IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0267448.html

Development of a conceptual model for evaluating new non-curative and curative therapies for sickle cell disease

Author

Listed:
  • Kate M Johnson
  • Boshen Jiao
  • M A Bender
  • Scott D Ramsey
  • Beth Devine
  • Anirban Basu

Abstract

Background: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a clinically heterogeneous disease with many acute and chronic complications driven by ongoing vaso-occlusion and hemolysis. It causes a disproportionate burden on Black and Hispanic communities. Our objective was to follow the SMDM/ISPOR Task Force recommendations for good practices and create a conceptual model of the progression of SCD under current clinical practice to inform cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) of promising curative therapies in the pipeline over a lifetime horizon. Methods: We used consultations with experts, providers, and patients to identify acute events and chronic conditions in the conceptual model. We compared our model structure to previous CEA models of interventions for SCD, assessed the prevalence of the identified disease attributes in Medicaid and Medicare claims databases, and identified relevant outcomes following the 2nd Panel in CEA. We determined an appropriate modeling technique and relevant data sources for parameterizing the model. Results: The conceptual model structure included four dimensions of disease: chronic pain, acute events, chronic conditions, and treatment complications, spanning 26 disease attributes with significant impacts on health-related quality of life and resource. We modeled chronic pain separately to reflect its importance to patients and interaction with all other disease attributes. We identified additional data sources for health state utilities and non-medical costs and benefits of SCD. We will use a microsimulation model with age- and sex-specific transitions between health states predicted by patient demographic characteristics and disease history. Conclusion: Developing the model structure through an explicit process of model conceptualization can increase the transparency and accuracy of results. We will populate the conceptual model with the data sources described and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of curative therapies.

