Over the past two decades, diabetes pharmacopoeia has flourished, with new drugs that, on top of their glucose-lowering efficacy, have been shown to protect the heart and the kidney. Despite these new opportunities, metformin retains a pivotal role among glucose-lowering agents. As one of the few available insulin sensitizers, metformin is an effective, safe, and overall well-tolerated drug backed by over 60 years of clinical experience, including evidence for potential benefits beyond glucose reduction across different ages, sexes, genetic backgrounds, geographical areas, and stages of disease. Although there is some discussion of whether metformin offers the most effective front-line option in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D), it remains a natural companion to all other glucose-lowering agents. Furthermore, metformin comes at a very low cost and, as such, it has extremely high cost-effectiveness, particularly given the serious economic burden associated with diabetes complications. This financial advantage is particularly relevant in resource-constrained healthcare systems, where the affordability of metformin may be instrumental in implementing an effective treatment in an evergrowing number of individuals. We present here compelling real-world evidence in support of the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of metformin across different patient populations, highlighting areas where more population-based studies are needed to further incorporate and consolidate its use in the pharmacological management of T2D.

There is uncertainty in the relative benefits and harms of hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) when added to cytoreductive surgery (CRS) +/- systemic chemotherapy or systemic chemotherapy alone in people with peritoneal metastases from colorectal, gastric, or ovarian cancers.
We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the medical literature until April 14, 2022 and applied methods used for high-quality systematic reviews.
We included a total of eight RCTs (seven RCTs included in quantitative analysis as one RCT did not provide data in an analyzable format). All comparisons other than ovarian cancer contained only one trial. For gastric cancer, there is high uncertainty about the effect of CRS + HIPEC + systemic chemotherapy. For stage III or greater epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing interval cytoreductive surgery, CRS + HIPEC + systemic chemotherapy probably decreases all-cause mortality compared to CRS + systemic chemotherapy. For colorectal cancer, CRS + HIPEC + systemic chemotherapy probably results in little to no difference in all-cause mortality and may increase the serious adverse events proportions compared to CRS +/- systemic chemotherapy, but probably decreases all-cause mortality compared to fluorouracil-based systemic chemotherapy alone.
The role of CRS + HIPEC in gastric peritoneal metastases is uncertain. CRS + HIPEC should be standard of care in women with stage III or greater epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing interval CRS. CRS + systemic chemotherapy should be standard of care for people with colorectal peritoneal metastases, with HIPEC given only as part of a RCT focusing on subgroups and regimes.
CRD42019130504.

UNASSIGNED: Coronavirus has burdened considerable expenditures on the different health systems. Vaccination programs, the critical solution against pandemic diseases, are known as safe and effective interventions to prevent and control epidemics. We aimed to perform a systematic review to provide economic evidence of the value of different types of vaccines available to combat the Covid-19 to all health policymakers worldwide.
UNASSIGNED: Electronic searches conducted on Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and other economic evaluation databases. Related and published articles searched up to March 2022 by using keywords such as \"Vaccination,\" \"Covid-19,\" \"Cost-benefit,\" \"Cost-utility,\" \"Cost-effectiveness,\" \"Economic Assessment,\" and \"Economic evaluation.\" Followed by choosing the most suitable articles according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, data captured and the results extracted. The quality assessment of the articles performed by the checklist of CHEERS 2022. Finally, 13 articles included in the review.
UNASSIGNED: All messenger RNA vaccines were dominant with approximately 70% coverage against no vaccination in the primary vaccination program except in one study that looked at booster effects. From a payer\'s perspective, a dollar invested in a vaccine would be less profitable than from a societal perspective. Therefore, primary mass vaccination can be considered a cost-effective intervention in primary vaccination to save more lives and produce more positive externalities. However, the cost-benefit ratio for all vaccines increases when statistical lifetime value and global economic and educational disadvantages are considered.
UNASSIGNED: The COVID-19 primary vaccination programs in regional outbreaks, from a long-term perspective, will demonstrate substantial cost-effectiveness. It is suggested that due to the positive externalities of vaccination, primary mass vaccination, with the help of COVAX-19TM, could be considered a reliable way to combat viral epidemics compared to the loss of individual lives and economic and educational disturbances around the world.

This paper reviews the effectiveness of four types of front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPLs) in influencing calorie purchases. The four FoPL types are poised for unified implementation across European countries. Further, this study extends its analysis to evaluate the impacts of the voluntary adoption of these FoPLs within 27 EU nations. Nutri-Score displays higher potential for yielding positive health and economic outcomes, compared with other FoPLs. Across EU countries, Nutri-Score is projected to avert nearly two million cases of non-communicable diseases, in total, between 2023 and 2050. Keyhole demonstrates effects of a similar magnitude but with no statistical significance. Nutri-Repere shows smaller impacts, while Nutri-Couleurs has non-significant effects. Nutri-Score is projected to significantly lower annual healthcare spending by 0.05%, whereas the other labels have negligible impacts. By reducing cases of disease, FoPLs have the potential to improve employment and work productivity. Nutri-Score surpasses the other labels with an estimated annual gain of 10.6 full-time equivalent workers per 100,000 individuals of working age across EU countries. In all, mandatory implementation of any of the four labels would lead to greater effects than those obtained with a voluntary implementation, providing evidence to inform legislation proposal for an EU-wide nutrition labelling system.

OBJECTIVE: Depressive disorders in adolescents are common and impairing. Evidence-based treatments are available; however, at a cost. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we anticipate increased demand for treatment services for adolescents with depression. We also anticipate that economic resources will be strained. Identifying cost-effective strategies to optimally treat depression in adolescents is imperative. This protocol for a scoping review aims to describe the literature with respect to economic evaluations of treatments for depression in adolescents.
METHODS: We will conduct a scoping review using established methods and reporting guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, PsyclNFO, Econlit, and the International HTA Database will be searched from inception to June 13, 2023, with an update closer to time of manuscript submission, while the NHS Economic Evaluation Database archives will be searched from inception to December 2014. Publications that contain economic evaluations, in the context of a clinical trial or a model-based study, testing a treatment of depression in adolescents will be selected for inclusion. Extracted data items will include: economic evaluation perspectives, health outcome variables and costs used in economic evaluations, types of analyses performed, as well as quality of reporting and methodology.
RESULTS: A narrative synthesis with summary tables will be used to describe our findings.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings will help identify gaps in the literature with respect to economic analyses for the treatment of depression such that these gaps can be filled with future research. Policy-makers, funders and administrators may also use our findings to inform their decisions around provision of various treatments for depression in adolescents.
BACKGROUND: osf.io/5fteb (note that information on this link will be updated upon acceptance for publication based on reviewer comments).