogram/Paper9832.html. Accessed 9 Aug 2016.
- 17.Masucci L, Beca J, Sabharwal M, Hoch JS. Methodological issues in economic evaluations submitted to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR). Pharmacoeconomics Open. 2017;1–9.Google Scholar
- 18.Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS): explanation and elaboration. A report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2013;16:231–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 22.NICE. Ofatumumab in combination with chlorambucil or bendamustine for untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: the company’s submission. Guidance and guidelines. Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta344/chapter/3-The-companys-submission#companys-economic-model. Accessed 4 Nov 2016.
- 23.NICE. Enzalutamide for metastatic hormone-relapsed prostate cancer previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen: the manufacturer’s submission. Guidance and guidelines. Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/TA316/chapter/3-The-manufacturers-submission#cost-effectiveness-evidence. Accessed 4 Nov 2016.
- 25.Latimer NR. Survival analysis for economic evaluations alongside clinical trials: extrapolation with patient-level data. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2013. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK395885/. Accessed 29 Mar 2017.
- 27.Hoaglin DC, Hawkins N, Jansen JP, Scott DA, Itzler R, Cappelleri JC, et al. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices. Part 2. Value Health. 2011;14:429–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.CADTH. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada. 4th ed. Available from: http://www.cadth.ca/guidelines-economic-evaluation-health-technologies-canada-4th-edition. Accessed 25 May 2017.
- 36.Williams C, Lewsey JD, Mackay DF, Briggs AH. Estimation of survival probabilities for use in cost-effectiveness analyses: a comparison of a multi-state modeling survival analysis approach with partitioned survival and Markov decision-analytic modeling. Med Decis Making. 2017;37(4):427–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 39.Jackson CH, Sharples LD, Thompson SG. Survival models in health economic evaluations: balancing fit and parsimony to improve prediction. Int J Biostat. 2010;6(1) (Article 34).Google Scholar
- 40.Goeree R, Villeneuve J, Goeree J, Penrod JR, Orsini L, Tahami Monfared AA. Economic evaluation of nivolumab for the treatment of second-line advanced squamous NSCLC in Canada: a comparison of modeling approaches to estimate and extrapolate survival outcomes. J Med Econ. 2016;19:630–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 42.Beca J. Method matters: partitioned survival models characterize and extrapolate risks differently from Markov models. Smdm; 2016. Available from: http://smdm.confex.com/smdm/2016bc/webprogram/Paper10350.html. Accessed 27 Apr 2017.