Suggested Citation

  • Kate M Johnson & Boshen Jiao & M A Bender & Scott D Ramsey & Beth Devine & Anirban Basu, 2022. "Development of a conceptual model for evaluating new non-curative and curative therapies for sickle cell disease," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0267448
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0267448
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0267448&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0267448?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Brisson & W. J. Edmunds, 2006. "Impact of Model, Methodological, and Parameter Uncertainty in the Economic Analysis of Vaccination Programs," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(5), pages 434-446, September.
    2. Maarten J. IJzerman & Hendrik Koffijberg & Elisabeth Fenwick & Murray Krahn, 2017. "Emerging Use of Early Health Technology Assessment in Medical Product Development: A Scoping Review of the Literature," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(7), pages 727-740, July.
    3. Maggie Tabberer & Sebastian Gonzalez-McQuire & Hana Muellerova & Andrew H. Briggs & Maureen P. M. H. Rutten-van Mölken & Mike Chambers & David A. Lomas, 2017. "Development of a Conceptual Model of Disease Progression for Use in Economic Modeling of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(4), pages 440-452, May.
    4. Samantha Husbands & Susan Jowett & Pelham Barton & Joanna Coast, 2017. "How Qualitative Methods Can be Used to Inform Model Development," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(6), pages 607-612, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hossein Haji Ali Afzali & Jonathan Karnon & Olga Theou & Justin Beilby & Matteo Cesari & Renuka Visvanathan, 2019. "Structuring a conceptual model for cost-effectiveness analysis of frailty interventions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Wang, Yi & Rattanavipapong, Waranya & Teerawattananon, Yot, 2021. "Using health technology assessment to set priority, inform target product profiles, and design clinical study for health innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    3. Droste, Nils & Brownell, Huntley & D'Amato, Dalia & Ekström, Hanna & Fridén, Alexia & Harrinkari, Teemu & Iliev, Bogomil & May, Wilhelm & Nebasifu, Ayonghe & Thomsen, Marianne, 2025. "Evaluating transformative policies in complex land-use systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    4. Samir S Soneji & Hai-Yen Sung & Brian A Primack & John P Pierce & James D Sargent, 2018. "Quantifying population-level health benefits and harms of e-cigarette use in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-19, March.
    5. Soltanzadeh, Javad & Sahebjamnia, Navid & Khosroshahi, Elnaz Mesma & Bouguerra, Abderaouf, 2024. "Commercializing Covid-19 diagnostic technologies: A review of challenges, success factors, and insights from the profiting from innovation framework," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    6. Blankart, Carl Rudolf & Dams, Florian & Penton, Hannah & Kaló, Zoltán & Zemplényi, Antal & Shatrov, Kosta & Iskandar, Rowan & Federici, Carlo, 2021. "Regulatory and HTA early dialogues in medical devices," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(10), pages 1322-1329.
    7. Rowan Iskandar & Carlo Federici & Cassandra Berns & Carl Rudolf Blankart, 2022. "An approach to quantify parameter uncertainty in early assessment of novel health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 116-134, September.
    8. Carlo Lazzaro, 2025. "Letter to the Editor: Lazzaro responds to Kennedy et al," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 26(1), pages 141-142, February.
    9. Pinelli, Maria & Lettieri, Emanuele & Bernhard, Fabian, 2025. "Navigating the technological landscape in hospitals: A taxonomy of scanning and assessment integration types anchored in innovation orientation and specialization of care," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    10. Julie A. Campbell & Douglas Ezzy & Amanda Neil & Martin Hensher & Alison Venn & Melanie J. Sharman & Andrew J. Palmer, 2018. "A qualitative investigation of the health economic impacts of bariatric surgery for obesity and implications for improved practice in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(8), pages 1300-1318, August.
    11. Petra Marešová & Lukáš Peter & Jan Honegr & Lukáš Režný & Marek Penhaker & Martin Augustýnek & Hana Mohelská & Blanka Klímová & Kamil Kuča, 2020. "Complexity Stage Model of the Medical Device Development Based on Economic Evaluation—MedDee," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-27, February.
    12. Anna K. Lugnér & Sido D. Mylius & Jacco Wallinga, 2010. "Dynamic versus static models in cost‐effectiveness analyses of anti‐viral drug therapy to mitigate an influenza pandemic," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(5), pages 518-531, May.
    13. Elahe Khorasani & Majid Davari & Abbas Kebriaeezadeh & Farshad Fatemi & Ali Akbari Sari & Vida Varahrami, 2022. "A comprehensive review of official discount rates in guidelines of health economic evaluations over time: the trends and roots," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(9), pages 1577-1590, December.
    14. Laurent Coudeville & Annelies Van Rie & Denis Getsios & J Jaime Caro & Pascal Crépey & Van Hung Nguyen, 2009. "Adult Vaccination Strategies for the Control of Pertussis in the United States: An Economic Evaluation Including the Dynamic Population Effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(7), pages 1-9, July.
    15. Carlo Federici & Leandro Pecchia, 2022. "Exploring the misalignment on the value of further research between payers and manufacturers. A case study on a novel total artificial heart," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 98-115, September.
    16. Greg Plosker, 2011. "Rotavirus Vaccine RIX4414 (Rotarix™)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 29(11), pages 989-1009, November.
    17. Marina Antoniou & Céu Mateus & Bruce Hollingsworth & Andrew Titman, 2024. "A Systematic Review of Methodologies Used in Models of the Treatment of Diabetes Mellitus," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 19-40, January.
    18. Alessandra Castelluccia & Pierpaolo Mincarone & Maria Rosaria Tumolo & Saverio Sabina & Riccardo Colella & Antonella Bodini & Francesco Tramacere & Maurizio Portaluri & Carlo Giacomo Leo, 2022. "Economic Evaluations of Magnetic Resonance Image-Guided Radiotherapy (MRIgRT): A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-21, August.
    19. Stefania Manetti & Emanuele Lettieri & Melody Zhifang Ni, 2023. "Development and validation of Medical Device Key Evidence Tool (‘MeDKET’): An evidence-based framework to explain success in selected European and US companies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-13, July.
    20. Euan Barlow & Alec Morton & Saudamini Dabak & Sven Engels & Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai & Yot Teerawattananon & Kalipso Chalkidou, 2022. "What is the value of explicit priority setting for health interventions? A simulation study," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 460-483, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0267448. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.