Cost-Utility Analysis of Lurasidone Versus Aripiprazole in Adults with Schizophrenia

Krithika Rajagopalan (), David Trueman, Lydia Crowe, Daniel Squirrell and Antony Loebel
Additional contact information
Krithika Rajagopalan: Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc.
David Trueman: DRG Abacus
Lydia Crowe: DRG Abacus
Daniel Squirrell: DRG Abacus
Antony Loebel: Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc.

PharmacoEconomics, 2016, vol. 34, issue 7, No 9, 709-721

Abstract: Abstract Background In 2014, lurasidone, an atypical antipsychotic, was approved for the treatment of schizophrenia in adults. It is an alternative treatment option to aripiprazole, and when compared with aripiprazole, lurasidone was associated with improved symptom reduction and reduced risk of weight gain and relapse. We conducted a cost-utility analysis of lurasidone versus aripiprazole from the perspective of healthcare services, using Scotland and Wales as specific case studies. Methods A 10-year Markov model, incorporating a 6-week acute phase and a maintenance phase across three health states (discontinuation, relapse, death) was constructed. Six-week probabilities of discontinuation and adverse events were based on a published independent mixed-treatment comparison; long-term risks of relapse and discontinuation were from an indirect comparison. Costs included drug therapy, relapse, and outpatient, primary and residential care. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5 %. Utility estimates were taken from published literature, and cost effectiveness was expressed as total 10-year incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results Lurasidone yielded a cost saving of £3383 and an improvement of 0.005 QALYs versus aripiprazole, in Scotland. Deterministic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that results were sensitive to relapse rates, while probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that lurasidone had the highest expected net benefit at willingness-to-pay thresholds of £20,000–30,000 per QALY. The probability that lurasidone was a cost-effective treatment strategy was approximately 75 % at all willingness-to-pay thresholds, with similar results being obtained for the Welsh analysis. Conclusions Our analysis suggests that lurasidone would provide an effective, cost-saving alternative for the healthcare service in the treatment of adult patients with schizophrenia.

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-016-0405-0 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:pharme:v:34:y:2016:i:7:d:10.1007_s40273-016-0405-0

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-016-0405-0

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().