scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Rivaroxaban versus Acenocoumarol in the Prevention of Stroke in Patients with Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation in Spain

10.36469/9823 ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Rubio-Terrés ◽  
Ruth Graefenhain de Codes ◽  
Darío Rubio-Rodríguez ◽  
Thomas Evers ◽  
Santiago Grau Cerrato
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
National Health System ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Healthcare Setting ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Pivotal Phase ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Life Years

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate, from the Spanish National Health System perspective, the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban (20 mg/day) versus use of acenocoumarol (5 mg/day) for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) at moderate to high risk for stroke. Methods: A Markov model was designed and populated with local cost estimates, efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in stroke prevention in NVAF compared with adjusted-dose warfarin clinical results from the pivotal phase III ROCKET AF trial and utility values obtained from the literature. Warfarin and acenocoumarol were assumed to have therapeutic equivalence. Results: Rivaroxaban treatment was associated with fewer ischemic strokes and systemic embolisms (0.289 vs. 0.300 events), intracranial bleeds (0.051 vs. 0.067), and myocardial infarctions (0.088 vs. 0.102) per patient compared with acenocoumarol. Over a lifetime time horizon, rivaroxaban led to a reduction of 0.041 life-threatening events per patient, and increases of 0.103 life-years and 0.155 quality-adjusted lifeyears (QALYs) versus acenocoumarol treatment. This resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €7045 per QALY and €10 602 per life-year gained. Sensitivity analysis indicated that these results were robust and that rivaroxaban is cost-effective compared with acenocoumarol in 89.4% of cases should a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30 000/QALY gained be considered. Conclusions: The present analysis suggests that rivaroxaban is a cost-effective alternative to acenocoumarol therapy for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolisms in patients with NVAF in the Spanish healthcare setting.

scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation: exploring the Italian National Health System perspective and different patient risk groups

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Lorenzoni ◽  
G. Barbieri ◽  
F. Saia ◽  
F. Meucci ◽  
G. L. Martinelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
National Health System ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Italian National Health ◽  
Valve Implantation ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Objectives To assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in Italy, considering patient groups with different surgical risk. Methods A Markov model with a 1-month cycle length, comprising eight different health states, defined by the New York Heart Association functional classes (NYHA I–IV), with and without stroke plus death, was used to estimate the CE of TAVI for intermediate-, high-risk and inoperable patients considering surgical aortic valve replacement or medical treatment as comparators according to the patient group. The Italian National Health System perspective and 15-year time horizon were considered. In the base-case analysis, effectiveness data were retrieved from published efficacy data and total direct costs (euros) were estimated from national tariffs. A scenario analysis considering a micro-costing approach to estimate procedural costs was also considered. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was expressed both in terms of costs per life years gained (LYG) and costs per quality adjusted life years (QALY). All outcomes and costs were discounted at 3% per annum. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to assess robustness of results. Results Over a 15-year time horizon, the higher acquisition costs for TAVI were partially offset in all risk groups because of its effectiveness and safety profile. ICERs were €8338/QALY, €11,209/QALY and €10,133/QALY, respectively, for intermediate-, high-risk and inoperable patients. ICER values were slightly higher in the scenario analysis. PSA suggested consistency of results. Conclusions TAVI would be considered cost-effective at frequently cited willingness-to-pay thresholds; further studies could clarify the CE of TAVI in real-life scenarios.

