Dataset Information

Systematic review of the methods of health economic models assessing antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Numerous economic models have assessed the cost-effectiveness of antipsychotic medications in schizophrenia. It is important to understand what key impacts of antipsychotic medications were considered in the existing models and limitations of existing models in order to inform the development of future models. OBJECTIVES:This systematic review aims to identify which clinical benefits, clinical harms, costs and cost savings of antipsychotic medication have been considered by existing models, to assess quality of existing models and to suggest good practice recommendations for future economic models of antipsychotic medications. METHODS:An electronic search was performed on multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, The NHS Economic Evaluation Database and Health Technology Assessment database) to identify economic models of schizophrenia published between 2005-2020. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion. Study quality was assessed using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) checklist and the Cooper hierarchy. Key impacts of antipsychotic medications considered by exiting models were descriptively summarised. RESULTS:Sixty models were included. Existing models varied greatly in key impacts of antipsychotic medication included in the model, especially in clinical outcomes used for assessing reduction in psychotic symptoms and types of adverse events considered in the model. Quality of existing models was generally low due to failure to capture the health and cost impact of adverse events of antipsychotic medications and input data not obtained from best available source. Good practices for modelling antipsychotic medications are suggested. DISCUSSIONS:This review highlights inconsistency in key impacts considered by different models, and limitations of the existing models. Recommendations on future research are provided.

SUBMITTER: Jin H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7351140 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review of the methods of health economic models assessing antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia.

Jin Huajie H Tappenden Paul P Robinson Stewart S Achilla Evanthia E Aceituno David D Byford Sarah S

PloS one 20200710 7

<h4>Background</h4>Numerous economic models have assessed the cost-effectiveness of antipsychotic medications in schizophrenia. It is important to understand what key impacts of antipsychotic medications were considered in the existing models and limitations of existing models in order to inform the development of future models.<h4>Objectives</h4>This systematic review aims to identify which clinical benefits, clinical harms, costs and cost savings of antipsychotic medication have been considere ...[more]

PMID: 32649663

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications in early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders is common, but both short and long-term effects on the illness are unclear. There have been numerous suggestions that people with early episodes of schizophrenia appear to respond differently than those with multiple prior episodes. The number of episodes may moderate response to drug treatment. OBJECTIVES:To assess the effects of antipsychotic medication treatment on people with early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders. SEARCH STRATEGY:We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group register (July 2007) as well as references of included studies. We contacted authors of studies for further data. SELECTION CRITERIA:Studies with a majority of first and second episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders comparing initial antipsychotic medication treatment with placebo, milieu, or psychosocial treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Working independently, we critically appraised records from 681studies, of which five studies met inclusion criteria. John Rathbone from the Schizophrenia Group supported us with the data extraction. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) where possible. For continuous data, we calculated mean difference (MD). We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS:Five studies with a combined N = 998 met inclusion criteria. Four studies (N = 724) provided leaving the study early data and results suggested that individuals treated with a typical antipsychotic medication are less likely to leave the study early than those treated with placebo (Chlorpromazine: 3 RCTs N = 353, RR 0.4 CI 0.3 to 0.5, NNT 3.2, Fluphenaxine: 1 RCT N = 240, RR 0.5 CI 0.3 to 0.8, NNT 5; Thioridazine: 1 RCT N = 236, RR 0.44 CI 0.3 to 0.7, NNT 4.3, Trifulperazine: 1 RCT N = 94, RR 0.96 CI 0.3 to 3.6). Two studies (Cole 1964; May 1976) contributed data to assessment of side effects and present a general pattern of more frequent side effects among individuals treated with typical antipsychotic medications compared to placebo. Rappaport 1978 suggested a higher rehospitalisation rate for those receiving chlorpromazine compared to placebo (N = 80, RR 2.29 CI 1.3 to 4.0, NNH 2.9). However, a higher attrition in the placebo group is likely to have introduced a survivor bias into this comparison, as this difference becomes non-significant in a sensitivity analysis on intent-to-treat participants (N = 127, RR 1.69 CI 0.9 to 3.0). One study (May 1976) contributes data to a comparison of trifluoperazine to psychotherapy on long-term health in favour of the trifluoperazine group (N = 92, MD 5.8 CI 1.6 to 0.0); however, data from this study are also likely to contain biases due to selection and attrition. One study (Mosher 1995) contributes data to a comparison of typical antipsychotic medication to psychosocial treatment on six-week outcome measures of global psychopathology (N = 89, MD 0.01 CI -0.6 to 0.6) and global improvement (N = 89, MD -0.03 CI -0.5 to 0.4), indicating no between-group differences. On the whole, there is very little useable data in the few studies meeting inclusion criteria. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:With only a few studies meeting inclusion criteria, and with limited useable data in these studies, it is not possible to arrive at definitive conclusions. The preliminary pattern of evidence suggests that people with early episode schizophrenia treated with typical antipsychotic medications are less likely to leave the study early, but more likely to experience medication-related side effects. Data are too sparse to assess the effects of antipsychotic medication on outcomes in early episode schizophrenia.

