Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of early responders versus early nonresponders to atypical antipsychotic therapy.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:To compare the cost-effectiveness of treating early responders versus early nonresponders to an atypical antipsychotic (risperidone) and the cost-effectiveness of treating early nonresponders maintained on risperidone versus those switched to olanzapine. METHODS:This post hoc analysis used data from a randomized, double-blind, 12-week schizophrenia study (Study Code: HGMN, n = 628). Participants were initially assigned to risperidone therapy. Early response was defined as a ? 20% improvement on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score from baseline to two weeks. Early responders continued on risperidone, whereas early nonresponders were randomized in a double-blind manner to continue on risperidone or switch to olanzapine for 10 additional weeks. Early responders and early nonresponders maintained on risperidone were compared for health-state utilities (benefits) and total cost over the 12-week study; early nonresponders maintained on risperidone or switched to olanzapine were compared from randomization (10-week period). Utilities were derived from the PANSS and adverse events. Mixed models were used to assess group differences in utilities. Treatment costs were calculated based on health states. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were then utilized to compare treatment groups. RESULTS:Early responders to risperidone had significantly greater total utility and lower total treatment costs than early nonresponders to risperidone. Compared with early nonresponders who continued on risperidone, those who were switched to olanzapine had significantly higher total utility scores at endpoint and numerically lower total treatment costs, reflecting significantly lower nonmedication treatment costs, even though medication costs were significantly higher compared with generic risperidone. CONCLUSION:Treatment of early responders was more cost-effective than treatment of early nonresponders to atypical antipsychotic therapy. Switching early nonresponders to olanzapine resulted in improved treatment effectiveness, met the criteria for some dominance, and appeared modestly more cost-effective than maintaining treatment with generic risperidone.

SUBMITTER: Peng X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3169978 | biostudies-literature | 2011

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of early responders versus early nonresponders to atypical antipsychotic therapy.

Peng Xiaomei X Ascher-Svanum Haya H Faries Douglas E DE Stauffer Virginia L VL Kollack-Walker Sara S Kinon Bruce J BJ Kane John M JM

ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR 20110420

<h4>Background</h4>To compare the cost-effectiveness of treating early responders versus early nonresponders to an atypical antipsychotic (risperidone) and the cost-effectiveness of treating early nonresponders maintained on risperidone versus those switched to olanzapine.<h4>Methods</h4>This post hoc analysis used data from a randomized, double-blind, 12-week schizophrenia study (Study Code: HGMN, n = 628). Participants were initially assigned to risperidone therapy. Early response was defined ...[more]

PMID: 21935336

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: Synthetic cannabinoid mixtures have been easily accessible for years, leading to the belief that these products were natural and harmless, which contributed to their popularity. Nevertheless, there are many reports of users ending up in hospital due to severe side effects such as tachycardia, aggression, and psychosis. Controlled studies on the effects of synthetic cannabinoids on human performance are lacking. In the present study, we assessed the safety pharmacology of the synthetic cannabinoid JWH-018 after acute administration. Methods: Seventeen healthy cannabis-experienced participants took part in this placebo-controlled, crossover study. Participants inhaled the vapor of JWH-018 (doses ranged between 2 and 6.2 mg) and were subsequently monitored for 12 h, during which vital signs, cognitive performance, and subjective experience were measured. Subjective high scores showed that there is a large variability in the subjective experience of participants. Therefore, a mixed analysis of variance, with "Responder" (i.e., subjective high score >2) as a between-subjects factor and "Drug" as a within-subjects factor (placebo and JWH-018), was used. Results: Serum concentrations of JWH-018 were significantly higher in the responders. Overall, JWH-018 increased heart rate within the first hour and significantly impaired critical tracking and memory performance. Responders to JWH-018 performed more poorly in tests measuring reaction time and showed increased levels of confusion, amnesia, dissociation, derealization, and depersonalization and increased drug liking after JWH-018. Conclusion: JWH-018 administration produced large variability in drug concentrations and subjective experience. Fluctuations in drug delivery probably contributed to the variation in response. JWH-018's impairing effects on cognition and subjective measures were mainly demonstrated in participants who experienced a subjective intoxication of the drug. Lack of control over drug delivery may increase the risk of overdosing in synthetic cannabinoid users.

Project description:ObjectiveCanakinumab is a human anti-interleukin-1β (anti-IL-1β) blocking agent that effectively neutralizes IL-1β-mediated signaling for treatment of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). While many patients have dramatic clinical response to IL-1 blockade, approximately one-third fail to respond, but there are currently no validated clinical or immunologic predictors of response. We undertook this study to characterize distinct gene signatures for treatment response and nonresponse to canakinumab in systemic JIA patients.MethodsWe performed a secondary analysis of whole-blood gene expression microarrays using blood samples obtained from healthy controls and systemic JIA patients at baseline and on day 3 after canakinumab treatment (GEO accession no. GSE80060). Patients were considered strong clinical responders if they met the ACR90 response (exhibited ≥90% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology [ACR] JIA response criteria; nonresponders were those who met ACR30 [exhibiting ≤30% improvement in the ACR JIA response criteria]). A random-effects model with patient identity as the random variable was used for differential expression analysis.ResultsWe identified a distinct gene expression signature in patients with a strong clinical response to canakinumab treatment as compared to nonresponders, mediated by up-regulation of neutrophil- and IL-1-associated genes and characterized by increasing divergence from control transcriptomes with increasing clinical response. We also identified a signature including up-regulated CD163 expression that was associated with canakinumab nonresponse. Intriguingly, canakinumab treatment induced either up- or down-regulation of type I interferon (IFN) genes, independent of clinical response.ConclusionHere, we identify a gene signature in systemic JIA patients prior to receiving treatment that distinguishes strong responders to canakinumab from nonresponders. Further prospective studies are needed to assess the utility of these insights for treatment decisions in systemic JIA and to track the association of up-regulated type I IFN signatures with systemic JIA complications.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of early responders versus early nonresponders to atypical antipsychotic therapy.

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of early responders versus early nonresponders to atypical antipsychotic therapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets