OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of pramipexole versus no treatment and ropinirole in moderate to very severe idiopathic restless legs syndrome (RLS) in the UK and Sweden. METHODS: A Markov model was developed using clinical trial data for pramipexole and ropinirole. Model health states were based on the International RLS Study Group Rating Scale (IRLS) scores. Health states were: no (IRLS 0), mild (IRLS 1-14), moderate (IRLS 15-24), severe (IRLS 25-34), very severe RLS (IRLS 35-40) and death. Patients entered the model with an IRLS score > 15 matching the trial inclusion criteria of the pramipexole trials. Resource use and utilities were based on trial data, literature, a patient survey and a panel of physicians from the UK and Sweden in the absence of published information. A healthcare sector perspective was taken for the UK and a societal perspective for Sweden using 2004-2005 unit costs. The base case analysis took a 1-year timeframe. RESULTS: In the UK the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for pramipexole was 3349 pounds sterling versus no treatment and a cost-saving of 92 pounds sterling against ropinirole. In Sweden, pramipexole produced cost-savings of Swedish Krona (SEK) 2381 (176 pounds sterling) versus no treatment and SEK 3564 (264 pounds sterling) against ropinirole. QALY gains in both countries were 0.095 versus no treatment and 0.007 versus ropinirole. Results compare well with UK cost-effectiveness thresholds of 20,000 pounds sterling/30,000 pounds sterling per QALY and are cost-saving for Sweden. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed results to be robust. CONCLUSIONS: Pramipexole is cost-effective compared to no treatment and ropinirole for patients with moderate to very severe RLS.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of pramipexole versus no treatment and ropinirole in moderate to very severe idiopathic restless legs syndrome (RLS) in the UK and Sweden. METHODS: A Markov model was developed using clinical trial data for pramipexole and ropinirole. Model health states were based on the International RLS Study Group Rating Scale (IRLS) scores. Health states were: no (IRLS 0), mild (IRLS 1-14), moderate (IRLS 15-24), severe (IRLS 25-34), very severe RLS (IRLS 35-40) and death. Patients entered the model with an IRLS score > 15 matching the trial inclusion criteria of the pramipexole trials. Resource use and utilities were based on trial data, literature, a patient survey and a panel of physicians from the UK and Sweden in the absence of published information. A healthcare sector perspective was taken for the UK and a societal perspective for Sweden using 2004-2005 unit costs. The base case analysis took a 1-year timeframe. RESULTS: In the UK the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for pramipexole was 3349 pounds sterling versus no treatment and a cost-saving of 92 pounds sterling against ropinirole. In Sweden, pramipexole produced cost-savings of Swedish Krona (SEK) 2381 (176 pounds sterling) versus no treatment and SEK 3564 (264 pounds sterling) against ropinirole. QALY gains in both countries were 0.095 versus no treatment and 0.007 versus ropinirole. Results compare well with UK cost-effectiveness thresholds of 20,000 pounds sterling/30,000 pounds sterling per QALY and are cost-saving for Sweden. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed results to be robust. CONCLUSIONS:Pramipexole is cost-effective compared to no treatment and ropinirole for patients with moderate to very severe RLS.