Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Switching Antipsychotic Medication to Long-Acting Injectable Risperidone in Patients with Schizophrenia: A 12- and 24-Month Follow-Up from the e-STAR Database in Spain

ArticleinApplied Health Economics and Health Policy 6(1):41-53 · February 2008with46 Reads
DOI: 10.2165/00148365-200806010-00004 · Source: PubMed
The availability of long-acting injectable risperidone may increase adherence to antipsychotic treatment and lead to improved clinical and economic outcomes for patients with schizophrenia. To investigate the cost effectiveness of treatment with long-acting injectable risperidone compared with previous antipsychotic regimens in patients with schizophrenia enrolled in the electronic Schizophrenia Treatment Adherence Registry (e-STAR) in Spain. e-STAR is an international, long-term, ongoing, observational study of schizophrenia patients who, during their routine course of clinical practice, are started on a new antipsychotic treatment. In e-STAR, data are collected at baseline, retrospectively over a minimum period of 12 months and up to a maximum of 24 months, and prospectively at 3-month intervals for 24 months after the start of a new antipsychotic drug. For the purpose of this study, patients who started treatment with long-acting injectable risperidone during their routine clinical management and were enrolled in the e-STAR study in Spain were eligible. The effectiveness of long-acting injectable risperidone compared with previous antipsychotic treatment, defined as the absence of hospitalizations or relapses, was assessed at 12 and 24 months of treatment. Acquisition costs of antipsychotic drug therapy were based on the official registered price. Drug prices from source were in euro, year 2005 values; hospital costs from source were in euro, year 2001 values, and were inflated to reflect 2005 costs. Complete follow-up data were available for 788 patients at 12 months after starting long-acting injectable risperidone and for 757 patients at 24 months. In terms of effectiveness, at 12 months after switching to long-acting injectable risperidone, there was a higher percentage of patients who did not require hospitalization (89.1%), did not relapse (85.4%) or neither required hospitalization nor relapsed (82.4%) as compared retrospectively with the same period for the previous treatment (67%, 47.8% and 59.8%, respectively). The corresponding figures at 24 months also favoured treatment with long-acting injectable risperidone (85.2% vs 60%, 88.5% vs 47.4% and 77% vs 53.6%, respectively). Treatment with long-acting injectable risperidone was associated with higher medication costs per month compared with previous antipsychotic medication after 12 (euro 405.80 vs euro 128.16) and 24 months (euro 407.33 vs euro 142.77) of follow-up. Cost effectiveness per month per patient was lower for risperidone than previous antipsychotic medication in the three patient scenarios: without hospitalization (euro 539.82 vs euro 982.13), without relapse (euro 519.67 vs euro 1242.03) and without hospitalization and without relapse (euro 597.22 vs euro 1059.39). Treatment with long-acting injectable risperidone compared with previous antipsychotic medications resulted in a higher number of patients not requiring hospitalization, not relapsing, and not requiring hospitalization and not showing relapse, resulting in risperidone being more cost effective per month per patient.It is important to note that real-world variations in adherence would automatically be controlled from within a randomized control trial, and hence, any evaluation of variations in adherence inevitably requires a real-world focus. On the basis of these findings, which were obtained in real-world clinical practice, long-acting injectable risperidone is predicted to be the dominant strategy because it results in effective symptom control and direct medical cost savings. However, because of limitations in methodology, any conclusions should, at this stage, be treated as tentative, and confirmation in more detailed follow-up studies is required. Cost-effectiveness comparisons based on experimental evaluations of relapse minimization strategies are also required. In order to avoid estimation biases in the future, a prospectively designed study is needed.