Project description:Background: Schizophrenia is a severe and complex disease with substantial economic and social burdens. Despite multiple treatment choices, adverse events, and impaired social functions are still challenges in clinical therapy. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations could provide evidence to help decision makers improve the utilization of scarce resources. However, there remains some challenges especially in modeling due to uncertainties in progression of schizophrenia. There are limited summaries about the overall methodologies of schizophrenia economic evaluations. Objective: The aim of this study is to review the existing economic evaluations of antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia and summarize the evidence and methods applied. Methods: An electronic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO host, The Cochrane Library and ScienceDirect from January 2014 to December 2020. Search terms included "schizophrenia," "schizophrenic," "pharmacoeconomic," "economic evaluation," "cost-effectiveness," and "cost-utility." The Literature was screened and extracted by two researchers independently and assessed with the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) List and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Statement. Results: A total of 25 studies were included in the review. The regions included Europe, North America, Asia and Africa. Most of the studies chose second-generation antipsychotics as comparators and integrated treatment sequences. Time horizons varied from 1 year to lifetime. The healthcare sector was the most common perspective, accordingly, most of the evaluations considered only direct medical costs. The Markov model and decision tree model were the most common choices. Adverse events, compliance and persistence were considered important parameters. Quality-adjusted life-years were the major outcomes applied to the economic evaluations. All utilities for health states and adverse events were collected from published literature. All of the studies applied uncertainty analysis to explore the robustness of the results. The quality of the studies was generally satisfactory. However, improvements were needed in the choice of time horizons, the measurements of outcomes and the descriptions of assumptions. Conclusions: This study highlights the methodology of economic evaluation of schizophrenia. Recommendations for modeling method and future study are provided.

Project description:The pharmacoepigenetics of antipsychotic treatment in severe mental illness is a growing area of research that aims to understand the interface between antipsychotic treatment and genetic regulation. Pharmacoepigenetics may some day assist in identifying treatment response mechanisms or become one of the components in the implementation of precision medicine. To understand the current evidence regarding the effects of antipsychotics on DNA methylation a systematic review with qualitative synthesis was performed through Pubmed, Embase and Psychinfo from earliest data to June 2019. Studies were included if they analyzed DNA methylation in an antipsychotic-treated population of patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Data extraction occurred via a standardized format and study quality was assessed. Twenty-nine studies were identified for inclusion. Study design, antipsychotic type, sample source, and methods of DNA methylation measurement varied across all studies. Eighteen studies analyzed methylation in patients with schizophrenia, four studies in patients with bipolar disorder, and seven studies in a combined sample of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Twenty-two studies used observational samples whereas the remainder used prospectively treated samples. Six studies assessed global methylation, five assessed epigenome-wide, and 15 performed a candidate epigenetic study. Two studies analyzed both global and gene-specific methylation, whereas one study performed a simultaneous epigenome-wide and gene-specific study. Only three genes were analyzed in more than one gene-specific study and the findings were discordant. The state of the pharmacoepigenetic literature on antipsychotic use is still in its early stages and uniform reporting of methylation site information is needed. Future work should concentrate on using prospective sampling with appropriate control groups and begin to replicate many of the novel associations that have been reported.

Dataset Information

Systematic review of the methods of health economic models assessing antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia.

Publications

Systematic review of the methods of health economic models assessing antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets