Cost-minimization analysis of escitalopram, fluoxetine, and amitriptyline in the treatment of depression

INTRODUCTION

Escitalopram, fluoxetine, and amitriptyline are the drugs commonly used in the treatment of depression. The pharmacoeconomic evaluation of these drugs becomes relevant as they are prescribed for a long period of time, and depression causes a significant economic burden. The cost-minimization study would contribute to bringing down the annual treatment costs, leading to better medication adherence and ultimately better patient outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All drug prices are mentioned in Indian National Rupee (INR). All expenses are based on 2022 pricing. No cost discounting was used because all expenditures were calculated over a year. We considered hypothetical scenarios where the patient was prescribed the lowest possible dose for depression, an equivalent antidepressant dose, a defined daily dose, and the maximum acceptable therapeutic dose for depression.

RESULTS

Annual average treatment costs of amitriptyline, escitalopram, and fluoxetine in patients with depression at baseline with equivalent dosing as mono-drug therapy were 2765.53, 2914.78, and 1422.72 rupees (INR), respectively. Savings were high when the patient was shifted to fluoxetine from either escitalopram or amitriptyline. The savings from switching to fluoxetine were 50.66% and 56.42% from escitalopram and amitriptyline, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The choice of an antidepressant depends on multiple aspects, among which the cost of treatment plays a crucial role. Among the drugs compared, fluoxetine seems to offer greater value for money. The study emphasizes that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are the most commonly prescribed antidepressants not only because of their favorable pharmacological profile but also because of their affordability.

[Clinical and economic comparison of utilization of reslizumab, mepolizumab and benralizumab in the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma]

During last few years, the approaches to the management of patients with severe asthma have been revised. Monoclonal antibodies (MABs), inhibitors of interleukin-5 (reslizumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab) have been recently introduced for the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma. The mentioned drugs were approved in Russia and included into the list of Vitally Essential Drugs.

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and economic consequences of the use of biological agents that antagonize IL-5 in the treatment of severe eosinophilic asthma in adults.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two methods of clinical and economic research were used: assessment of the cost-effectiveness ratio and analysis of the budget impact. The effectiveness of the drugs was assessed using indirect comparison; special attention was paid to comparability of the patient groups in the studies chosen for such an assessment. Two approaches were used for calculation of the cost of therapy for severe asthma: using DRGs (applicable to most regions of Russia), and without the use of DRGs, which is relevant only for few Russian regions.

RESULTS

Basing on the data obtained from a budget impact study without the use of DRG, it was shown that reslizumab was dominating for patients with body mass of up to 70 kg, while for the patients with body mass of 70 to 110 kg, mepolizumab was dominating, while utilization of reslizumab appeared to be somewhat more expensive. In the group of patients with body mass over 110 kg, mepolizumab also was dominating. The calculation of the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) showed that reslizumab appeared to be dominating over two other MABs, The results of the study using the DRG demonstrated that the cost of an annual course of benralizumab in most cases in Russia would exceed the amount that can be compensated by Territorial Funds for Mandatory Medical Insurance to a healthcare institution for therapy of bronchial asthma in one adult patient with genetically engineered drugs. Therefore, further comparisons were made for reslizumab and mepolizumab only. Analysis of the impact on the budget demonstrated that treatment with reslizumab and mepolizumab would represent a similar burden for the budget. When applying cost-effectiveness analysis, reslizumab was more cost-effective than mepolizumab (regardless of patient body mass).

CONCLUSION

Thus, the results of the clinical and economic study suggested that, basing on the cost-effectiveness analysis, reslizumab appeared to be the dominant IL-5 antagonist (regardless of body mass if DRG approach was used and in patients with body mass up to 110 kg, if such an approach was not used). Basing on budget impact analysis, calculations without use of DRG approach showed superiority of reslizumab over mepolizumab and benralizumab for the patients with body mass up to 70 kg and the DRG-based approach showed equal burden for the budget for reslizumab and mepolizumab for the patients with any body mass.

Evaluation of quality of pharmacoeconomic studies involved in traditional Chinese medicine in China

OBJECTIVES

The pharmacoeconomic studies of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) are still in its infancy. Assessing the quality of pharmacoeconomic studies of TCM to improve the efficiency of health resource allocation and guide the rational use of medicine.

METHODS

Four databases were searched from inception to January 2018. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement (CHEERS) and the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) were used to assess the reporting quality and methodological quality. STATA 12.0 and Meta analyst 3.13 were used to analyze the related data.

RESULTS

A total of 178 studies were included. The methodological evaluation of the study found that the total score of QHES was 47.85 ± 8.09. The report quality evaluation results found that many studies did not report comprehensive information, such as lack of detailed reports on abstracts, study perspectives, time frames, discount rates, model selection, but the titles, study background and location, and health results, resource and cost estimates, analysis methods, and heterogeneity analysis are reported in more detail. Six of the ten stratification factors have statistically significant differences.

CONCLUSION

The overall quality of pharmacoeconomic studies of TCM is low, and further standardization and improvement are needed to obtain reliable study results.

Pharmacoeconomic study comparing carbetocin with oxytocin for the prevention of hemorrhage following cesarean delivery in Lima, Peru

Postpartum hemorrhage is one of the main causes of maternal death. Oxytocin has traditionally been used to prevent postpartum hemorrhage.

AIM

To compare oxytocin with carbetocin, a long-acting analog of oxytocin, for prevention of uterine hemorrhage after cesarean delivery.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Clinical data were retrieved from the 2012 Cochrane meta-analysis "Carbetocin for preventing postpartum hemorrhage". A decision tree was constructed. The direct costs were those of medications from the Peruvian official price list (DIGEMID). Costs associated with additional oxytocic drugs, blood transfusions, postpartum hemorrhage kits and hysterectomy were obtained from Hospital Nacional Edgardo Rebagliati Martins. The perspective of the study was that of the payer. The time horizon for calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was 1 year (2015).

RESULTS

Patients who received carbetocin required fewer additional uterotonic agents, had fewer hemorrhages and received fewer blood transfusions. Therefore, the costs associated with these interventions were lower. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was S/. 49,918 per QALY gained, which is lower than the threshold we estimated for Peru.

CONCLUSION

Carbetocin is more cost-effective than oxytocin for prevention of uterine hemorrhage after cesarean delivery.