Suppr超能文献

哪种抗癫痫药物是局灶性癫痫初始单药治疗中最具成本效益的?

Which is the most cost-effective antiseizure medication for initial monotherapy for focal epilepsy?

作者信息

Hu Yani, Chen Shunan, Mao Fengqian, Wang Suhong, Chen Jie, Hu Wei, Yu Lingyan, Dai Haibin

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China.

School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.

出版信息

Epilepsia. 2025 Apr;66(4):1129-1142. doi: 10.1111/epi.18269. Epub 2025 Jan 22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

An increasing number of antiseizure medications (ASMs) are approved for monotherapy for focal epilepsy, but direct comparisons of the lifetime cost-effectiveness of all existing treatment strategies are lacking. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of new ASMs and traditional ASMs as first-line monotherapy for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy.

METHOD

We used a Markov model to evaluate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of 10 ASMs in the treatment of focal epilepsy, with lacosamide (LCM) as a control, from the perspective of society in the United States. Effectiveness, cost data, and health state utilities were obtained from published literature. The cycle of the model is 6 months. Willingness to pay was defined as $150 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate parameter uncertainty, and several scenario analyses were also conducted.

RESULTS

The base case analysis showed that carbamazepine (CBZ) was the least costly ASM and more effective than valproic acid (VPA), levetiracetam (LEV), gabapentin (GBP), topiramate (TPM), and lamotrigine (LTG) from an American social perspective. In contrast, oxcarbazepine (OXC), phenytoin (PHT), phenobarbitone (PHB), LCM, and zonisamide (ZNS) were more effective than CBZ, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $334 703.50, $325 610.99, $3 037 148.62, $1 178 954.91, and $108 153 360.85/QALY, respectively. The traditional ASMs were ranked as CBZ, PHT, VPA, and PHB; the new ASMs were ranked as OXC, LEV, LCM, LTG, TPM, GBP, and ZNS. When generic drugs are used, PHT, OXC, and CBZ remain the three most cost-effective options.

SIGNIFICANCE

In terms of cost-effectiveness, CBZ monotherapy is the best option for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy, followed by OXC, PHT, VPA, LEV, PHB, LCM, LTG, TPM, GBP, and ZNS. Most traditional ASMs are more cost-effective than new ASMs; OXC is an exception.

摘要

目的

越来越多的抗癫痫药物(ASMs)被批准用于局灶性癫痫的单药治疗,但目前缺乏对所有现有治疗策略的终生成本效益的直接比较。本研究旨在比较新型ASMs和传统ASMs作为新诊断局灶性癫痫一线单药治疗的成本效益。

方法

我们使用马尔可夫模型,从美国社会角度评估10种ASMs治疗局灶性癫痫的终生成本效益,以拉科酰胺(LCM)作为对照。有效性、成本数据和健康状态效用值均来自已发表的文献。模型周期为6个月。支付意愿定义为每质量调整生命年(QALY)150000美元。进行了单向和概率敏感性分析以评估参数不确定性,还进行了几种情景分析。

结果

基础病例分析表明,从美国社会角度来看,卡马西平(CBZ)是成本最低的ASMs,且比丙戊酸(VPA)、左乙拉西坦(LEV)、加巴喷丁(GBP)、托吡酯(TPM)和拉莫三嗪(LTG)更有效。相比之下,奥卡西平(OXC)、苯妥英(PHT)、苯巴比妥(PHB)、LCM和唑尼沙胺(ZNS)比CBZ更有效,增量成本效益比分别为每QALY 334703.50美元、325610.99美元、3037148.62美元、1178954.91美元和108153360.85美元。传统ASMs的排名为CBZ、PHT、VPA和PHB;新型ASMs的排名为OXC、LEV、LCM、LTG、TPM、GBP和ZNS。当使用仿制药时,PHT、OXC和CBZ仍然是最具成本效益的三种选择。

意义

在成本效益方面,CBZ单药治疗是新诊断局灶性癫痫的最佳选择,其次是OXC、PHT、VPA、LEV、PHB、LCM、LTG、TPM、GBP和ZNS。大多数传统ASMs比新型ASMs更具成本效益;OXC是个例外。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验