Dose-escalation strategy in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: A change in terms of cost-effectiveness

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522199254
Author(s):  
Jacopo Giuliani ◽  
Francesco Fiorica ◽  
Giovanni Ponturo ◽  
Maurizio Azzurro ◽  
Andrea Ruzzenente ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Lower Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Pivotal Phase ◽  
Randomized Controlled

The analysis was conducted to assess the pharmacological costs of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil in the treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Pivotal phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil in the treatment of refractory mCRC were considered. We have also considered the ReDOS trial, in order to verify if the dose-escalation strategy (practice changing for regorafenib) could influences the results. Differences in OS (expressed in months) between the different arms were calculated and compared with the pharmacological costs (at the Pharmacy of our Hospital and expressed in euros (€)) needed to get one month of OS. Trifluridine/tipiracil resulted the less expensive, with 1167.50 €per month OS-gained. The ReDOS trial further reduce costs with 510.41 €per month OS-gained in favour of regorafenib with the escalation-dose strategy. Both regorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil can be considered economically sustainable treatments for refractory mCRC, apparently with a lower cost of trifluridine/tipiracil. The adoption of a dose-escalation strategy (ReDOS trial) could reverse the situation making regorafenib more cost-effective than trifluridine/tipiracil.

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of genomic profiling in early breast cancer in Colombia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo Rojas ◽  
María Rojas-Reyes ◽  
Diego Rosselli ◽  
Andres F. Cardona
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
National Health System ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Decision Analytic Model ◽  
United States Dollar ◽  
Life Years

Abstract BackgroundThe best strategy to establish indication for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer (EBC) in Colombia is unknown. This study aimed to identify the cost-effectiveness of various strategies to establish the necessity of adjuvant chemotherapy.MethodsThis study used an adapted decision-analytic model to compare cost and outcomes of care that includes Oncotype DX™ (ODX) or Mammaprint™ (MMP) test with routine care without ODX or MMP tests (application of adjuvant chemotherapy for all patients) over a 5-year time horizon, and the from the perspective of the Colombian National Health System (NHS) perspective (payer). Data were obtained from published literature and clinical trial database. The study population was composed of women with EBC, hormone-receptor positive (HR+), Her2-negative, lymph-node negative (LN0), with high-risk clinical criteria for recurrence. The outcome measures were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; 2019 United States Dollar [USD] per quality-adjusted life years [QALY] gained) and net monetary benefit (NMB).ResultsODX increases QALYs by 0.05 and MMP by 0.03 with savings of $2,445 and $570 compared with the standard strategy, respectively. The ICER for ODX was −$41,857 and that for MMP was −$18,253 per QALY; NMB was $2,821 and $771, respectively. Both tests were cost effective under defined threshold. When the two tests were compared, ODX was more cost effective than MMP. Sensitivity analysis revealed that, with a threshold of 1 GDP per capita, ODX will be cost effective in 95.5% of the cases compared with 70.2% of MMP. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that ODX was a consistently superior strategy.ConclusionsGenomic profiling using ODX or MMP tests to define the need of adjuvant chemotherapy treatment in patients with HR + and Her2 − EBC is a cost-effective strategy that allows Colombian NHS saving money.

Cost-effectiveness of mobile health-based integrated care for atrial fibrillation: Model development and data analysis (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xueyan Luo ◽  
Wei Xu ◽  
Quan Yuan ◽  
Han Lai ◽  
Chunji Huang
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Integrated Care ◽  
Mobile Health ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Mhealth Technology

BACKGROUND Mobile health (mhealth) technology is increasingly used in disease management. Using mhealth tools to integrate and streamline care was found to improve atrial fibrillation (AF) patients’ clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to investigate the potential clinical and health economic outcomes of mhealth-based integrated care for AF from the perspective of a public healthcare provider in China. METHODS A Markov model was designed to compare outcomes of mhealth-based care and usual care in a hypothetical cohort of AF patients in China. The time horizon was 30 years with monthly cycles. Model outcomes measured were direct medical cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of base-case results. RESULTS In the base-case analysis, mhealth-based care gained higher QALYs of 0.0818 with an incurred cost of USD1,778. Using USD33,438 per QALY (three times gross domestic product) as the willingness-to-pay threshold, mhealth-based care was cost-effective, with an ICER of USD21,739 per QALY. The one-way sensitivity analysis found compliance to mhealth-based care had the greatest impact on the ICER. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, mhealth-based care was accepted as cost-effective in 80.91% of 10,000 iterations. CONCLUSIONS This study suggested that the use of mhealth technology in streamlining and integrating care for AF patients was cost-effective in China.

