Literature DB >> 15222773

The cost of multiple sclerosis and the cost effectiveness of disease-modifying agents in its treatment.

Ceri J Phillips1.   

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is one of the most common causes of neurological disability in young and middle-aged adults. The full economic cost of MS is substantial given that MS patients experience a major perturbation in their daily activities and the disease affects mainly young people who are obliged to restrict their levels of economic activity, either temporarily or permanently. A positive relationship exists between the direct and indirect costs of MS and its severity. Cost variations between countries exist because of differences in the costs of inpatient care, the number of ambulatory visits, drug usage and the extent and type of informal care. The development and availability of new agents has been accompanied by an increased optimism that treatment regimens for MS would be more effective. However, doubts have been expressed about the effectiveness of these treatments, which have compounded the problems associated with estimating the relative cost effectiveness of such interventions. In addition, variations in the utility scores associated with disease categories, the impact of relapses and the resulting utility losses, plus the speed of disease progression have all contributed to the difficulty of estimating the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) losses for a patient experiencing MS. Differences between studies with respect to the costs associated with each disability level, the timescale of the disease and the period over which costs and QALYs are to be measured, and the perspective employed in relation to costing have also resulted in a wide range of estimates being produced for the cost effectiveness of interferons and glatiramer acetate in the management of MS. These range from situations of cost savings, to over $US1.6 million (euro1.85 million) per QALY gained. Recent cost-effectiveness studies have benefited from more relevant and up-to-date data relating to disease progression and have generally produced more favourable cost-effectiveness ratios. However, the lack of homogeneity in the design of the studies partly accounts for the extent of variation in the estimates of cost effectiveness, and the difficulty of arriving at a consensus. The UK Department of Health has introduced a scheme that provides disease-modifying agents in the National Health Service for those patients with clinically active relapsing disease. Patients are monitored annually and payments to manufacturers are dependent on outcomes achieved. This initiative, although not without its detractors, will hopefully enhance the quantity and quality of evidence on the impact of drugs on disease progression and address some of the current difficulties with estimating the relative cost effectiveness of disease-modifying drugs in the treatment of patients with MS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15222773     DOI: 10.2165/00023210-200418090-00002

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


  73 in total

Review 1.  Outcomes assessment of drug treatment in multiple sclerosis clinical trials.

Authors:  M Malone; B Lomaestro
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Treatment of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: current recommendations and future prospects.

Authors:  G P Rice
Journal:  BioDrugs       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.807

3.  Evidence for genetic basis of multiple sclerosis. The Canadian Collaborative Study Group.

Authors:  A D Sadovnick; G C Ebers; D A Dyment; N J Risch
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-06-22       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Offspring recurrence rates and clinical characteristics of conjugal multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  N P Robertson; J I O'Riordan; J Chataway; D P Kingsley; D H Miller; D Clayton; D A Compston
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1997-05-31       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 5.  What is new in the treatment of multiple sclerosis?

Authors:  B Weinstock-Guttman; L D Jacobs
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 9.546

6.  Suppression of experimental allergic encephalomyelitis by a synthetic polypeptide.

Authors:  D Teitelbaum; A Meshorer; T Hirshfeld; R Arnon; M Sela
Journal:  Eur J Immunol       Date:  1971-08       Impact factor: 5.532

7.  How many people in the world have multiple sclerosis?

Authors:  G Dean
Journal:  Neuroepidemiology       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.282

Review 8.  Use and misuse of statistics for epidemiological studies of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  P L Hibberd
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 10.422

9.  [Early multiple sclerosis therapy in the effects of public health economics].

Authors:  P Rieckmann
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  2001-09-15

10.  Intramuscular interferon beta-1a for disease progression in relapsing multiple sclerosis. The Multiple Sclerosis Collaborative Research Group (MSCRG)

Authors:  L D Jacobs; D L Cookfair; R A Rudick; R M Herndon; J R Richert; A M Salazar; J S Fischer; D E Goodkin; C V Granger; J H Simon; J J Alam; D M Bartoszak; D N Bourdette; J Braiman; C M Brownscheidle; M E Coats; S L Cohan; D S Dougherty; R P Kinkel; M K Mass; F E Munschauer; R L Priore; P M Pullicino; B J Scherokman; R H Whitham
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 10.422

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Interferon-beta treatment for multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Robert A Bermel; Richard A Rudick
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 7.620

2.  Multiple sclerosis prevalence in the United States commercially insured population.

Authors:  Piyameth Dilokthornsakul; Robert J Valuck; Kavita V Nair; John R Corboy; Richard R Allen; Jonathan D Campbell
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 9.910

3.  Dynamic Learning of Patient Response Types: An Application to Treating Chronic Diseases.

Authors:  Diana M Negoescu; Kostas Bimpikis; Margaret L Brandeau; Dan A Iancu
Journal:  Manage Sci       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 4.883

4.  Economic Burden of Multiple Sclerosis in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jalal Dahham; Rana Rizk; Ingrid Kremer; Silvia M A A Evers; Mickaël Hiligsmann
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Clinical utility of glatiramer acetate in the management of relapse frequency in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Oscar Fernández
Journal:  J Cent Nerv Syst Dis       Date:  2012-08-29

6.  Cost-effectiveness of different interferon beta products for relapsing-remitting and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: Decision analysis based on long-term clinical data and switchable treatments.

Authors:  Shekoufeh Nikfar; Abbas Kebriaeezadeh; Rassoul Dinarvand; Mohammad Abdollahi; Mohammad-Ali Sahraian; David Henry; Ali Akbari Sari
Journal:  Daru       Date:  2013-06-22       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  When to initiate disease-modifying drugs for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis in adults?

Authors:  Mona Alkhawajah; Joel Oger
Journal:  Mult Scler Int       Date:  2011-05-17

8.  Assessing cost-effectiveness in the management of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Ceri J Phillips; Ioan Humphreys
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2009-11-18

Review 9.  Cost of Illness of Multiple Sclerosis - A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Olivia Ernstsson; Hanna Gyllensten; Kristina Alexanderson; Petter Tinghög; Emilie Friberg; Anders Norlund
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Cost-effectiveness of multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapies: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  David Yamamoto; Jonathan D Campbell
Journal:  Autoimmune Dis       Date:  2012-12-06
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.