Matching the model with the evidence: comparing discrete event simulation and state-transition modeling for time-to-event predictions in a cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer patients

Abstract

BackgroundIndividual patient data, e.g. from clinical trials, often need to be extrapolated or combined with additional evidence when assessing long-term impact in cost-effectiveness modeling studies. Different modeling methods can be used to represent the complex dynamics of clinical practice; the choice of which may impact cost-effectiveness outcomes. We compare the use of a previously designed cohort discrete-time state-transition model (DT-STM) with a discrete event simulation (DES) model. MethodsThe original DT-STM was replicated and a DES model developed using AnyLogic software. Models were populated using individual patient data of a phase III study in metastatic colorectal cancer patients, and compared based on their evidence structure, internal validity, and cost-effectiveness outcomes. The DT-STM used time-dependent transition probabilities, whereas the DES model was populated using parametric distributions. ResultsThe estimated time-dependent transition probabilities for the DT-STM were irregular and more sensitive to single events due to the required small cycle length and limited number of event observations, whereas parametric distributions resulted in smooth time-to-event curves for the DES model. Although the DT-STM and DES model both yielded similar time-to-event curves, the DES model represented the trial data more accurately in terms of mean health-state durations. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was €172,443 and €168,383 per Quality Adjusted Life Year gained for the DT-STM and DES model, respectively. ConclusionDES represents time-to-event data from clinical trials more naturally and accurately than DT-STM when few events are observed per time cycle. As a consequence, DES is expected to yield a more accurate ICER.