    • "As a result, time to relapse was prolonged by more than 50% when similar patients were switched to PP as compared with oral APs. This is supported by the findings of several prior reports on data from the electronic Schizophrenia Treatment Adherence Registry (e-STAR), which found a beneficial effect of atypical long-acting APs in reducing hospitalizations after patients were switched from oral therapies (Olivares et al., 2008Olivares et al., , 2009aOlivares et al., , 2009b). Despite the positive findings seen in e-STAR, clinical studies have failed to demonstrate significant treatment differences between LAI and oral APs (Schooler, 2003; Kane et al., 2010; Macfadden et al., 2010; Rosenheck et al., 2011a). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This report examines relapse risk following a switch from risperidone long-acting injectable (RLAI) to another long-acting injectable antipsychotic [paliperidone palmitate (PP)] versus a switch to oral antipsychotics (APs). Truven Health's MarketScan Multistate Medicaid Database compared relapses following switches from RLAI. New user cohorts for these two groups were created on the basis of first incidence of exposure to the 'switched to' drug. Groups were balanced using 1:1 propensity score matching. Time-to-event analysis assessed schizophrenia-related hospital/emergency department visits. A total of 188 patients switched from RLAI to PP, and 131 patients switched from RLAI to oral AP. Propensity score-matched cohort included 109 patients who switched to PP and 109 patients who switched to an oral AP. Patients who switched from RLAI to PP had fewer events (26 vs. 32), longer time to an event (mean 70 vs. 47 days), and lower risk of relapse (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.92; P=0.024) compared with those who switched from RLAI to oral AP. Switching from RLAI to PP may be associated with a lower risk for relapse and longer duration of therapy compared with switching to oral AP. Given the limitations of observational studies, these results should be confirmed by other prospective evaluations.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License, where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
    Full-text · Article · Feb 2015
    • "The search and screening process is summarised inFigure 1. The cost data literature review resulted in 33 relevant cost studies identified for 11 disorders (Table 2): anxiety disorder [23], dementia2425262728293031, epilepsy [32,33], headache [15,34,35], mood disorders3637383940, multiple sclerosis [14,414243, Parkinson's disease [24,44], psychotic disorders [45,46], stroke [24,47484950 and neuromuscular diseases [51]. Two articles were excluded from de model because they presented outlier estimations for stroke [52,53] and traumatic brain injury [52]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Background Brain disorders represent a high burden in Europe and worldwide. The objective of this study was to provide specific estimates of the economic costs of brain disorders in Spain, based on published epidemiological and economic evidence. Methods A cost-of-illness study with a societal perspective of 19 brain disorders was carried out. Cost data published between 2004 and 2012 was obtained from a systematic literature review. Direct healthcare, direct non-medical and indirect costs were considered, prioritizing bottom-up information. All costs were converted to Euro and to year 2010. The missing values were imputed with European estimates. Sensitivity analyses based on qualitative assessment of the literature and on a Monte Carlo simulation were performed. Results The review identified 33 articles with information on costs for 11 disorders (8 neurological, 3 mental). The average per–patient cost ranged from 36,946 € for multiple sclerosis to 402 € for headache. The societal cost of the 19 brain disorders in Spain in 2010 was estimated in 84 € billion. Societal costs ranged from 15 € billion for dementia to 65 € million for eating disorders. Mental disorders societal cost were 46 € billions (55% of the total), while neurological disorder added up to 38 € billion. Healthcare costs represented 37% of the societal costs of brain disorders, whereas direct non-medical constituted 29% and indirect costs 33%. Conclusion Brain disorders have a substantial economic impact in Spain (equivalent to almost 8% of the country's GDP). Economic data on several important brain disorders, specially mental disorders, is still sparse.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2014
    • "A total of 1,659 patients completed the study.25 At 12 months after switching from oral to LAI antipsychotics, the percentage of patients who did not require hospitalization (89.1% vs 67.0%) and did not relapse (85.4% vs 47.8%) was higher with LAIs than with oral antipsychotics.26 Cost-effectiveness per month per patient was lower for LAIs than for previous antipsychotic medication among patients who were defined as without hospitalization, without relapse, or without hospitalization and without relapse. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Schizophrenia is a debilitating chronic disease that requires lifelong medical care and supervision. Even with treatment, the majority of patients relapse within 5 years, and suicide may occur in up to 10% of patients. Poor adherence to oral antipsychotics is the most common cause of relapse. The discontinuation rate for oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia ranges from 26% to 44%, and as many as two-thirds of patients are at least partially nonadherent, resulting in increased risk of hospitalization. A very helpful approach to improve adherence in schizophrenia is the use of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics, although only a minority of patients receive these. Reasons for underutilization may include negative attitudes, perceptions, and beliefs of both patients and health care professionals. Research shows, however, significant improvements in adherence with LAIs compared with oral drugs, and this is accompanied by lower rates of discontinuation, relapse, and hospitalization. In addition, LAIs are associated with better functioning, quality of life, and patient satisfaction. A need exists to encourage broader LAI use, especially among patients with a history of nonadherence with oral antipsychotics. This paper reviews the impact of nonadherence with antipsychotic drug therapy overall, as well as specific outcomes of the schizophrenia patient, and highlights the potential benefits of LAIs.
    Full-text · Article · Nov 2013
Show more