Dataset Information

Economic Evaluations of Pharmacologic Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder: A Systematic Literature Review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The crisis of opioid use puts a strain on resources in the United States and worldwide. There are 3 US Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for treatment of opioid use disorder: methadone, buprenorphine, and injectable extended-release naltrexone (XR-NTX). The comparative effectiveness and cost vary considerably among these 3 medications. Economic evaluations provide evidence that help stakeholders efficiently allocate scarce resources. Our objective was to summarize recent health economic evidence of pharmacologic treatment of opioid use disorder interventions.

Methods

We searched PubMed for peer-reviewed studies in English from August 2015 through December 2019 as an update to a 2015 review. We used the Drummond checklist to evaluate and categorize economic evaluation study quality. We summarized results by economic evaluation methodology and pharmacologic treatment modality.

Results

We identified 105 articles as potentially relevant and included 21 (4 cost-offset studies and 17 cost-effectiveness/cost-benefit studies). We found strengthened evidence on buprenorphine and methadone, indicating that these treatments are economically advantageous compared with no pharmacotherapy, but found limited evidence on XR-NTX. Only half of the cost-effectiveness studies used a generic preference-based measure of effectiveness, limiting broad comparison across diseases/disorders. The disease/disorder-specific cost-effectiveness measures vary widely, suggesting a lack of consensus on the value of substance use disorder treatment.

Conclusion

We found studies that provide new evidence supporting the cost-effectiveness of buprenorphine compared with no pharmacotherapy. We found a lack of evidence supporting superior economic value for buprenorphine versus methadone, suggesting that both are attractive alternatives. Further economic research is needed on XR-NTX, as well as other emerging pharmacotherapies, treatment modalities, and dosage forms.

SUBMITTER: Onuoha EN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8591614 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSpinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a rare, progressive neuromuscular disease that affects individuals with a broad age range. SMA is typically characterised by symmetrical muscle weakness but is also associated with cardiac defects, life-limiting impairments in respiratory function and bulbar function defects that affect swallowing and speech. Despite the advent of three innovative disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for SMA, the cost of DMTs in addition to the costs of standard of care can be a barrier to treatment access for patients. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) decision makers evaluate the cost effectiveness of a new treatment before making a reimbursement decision.ObjectiveThe primary objective was to conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify the modelling approaches used in economic evaluations that assess current approved treatments in SMA, with a secondary objective to widen the scope and identify economic evaluations assessing other (non-SMA) neuromuscular disorders.MethodsAn SLR was performed to identify available economic evaluations associated with any type of SMA (Type 1, 2, 3 and/or 4). Economic evaluations associated with other (non-SMA) neuromuscular disorders were identified but not further analysed. Electronic searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews and EconLit via the Ovid platform in August 2019, and were supplemented by searches of the grey literature (reference lists, conference proceedings, global HTA body websites and other relevant sources). Eligibility criteria were based on the population, interventions, comparators and outcomes (PICO) framework. Quality assessment of full publications was conducted with reference to a published checklist.ResultsNine publications covering eight unique studies met all eligibility criteria for inclusion in the SLR, including four conference abstracts, two peer-reviewed original research articles and three HTA submissions (conducted in Canada, the US and the UK). Evaluations considered patients with early infantile-onset (most likely to develop Type 1 or Type 2 SMA), later-onset SMA and both infantile- and later-onset SMA. Data for the identified economic models were collected from literature reviews and relatively short-term clinical trials. Several intent-to-treat clinical trial populations were used in the studies, which resulted in variation in cycle length and different outcome measures to determine clinical efficacy. The results of the quality assessment on the five full-text, peer-reviewed publications found that they generally provided clear descriptions of objectives, modelling methods and results. However, key decisions, such as choice of economic evaluation, model type and choice of variables for sensitivity analysis, were often not adequately justified.ConclusionsThis SLR highlights the need for economic evaluations in SMA to better align in modelling approaches with respect to (i) consistency in model structure and use of motor function milestones as health states; (ii) consensus on measuring quality of life to estimate utilities; (iii) consistency in data collection by registries; and (iv) consensus on SMA-type classification and endpoints that determine intervention efficacy. Future economic evaluations should also incorporate the review group critiques of previous HTA submissions relating to data inputs and approaches to modelling and should include patient data reflective of the SMA population being modelled. Economic evaluations would also be improved with inclusion of long-term efficacy and safety data from clinical trials and valid patient and caregiver utility data.