Cataract surgery for falls prevention and improving vision: modelling the health gain, health system costs and cost-effectiveness in a high-income country

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 302-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matt Boyd ◽  
Giorgi Kvizhinadze ◽  
Adeline Kho ◽  
Graham Wilson ◽  
Nick Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health System ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Health Gain ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Falls Prevention ◽  
Age Group ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Incident Cases

AimTo estimate the health gain, health system costs and cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery when expedited as a falls prevention strategy (reducing the waiting time for surgery by 12 months) and as a routine procedure.MethodsAn established injurious falls model designed for the New Zealand (NZ) population (aged 65+ years) was adapted. Key parameters relating to cataracts were sourced from the literature and the NZ Ministry of Health. A health system perspective with discounting at 3% was used.ResultsExpedited cataract surgery for 1 year of incident cases was found to generate a total 240 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 161 to 360) at net health system costs of NZ$2.43 million (95% UI 2.02 to 2.82 million) over the remaining lifetimes of the surgery group. This intervention was cost-effective by widely accepted standards with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of NZ$10 600 (US$7540) (95% UI NZ$6030 to NZ$15 700) per QALY gained. The level of cost-effectiveness did not vary greatly by sex, ethnicity and previous fall history, but was higher for the 65–69 age group compared with the oldest age group of 85–89 years (NZ$7000 vs NZ$14 200 per QALY gained). Comparing cataract surgery with no surgery, the ICER was even more favourable at NZ$4380 (95% UI 2410 to 7210) per QALY. Considering only the benefits for vision improvement and excluding the benefits of falls prevention, it was still favourable at NZ$9870 per QALY.ConclusionsExpedited cataract surgery appears very cost-effective. Routine cataract surgery is itself very cost-effective, and its value appears largely driven by the falls prevention benefits.

Is neratinib following trastuzumab in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer cost-effective?

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6625-6625
Author(s):  
Naomi RM Schwartz ◽  
Meghan Rose Flanagan ◽  
Joseph B Babigumira ◽  
Lotte Maria Gertruda Steuten ◽  
Joshua A. Roth
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Recurrence Rates ◽  
Adjuvant Trastuzumab ◽  
Her2 Breast Cancer ◽  
Life Years

6625 Background: Neratinib after adjuvant trastuzumab significantly improves disease-free survival (DFS) in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-postiive (HER2+) breast cancer, but the median absolute DFS gain is only 1.3 months. There has been much controversy in the clinical and lay media as to whether the substantial cost of neratinib is justified by its effects, including a prominent ASCO Post article from Dr. Vogl about a year ago. We performed a cost-utility analysis to formally assess the value of adding neratinib based on Phase III ExteNET trial results. Methods: We developed a Markov state-transition model to assess the value of neratinib in Stage I-III HER2+ breast cancer. Five-year recurrence rates were derived from ExteNet. Mortality and recurrence rates after 5 years were derived from the HERceptin Adjuvant (HERA) trial. Costs were derived from wholesale acquisition costs and peer-reviewed literature. Health state utilities were derived from ExteNET and prior publications. Outcomes included life years (LY), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), direct medical expenditures, and cost per QALY gained. The analysis took a payer perspective over a lifetime horizon and results were discounted at 3% per year. One-way and probabilistic analyses were conducted to evaluate uncertainty. As neratinib conferred more clinical benefit in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) disease, we also assessed value in that specific subgroup. Results: Base case results are presented in Table. At typical U.S. willingness to pay thresholds of $100,000 and $150,000 per QALY gained, neratinib had 16.7% and 27.2%, probabilities of cost-effectiveness, respectively. In the HR+ subgroup, neratinib had a cost of $275,311 per QALY gained (19.9% & 31.2% probability of cost-effectiveness at $100,000 & $150,000 per QALY). Conclusions: In the first independent assessment of the value of neratinib after adjuvant trastuzumab, neratinib is not projected to be cost-effective, even among patients who derived the most clinical benefit. Future analyses should reassess the cost-effectiveness of neratinib treatment as trial data mature. Base case results. [Table: see text]

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of hydrogel spacer in radiotherapy (RT) of prostate cancer (PC).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 43-43
Author(s):  
Rahul Ramesh Khairnar ◽  
Joseph Levy ◽  
Mark Mishra
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Incremental Cost ◽  
Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Credible Interval ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Incremental Effectiveness ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Fee Schedule

43 Background: A hydrogel rectal spacer (HRS) is an FDA-approved medical device used to increase the separation between the rectum and the prostate. A recent phase III trial demonstrated a small reduction in the incidence of RT toxicities associated with use of HRS. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of HRS use in PC patients undergoing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Methods: A multi-state Markov model was constructed to examine the cost-effectiveness of HRS in men with localized PC receiving IMRT in the US (arms: IMRT alone vs. IMRT + HRS). Subgroups included delivery site of IMRT (hospital vs. ambulatory) and baseline sexual function (SF) (general population vs. those with good SF). Based on previous studies, recurrence and survival were assumed equal for both arms. Data on SF, gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities incidence, as well as potential risks associated with HRS implantation were obtained from a recently published clinical trial. Health utilities and costs were derived from the literature and 2018 Physician Fee Schedule. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs were modeled for a 5-year period from receipt of RT. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and value-based threshold analysis were conducted. Costs and utilities were discounted at 3% annually. Results: The per-person 5-year incremental cost for HRS administered in a hospital was $4,008 and the incremental effectiveness was 0.0273 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $146,746 (95% credible interval from PSA $125,638 – $178,049) for PC patients undergoing HRS insertion in a hospital vs. $73,359 ($66,732 – $86,767) for patients undergoing HRS insertion in an ambulatory facility. For men with good SF, the ICER was $55,153 ($46,002 – $76,090) and $26,542 ($17,399 – $46,044) in hospital vs. ambulatory facility. Conclusions: This study is the first to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HRS based on long-term toxicity data. Based on the current Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, HRS is cost-effective in men with good SF at a willingness to pay threshold of $100,000 and it is marginally cost-effective for the entire population depending on the facility where the HRS is inserted.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness of Pazopanib in Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma in the United Kingdom

Sarcoma ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jordan Amdahl ◽  
Stephanie C. Manson ◽  
Robert Isbell ◽  
Ayman Chit ◽  
Jose Diaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Relative Effectiveness ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Other ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Life Years

In the phase III PALETTE trial, pazopanib improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in patients with advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (mSTS) who had received prior chemotherapy. We used a multistate model to estimate expected PFS, overall survival (OS), lifetime STS treatment costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for patients receiving pazopanib, placebo, trabectedin, ifosfamide, or gemcitabine plus docetaxel as second-line mSTS therapies. The cost-effectiveness of pazopanib was expressed as the incremental costs per QALY gained. Estimates of PFS/OS, adverse events, and utilities for pazopanib and placebo were from the PALETTE trial. Estimates of relative effectiveness of the other comparators were from an unadjusted indirect comparison versus pazopanib. Costs were from published sources. Pazopanib is estimated to increase QALYs by 0.128 and costs by£7,976 versus placebo; cost per QALY gained with pazopanib versus placebo is estimated to be£62,000. Compared with the other chemotherapies, pazopanib provides similar QALYs at a lower cost. Pazopanib may not be cost-effective versus placebo but may be cost-effective versus the most commonly used active treatments, although this conclusion is uncertain. Given the unmet need for effective treatments for mSTS, pazopanib may be an appropriate alternative to some currently used medications in the United Kingdom.

scholarly journals Quality of Life and Cost-Effectiveness Assessment of Radioiodine Ablation Strategies in Patients With Thyroid Cancer: Results From the Randomized Phase III ESTIMABL Trial

