Nishimura Shinichi, Nakao Mutsuhiro
a Medical Affairs, MSD K.K. , Tokyo , Japan.
b Graduate School of Public Health , Teikyo University , Tokyo , Japan.
J Med Econ. 2018 Jul;21(7):698-703. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2018.1466710. Epub 2018 May 8.
This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of the orexin receptor antagonist suvorexant against zolpidem, the most widely used hypnotic benzodiazepine receptor agonist in Japan. To this end, a model was used that factored in insomnia and the risk for hip fractures, which have devastating effects on the elderly.
Data were derived from published papers. The target population was a virtual cohort of elderly patients (≥65 years) with insomnia residing in Japan. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio as effectiveness measures. The investigators assumed the perspective of healthcare payers.
In the base-case analysis, suvorexant was cost-saving (suvorexant: $252.3, zolpidem: $328.7) and had higher QALYs gained (suvorexant: 0.0641, zolpidem: 0.0635) for elderly Japanese patients with insomnia compared with zolpidem, indicating that suvorexant was dominant. In the sensitivity analysis, the outcome changed from dominant to dominated due to the relative risk for hip fractures associated with suvorexant. However, when the other parameters were varied from the lower to the upper limits of their ranges, suvorexant remained dominant compared to zolpidem.
The relative risk for hip fractures for suvorexant used in the model was based on data from pre-approval clinical trials. More precise data may be needed.
Suvorexant seemed to be more cost-effective than the alternative zolpidem. The findings suggested that suvorexant might be a viable alternative to zolpidem for elderly patients with insomnia. A sensitivity analysis showed that outcome varied depending on the relative risk for hip fractures associated with suvorexant. Further investigations may be needed for more precise results.
本研究评估了食欲素受体拮抗剂苏沃雷生相对于唑吡坦(日本使用最广泛的催眠性苯二氮䓬受体激动剂)的成本效益。为此,使用了一个考虑失眠和髋部骨折风险的模型,这些因素对老年人具有毁灭性影响。
数据来源于已发表的论文。目标人群是居住在日本的虚拟老年失眠患者队列(≥65岁)。使用质量调整生命年(QALY)和增量成本效益比作为有效性指标来评估成本效益。研究者采用医疗保健支付者的视角。
在基础病例分析中,与唑吡坦相比,苏沃雷生对日本老年失眠患者具有成本节约优势(苏沃雷生:252.3美元,唑吡坦:328.7美元),且获得的QALY更高(苏沃雷生:0.0641,唑吡坦:0.0635),表明苏沃雷生具有主导性。在敏感性分析中,由于与苏沃雷生相关的髋部骨折相对风险,结果从主导变为非主导。然而,当其他参数在其范围的下限到上限之间变化时,与唑吡坦相比,苏沃雷生仍具有主导性。
模型中使用的苏沃雷生导致髋部骨折的相对风险基于批准前临床试验的数据。可能需要更精确的数据。
苏沃雷生似乎比替代药物唑吡坦更具成本效益。研究结果表明,对于老年失眠患者,苏沃雷生可能是唑吡坦的可行替代药物。敏感性分析表明,结果因与苏沃雷生相关的髋部骨折相对风险而异。可能需要进一步研究以获得更精确的结果。