Zhao Jingping, Jiang Kaida, Li Qingwei, Zhang Yanlei, Cheng Yan, Lin Ziyi, Xuan Jianwei
a The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University , Changsha City , Hunan Province , China.
b Shanghai Mental Health Center , Shanghai , China.
J Med Econ. 2019 May;22(5):439-446. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2019.1580714. Epub 2019 Mar 5.
This study aimed to analyze (1) the cost-effectiveness of olanzapine orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) compared to olanzapine standard oral tablet (SOT) and (2) the cost-effectiveness of olanzapine-SOT compared to aripiprazole-SOT for patients with schizophrenia in China.
A microsimulation model was adapted from a healthcare payers' perspective. The model ran over a 1-year time horizon, using quarterly cycles. The costs of adverse events were acquired through a clinical expert panel. The average bidding prices in China of olanzapine-ODT, olanzapine-SOT, aripiprazole-SOT, and other switch alternatives were used. Inpatient and outpatient medical costs were sourced from the Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance database in Tianjin. Additionally, adherence, efficacy, safety, and utility data were taken from the literature. Uncertainty of parameters were assessed through one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
The total annual costs per patient in aripiprazole-SOT arm, olanzapine-SOT arm, and olanzapine-ODT arm are USD 2,296.05, USD 1,940.05, and USD 2,292.81, respectively. The average number of relapses per patient in 1 year in the aripiprazole-SOT arm, olanzapine-SOT arm, and olanzapine-ODT arm, are 0.734, 0.325, and 0.198, respectively. The quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained per patient in 1 year in the aripiprazole-SOT arm, olanzapine-SOT arm, and olanzapine-ODT arm are 0.714, 0.737, and 0.758, respectively. Consequently, (1) the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of administrating olanzapine-ODT over olanzapine-SOT are USD 2,791.96 per relapse avoided and USD 16,798.39 per QALY gained; and (2) the ICERs of using olanzapine-SOT over aripiprazole-SOT are USD -870.39 per relapse avoided and USD -15,477.93 per QALY gained. All ICERs are under the willingness-to-pay threshold in China of USD 25,772.67. The sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results.
As the first-line treatment for schizophrenia in China, olanzapine-ODT is cost-effective compared to olanzapine-SOT and olanzapine-SOT is cost-effective compared to aripiprazole-SOT.
本研究旨在分析:(1)与奥氮平标准口服片剂(SOT)相比,奥氮平口腔崩解片(ODT)的成本效益;(2)在中国,与阿立哌唑SOT相比,奥氮平SOT的成本效益。
从医疗保健支付方的角度采用微观模拟模型。该模型在1年的时间范围内运行,采用季度周期。不良事件的成本通过临床专家小组获取。使用了奥氮平ODT、奥氮平SOT、阿立哌唑SOT及其他换药选择在中国的平均中标价格。住院和门诊医疗成本来自天津市城镇职工基本医疗保险数据库。此外,依从性、疗效、安全性和效用数据取自文献。通过单因素和概率敏感性分析评估参数的不确定性。
阿立哌唑SOT组、奥氮平SOT组和奥氮平ODT组每位患者的年度总成本分别为2296.05美元、1940.05美元和2292.81美元。阿立哌唑SOT组、奥氮平SOT组和奥氮平ODT组每位患者1年内的平均复发次数分别为0.734、0.325和0.198。阿立哌唑SOT组、奥氮平SOT组和奥氮平ODT组每位患者1年内获得的质量调整生命年(QALY)分别为0.714、0.737和0.758。因此,(1)与奥氮平SOT相比,使用奥氮平ODT的增量成本效益比(ICER)为每避免一次复发2791.96美元,每获得一个QALY为16798.39美元;(2)与阿立哌唑SOT相比,使用奥氮平SOT的ICER为每避免一次复发-870.39美元,每获得一个QALY为-15477.93美元。所有ICER均低于中国25772.67美元的支付意愿阈值。敏感性分析证实了结果的稳健性。
作为中国精神分裂症的一线治疗药物,与奥氮平SOT相比,奥氮平ODT具有成本效益,与阿立哌唑SOT相比,奥氮平SOT具有成本效益。