36-MONTH COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF ANTIPSYCHOTIC TREATMENTS IN PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA IN THE PAN-EUROPEAN SOHO (SCHIZOPHRENIA OUTPATIENT HEALTH OUTCOMES) STUDY
Author(s)
Diego Novick, MSc, Health Outcomes Researcher1, Frank Windmeijer, PhD, Professor2, Jackie Brown, PhD, CNS Team Leader1, Jihyung Hong, MSc, Research Assistant3, Martin Knapp, PhD, Professor3, Stathis Kontodimas, MSc, Health Economist1, Mark Ratcliffe, PhD, Director11Eli Lilly and Company Limited, Windlesham, Surrey, United Kingdom; 2 University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom; 3 London School of Economics, London, United Kingdom
OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness (measured using an incremental cost-utility ratio) of treating schizophrenia patients with olanzapine versus risperidone, clozapine, quetiapine, amisulpride, oral typical and depot typical antipsychotics. METHODS: European SOHO is a 3-year, prospective, outpatient, observational study associated with antipsychotic treatment in 10 European countries. Health care resource use and quality of life data (EuroQol EQ-5D and UK population utility values) were collected at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 32 and 36 months. UK health care costs were applied to the resource use data for the 10 countries. Pair-wise incremental costs and utilities were estimated between olanzapine-treated patients and patients treated with each of the other antipsychotics. Utility increments were used to estimate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Incremental cost-utility ratios were expressed as the additional cost per QALY gained. Bootstrap replications provided an estimate of uncertainty. RESULTS: 10,972 patients were enrolled at baseline, 65% were eligible for analyses at 36 months. Treatment with olanzapine is more effective and less costly than clozapine and quetiapine. Treatment with olanzapine is more effective but more costly compared to treatment with risperidone, amisulpride, and oral typical or depot typical antipsychotics. The incremental cost-utility ratios of olanzapine versus these four medications were £12,343, £1,586, £14,849 and £23,379 per additional QALYs gained respectively. The bootstrap replications for uncertainty showed that 100% of the replications fell below a £30,000 per QALY threshold in the comparison with quetiapine and oral typicals. It was 98%, 91%, 99% and 79% for the comparison with risperidone, clozapine, amisulpride and depot typicals respectively. CONCLUSION: Among SOHO patients, if a funding threshold of £30,000 per QALY gained is assumed, olanzapine has a high probability of being the most cost-effective treatment compared with atypical, oral and depot typical antipsychotic medications.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2007-05, ISPOR 2007, Arlington, VA, USA
Value in Health, Vol. 10, No.3 (May/June 2007)
Code
PMH24
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Mental Health