Literature DB >> 11465013

The economics of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in depression: a critical review.

L Frank1, D A Revicki, S V Sorensen, Y C Shih.   

Abstract

The prevalence of depression and the high costs associated with its treatment have increased interest in pharmacoeconomic evaluations of drug treatment, particularly in the 1990s as the use of selective serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT) reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) expanded substantially. This review presents results from specific studies representing the key study designs used to address the pharmacoeconomics of SSRI use: retrospective administrative database analyses, clinical decision analysis models, and randomised clinical trials. Methodological considerations in interpreting results are highlighted. In retrospective administrative database analyses, most comparisons have been made between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). A few studies have addressed differences between SSRIs. The studies focused on healthcare cost (to payer) and cost-related outcomes (e.g. treatment duration, drug switching). Although SSRIs are generally associated with higher drug acquisition costs than are TCAs, total healthcare costs are at least offset, if not decreased, by reductions in costs associated with use of SSRIs. Although studies from the early 1990s show some advantage for fluoxetine, the results are limited by use of data from shortly after the introduction of paroxetine and sertraline; studies from the mid- 1990s on that compare drugs within the SSRI class show general equivalence in terms of cost. Important methodological advances are occurring in retrospective studies, with selection bias and other design limitations being addressed statistically. Clinical decision analysis models permit flexibility in terms of ability to specify different alternative treatment scenarios and varying durations. Sensitivity analysis aids interpretability, although model inputs are limited by data availability. Results from short term (1 year duration or less) studies comparing SSRIs and TCAs suggest that SSRIs are more cost effective or that there is no difference. Longer term studies (lifetime Markov models) focus more on the impact of maintenance antidepressant therapy and show more mixed results, generally favouring SSRIs over TCAs. The results indicate that the effect of SSRIs is mainly through prevention of relapse. Important assumptions of these models include fewer serious adverse effects and lower treatment discontinuation rates with SSRIs. Naturalistic clinical trials provide greater generalisability than traditional randomised clinical trials. One naturalistic trial found that nearly half of TCA-treated patients switched to another antidepressant within 6 months; only 20% of SSRI-treated patients switched. Cost differences between groups were minimal. These studies indicate few differences in medical costs, depression outcomes and health-related quality of life between TCAs and fluoxetine, although fewer fluoxetine-treated patients switched treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11465013     DOI: 10.2165/00023210-200115010-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CNS Drugs        ISSN: 1172-7047            Impact factor:   5.749


  79 in total

Review 1.  Choosing an antidepressant: effectiveness based pharmacoeconomics.

Authors:  A Stewart
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 4.839

2.  Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life.

Authors:  M J Buxton; M F Drummond; B A Van Hout; R L Prince; T A Sheldon; T Szucs; M Vray
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1997 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.046

3.  A Markov process analysis comparing the cost effectiveness of maintenance therapy with citalopram versus standard therapy in major depression.

Authors:  M J Nuijten; M Hardens; E Souêtre
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: meta-analysis of discontinuation rates.

Authors:  S A Montgomery; J Henry; G McDonald; T Dinan; M Lader; I Hindmarch; A Clare; D Nutt
Journal:  Int Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.659

5.  Clinical and economic comparison of sertraline and fluoxetine in the treatment of depression. A 6-month double-blind study in a primary-care setting in France.

Authors:  P Boyer; J M Danion; J C Bisserbe; J M Hotton; S Troy
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Disability and depression among high utilizers of health care. A longitudinal analysis.

Authors:  M Von Korff; J Ormel; W Katon; E H Lin
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1992-02

7.  Trends in the prescription of antidepressants by office-based psychiatrists.

Authors:  M Olfson; G L Klerman
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 18.112

8.  Service utilization and social morbidity associated with depressive symptoms in the community.

Authors:  J Johnson; M M Weissman; G L Klerman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992-03-18       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: meta-analysis of efficacy and acceptability.

Authors:  F Song; N Freemantle; T A Sheldon; A House; P Watson; A Long; J Mason
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-03-13

10.  Double-blind study of the efficacy and safety of sertraline versus fluoxetine in major depression.

Authors:  E Aguglia; M Casacchia; G B Cassano; C Faravelli; G Ferrari; P Giordano; P Pancheri; L Ravizza; M Trabucchi; F Bolino
Journal:  Int Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 1.659

View more
  9 in total

1.  A proposed model for economic evaluations of major depressive disorder.

Authors:  Hossein Haji Ali Afzali; Jonathan Karnon; Jodi Gray
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-06-02

2.  Duloxetine: a new psychopharmacologic treatment option for fibromyalgia?

Authors:  Chi-Un Pae; Prakash Masand
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 5.285

Review 3.  A critical review of model-based economic studies of depression: modelling techniques, model structure and data sources.

Authors:  Hossein Haji Ali Afzali; Jonathan Karnon; Jodi Gray
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Evaluation of the cost effectiveness of escitalopram versus venlafaxine XR in major depressive disorder.

Authors:  José-Luis Fernandez; Stuart Montgomery; Clément Francois
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 5.  Escitalopram: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in depression.

Authors:  Katherine F Croom; Greg L Plosker
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Cost-effectiveness evaluation of escitalopram in major depressive disorder in Italy.

Authors:  Claudio Mencacci; Guido Di Sciascio; Pablo Katz; Claudio Ripellino
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2013-02-07

7.  Resource use among patients with diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, or diabetes with depression.

Authors:  Trong K Le; Stephen L Able; Maureen J Lage
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2006-10-23

8.  Cough up for just a cup of coffee: Pharmacoeconomics of depression.

Authors:  G Swaminath
Journal:  Indian J Psychiatry       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 1.759

9.  C-QUALITY: cost and quality-of-life pharmacoeconomic analysis of antidepressants used in major depressive disorder in the regional Italian settings of Veneto and Sardinia.

Authors:  Claudio Mencacci; Eugenio Aguglia; Giovanni Biggio; Lodovico Cappellari; Guido Di Sciascio; Andrea Fagiolini; Giuseppe Maina; Alfonso Tortorella; Pablo Katz; Claudio Ripellino
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2013-12-03
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.