Project description:BackgroundSpinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a rare and devastating condition for which new disease-modifying treatments have recently been approved. Given the increasing importance of economic considerations in healthcare decision-making, this review summarizes the studies assessing the cost of SMA and economic evaluations of treatments. A systematic review of the literature in PubMed and Scopus up to 15 September 2020 was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines.ResultsNine studies reporting the annual cost of care of patients with SMA and six evaluations of the cost-effectiveness of SMA treatments were identified. The average annual cost of SMA1, the most frequent and severe form in which symptoms appear before the age of 6 months were similar according to the different studies, ranged from $75,047 to $196,429 per year. The yearly costs for the forms of the later-onset form, called SMA2, SMA3, and SMA4, which were usually pooled in estimates of healthcare costs, were more variable, ranging from $27,157 to $82,474. The evaluations of cost-effectiveness of treatment compared nusinersen treatment against standard of care (n = 3), two treatments (nusinersen and onasemnogene abeparvovec) against each other and no drug treatment (n = 1), nusinersen versus onasemnogene abeparvovec (n = 1), and standard of care versus nusinersen with and without newborn screening (n = 1). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of nusinersen compared to standard of care in SMA1 ranged from $210,095 to $1,150,455 per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained and that for onasemnogene abeparvovec ranged from $32,464 to $251,403. For pre-symptomatic patients, the ICER value ranged from $206,409 to $735,519. The ICERs for later-onset forms of SMA (2, 3 and 4) were more diverse ranging from $275,943 to $8,438,049.ConclusionThis review confirms the substantial cost burden of standard of care for SMA patients and the high cost-effectiveness ratios of the approved drugs at the current price when delivered in post-symptomatic patients. Since few studies have been conducted so far, there is a need for further prospective and independent economic studies in pre- and post-symptomatic patients.

Project description:BackgroundMantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare and aggressive subtype of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. While treatment of patients with MCL and their outcomes are previously published, the availability of heath economics evidence is unclear.ObjectiveThe aim of this paper was to conduct a comprehensive review of studies relating to economic evaluations, costs and resource use, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with MCL.MethodsSearch strategies were designed to capture studies reporting economic or HRQoL outcomes published in the previous 11 years (2007-2018). The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), and EconLit. In addition, we reviewed congress abstracts presented over the previous 2 years (2015 and 2016; where 2017 proceedings had occurred, these were searched instead of 2015). Publications were screened in duplicate by two reviewers and supplementary searches were carried out on health technology assessment websites. Searches were first conducted in October 2017 and updated in March 2018.FindingsThe systematic literature review identified 11 economic evaluations (in 16 publications), seven studies reporting data relating to costs or resource use, and five relating to HRQoL. Four economic evaluations presented results for patients with MCL modelled in the first-line setting, while seven modelled patients in the relapsed/refractory setting. The majority of economic evaluations were conducted using a Markov model with three to five health states. Seven studies assessed resource use and reported adverse events as key drivers of increased costs and resource use. Across the five studies reporting HRQoL, disparate measures were used. Two studies reported improvement in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) total scores following treatment and found that clinical response to treatment was associated with improvement in overall HRQoL.Conclusions and relevanceThe published economic and HRQoL evidence in MCL, although scarce, reveals that the economic and HRQoL burden associated with MCL is substantial. In highlighting this evidence, this analysis underlines a critical unmet need for more effective treatments with improved outcomes in MCL.

Project description:AimBorderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a common mental health condition with high patterns of service utilisation of inpatient and community treatment. Over the past five years there has been significant growth in research with economic data, making this systematic review a timely update.MethodsEmpirical studies written in English or German, published up to December 2015, and cited in major electronic databases were examined using the PRISMA systematic review method. Papers were included that had one of the following: data related to cost of BPD to society, the individual, the carer or families; cost benefits of interventions. Reported cost data were inflated to the year 2015 and converted into US- dollars (USD $) using purchasing power parities.ResultsWe identified 30 economic evaluations providing cost data related to interventions for BPD across 134,136 patients. The methodological quality was good, almost all studies fulfilled ≥ 50% of the quality criteria. The mean cost saving for treating BPD with evidence-based psychotherapy across studies was USD $2,987.82 per patient per year. A further mean weighted reduction of USD $1,551 per patient per year (range $83 - $29,392) was found compared to treatment as usual. Evidence-based psychological treatment was both less expensive as well as more effective, despite considerable differences in health cost arrangements between individual studies and countries. Where it was able to be calculated, a significant difference in cost-savings between different types of evidence-based psychotherapies was found.DiscussionIndividuals with BPD consistently demonstrate high patterns of service utilization and therefore high costs. The findings of this review present a strong argument in favour of prioritizing BPD treatments in reimbursement decisions, both for the affected individual and the family. The provision of evidence based treatment, irrespective of the type of psychological treatment, may lead to widespread reductions in healthcare costs.