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (26) ◽  
pp. 2885-2892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabelle Borget ◽  
Julia Bonastre ◽  
Bogdan Catargi ◽  
Désirée Déandréis ◽  
Slimane Zerdoud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Thyroid Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Tsh Stimulation

Purpose In the ESTIMABL phase III trial, the thyroid ablation rate was equivalent for the two thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) stimulation methods (thyroid hormone withdrawal [THW] and recombinant human TSH [rhTSH]) and the two iodine-131 (131I) activities (1.1 or 3.7 GBq). The objectives of this article were to present health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) results and a cost-effectiveness evaluation performed alongside this trial. Patients and Methods HRQoL and utility were longitudinally assessed, from random assignment to the follow-up visit at 8 ± 2 months for the 752 patients with thyroid cancer, using the Short Form-36 and the EuroQoL-5D questionnaires, respectively. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the societal perspective in the French context. Resource use (hospitalization for 131I administration, rhTSH, sick leaves, and transportation) was collected prospectively. We used the net monetary benefit approach and computed cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for both TSH stimulation methods and 131I activities. Sensitivity analyses of the costs of rhTSH were performed. Results At 131I administration, THW caused a clinically significant deterioration of HRQoL, whereas HRQoL remained stable with rhTSH. This deterioration was transient with no difference 3 months later. rhTSH was more effective than THW in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs; +0.013 QALY/patient) but more expensive (+€474/patient). The probability that rhTSH would be cost effective at a €50,000/QALY threshold was 47% in France. The use of 1.1 GBq of 131I instead of 3.7 GBq reduced per-patient costs by €955 (US$1,018) but with slightly decreased efficacy (−0.007 QALY/patient). Conclusion rhTSH avoids the transient THW-induced deterioration of HRQoL but is unlikely to be cost effective at its current price.

scholarly journals 2200. Cost-effectiveness of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam for Treating Ventilated Nosocomial Bacterial Pneumonia

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S749-S750
Author(s):  
Jaesh Naik ◽  
Joe Yang ◽  
David Elsea ◽  
Simone Critchlow ◽  
Laura Puzniak
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Initial Treatment ◽  
Bacterial Pneumonia ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Treatment Setting ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Short Term Mortality

Abstract Background Ventilated, hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (vHABP/VABP) are associated with high rates of antibiotic resistance and high morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. Ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) has shown non-inferiority to meropenem for treating HABP/VABP in a Phase III trial, ASPECT-NP. This study evaluates cost-effectiveness of C/T against meropenem in treating HABP/VABP. Methods We developed a model consisting of a short-term decision tree (reflecting the in-hospital period) followed by a long-term Markov structure (capturing lifetime costs and outcomes). Patient characteristics and clinical efficacy were informed by subjects in ASPECT-NP who received any dose of study drugs. Susceptibility was based on the Program to Assess C/T Susceptibility surveillance database. Second-line and salvage treatment were added to resemble real-world treatment patterns and used to calculate overall clinical cure and mortality rates based on results from a network meta-analysis. We analyzed two clinical scenarios: (1)”confirmed treatment’ in which C/T or meropenem is used after pathogen susceptibility is known; (2) ‘initial treatment’ of high-risk patients before susceptibility is known. Model outcomes include, percentage clinically cured, short-term mortality, direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Sensitivity analyses (SAs) were conducted to test the robustness of results. Results In the confirmed treatment setting, C/T had a higher cure rate (5.0 percentage points, the same below), lower short-term mortality (−5.1%), cost more ($2,728), and yielded higher lifetime QALYs (0.61) than meropenem ($4,472/QALY gained). In the initial treatment setting, C/T sustained a better clinical performance (9.5% more cure, −6.8% mortality, 1.16 more QALYs), yet cost less than meropenem (−$5,662) due to better susceptibility. The response and mortality rates from ASPECT-NP had the greatest impact on results. SAs showed that the result of C/T being cost-effective over meropenem was generally robust. Conclusion The results indicate that, compared with meropenem, C/T could be a cost-effective option for patients with vHABP/VABP in the US setting. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document