<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Dakin HA</submitter><funding>NIHR</funding><funding>NIHR Biomedical Research Centre</funding><funding>NIHR Senior Research Fellowship</funding><funding>National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)</funding><funding>Pfizer Ltd</funding><pagination>1340-1348</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC7537832</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>23(10)</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Objectives&lt;/h4>We applied principles for conducting economic evaluations of factorial trials to a trial-based economic evaluation of a cluster-randomized 2 × 2 × 2 factorial trial. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of atorvastatin, omega-3 fish oil, and an action-planning leaflet, alone and in combination, from a UK National Health Service perspective.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>The Atorvastatin in Factorial With Omega EE90 Risk Reduction in Diabetes (AFORRD) Trial randomized 800 patients with type 2 diabetes to atorvastatin, omega-3, or their respective placebos and randomized general practices to receive a leaflet-based action-planning intervention designed to improve compliance or standard care. The trial was conducted at 59 UK general practices. Sixteen-week outcomes for each trial participant were extrapolated for 70 years using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model v2.01. We analyzed the trial as a 2 × 2 factorial trial (ignoring interactions between action-planning leaflet and medication), as a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial trial (considering all interactions), and ignoring all interactions.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>We observed several qualitative interactions for costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) that changed treatment rankings. However, different approaches to analyzing the factorial design did not change the conclusions. There was a ≥99% chance that atorvastatin is cost-effective and omega-3 is not, at a £20 000/QALY threshold.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Atorvastatin monotherapy was the most cost-effective combination of the 3 trial interventions at a £20 000/QALY threshold. Omega-3 fish oil was not cost-effective, while there was insufficient evidence to draw firm conclusions about action planning. Recently-developed methods for analyzing factorial trials and combining parameter and sampling uncertainty were extended to estimate cost-effectiveness acceptability curves within a 2x2x2 factorial design with model-based extrapolation.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research</journal><pubmed_title>Economic Evaluation of Factorial Trials: Cost-Utility Analysis of the Atorvastatin in Factorial With Omega EE90 Risk Reduction in Diabetes 2 × 2 × 2 Factorial Trial of Atorvastatin, Omega-3 Fish Oil, and Action Planning.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC7537832</pmcid><funding_grant_id>NF-SI-0617-10029</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>NF-SI-0515-10096</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Farmer A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Holman RR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gray AM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dakin HA</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Economic Evaluation of Factorial Trials: Cost-Utility Analysis of the Atorvastatin in Factorial With Omega EE90 Risk Reduction in Diabetes 2 × 2 × 2 Factorial Trial of Atorvastatin, Omega-3 Fish Oil, and Action Planning.</name><description>&lt;h4>Objectives&lt;/h4>We applied principles for conducting economic evaluations of factorial trials to a trial-based economic evaluation of a cluster-randomized 2 × 2 × 2 factorial trial. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of atorvastatin, omega-3 fish oil, and an action-planning leaflet, alone and in combination, from a UK National Health Service perspective.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>The Atorvastatin in Factorial With Omega EE90 Risk Reduction in Diabetes (AFORRD) Trial randomized 800 patients with type 2 diabetes to atorvastatin, omega-3, or their respective placebos and randomized general practices to receive a leaflet-based action-planning intervention designed to improve compliance or standard care. The trial was conducted at 59 UK general practices. Sixteen-week outcomes for each trial participant were extrapolated for 70 years using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model v2.01. We analyzed the trial as a 2 × 2 factorial trial (ignoring interactions between action-planning leaflet and medication), as a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial trial (considering all interactions), and ignoring all interactions.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>We observed several qualitative interactions for costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) that changed treatment rankings. However, different approaches to analyzing the factorial design did not change the conclusions. There was a ≥99% chance that atorvastatin is cost-effective and omega-3 is not, at a £20 000/QALY threshold.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>Atorvastatin monotherapy was the most cost-effective combination of the 3 trial interventions at a £20 000/QALY threshold. Omega-3 fish oil was not cost-effective, while there was insufficient evidence to draw firm conclusions about action planning. Recently-developed methods for analyzing factorial trials and combining parameter and sampling uncertainty were extended to estimate cost-effectiveness acceptability curves within a 2x2x2 factorial design with model-based extrapolation.</description><dates><release>2020-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2020 Oct</publication><modification>2024-02-15T15:06:24.459Z</modification><creation>2020-10-29T09:08:31Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC7537832</accession><cross_references><pubmed>33032778</pubmed><doi>10.1016/j.jval.2020.05.018</doi></cross_references></HashMap>