Cost-per-remitter for esketamine nasal spray versus quetiapine for treatment-resistant depression.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Kristin Clemens, Amanda Teeple, Benoit Rive, Noam Kirson, Urvi Desai, Jason Doran, Diab Eid, Alice Qu, Hannah Bowrey, Kruti Joshi
{"title":"Cost-per-remitter for esketamine nasal spray versus quetiapine for treatment-resistant depression.","authors":"Kristin Clemens, Amanda Teeple, Benoit Rive, Noam Kirson, Urvi Desai, Jason Doran, Diab Eid, Alice Qu, Hannah Bowrey, Kruti Joshi","doi":"10.57264/cer-2024-0092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> Estimate the cost-per-remitter with esketamine nasal spray plus an oral antidepressant (ESK NS + OAD) versus quetiapine extended release plus an oral antidepressant (QTP XR + OAD) among adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). <b>Materials & methods:</b> An Excel-based model was developed to estimate the cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD and QTP XR + OAD from the perspective of a US commercial insurance plan and Medicaid. Remission and response rates were estimated in 4-week intervals over 32 weeks using data from the ESCAPE-TRD phase IIIb clinical trial comparing ESK NS + OAD versus QTP XR + OAD in adults with TRD. Direct healthcare costs were sourced from health economic literature and the RED BOOK<sup>®</sup> drug pricing database. Indirect costs were derived from a separate analysis of ESCAPE-TRD using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Depression questionnaire. Adults not remitting/responding either stayed on current treatment or discontinued current treatment and initiated either augmented therapy with antipsychotics or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. In a scenario analysis, all individuals who did not achieve response and discontinued treatment initiated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. <b>Results:</b> The remission rate at 32 weeks was 50% for adults receiving ESK NS + OAD and 33% for adults receiving QTP XR + OAD. The cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD compared with QTP XR + OAD was $3102.17 lower in the commercial setting and $456.12 lower in the Medicaid setting. Under the scenario analysis, the cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD compared with QTP XR + OAD was $15,133.66 lower in the commercial setting and $12,487.62 lower in the Medicaid setting. <b>Conclusion:</b> The findings suggest that ESK NS + OAD is a cost-effective treatment for adults with TRD compared with QTP XR + OAD in the commercial and Medicaid settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":15539,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","volume":" ","pages":"e240092"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0092","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Estimate the cost-per-remitter with esketamine nasal spray plus an oral antidepressant (ESK NS + OAD) versus quetiapine extended release plus an oral antidepressant (QTP XR + OAD) among adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Materials & methods: An Excel-based model was developed to estimate the cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD and QTP XR + OAD from the perspective of a US commercial insurance plan and Medicaid. Remission and response rates were estimated in 4-week intervals over 32 weeks using data from the ESCAPE-TRD phase IIIb clinical trial comparing ESK NS + OAD versus QTP XR + OAD in adults with TRD. Direct healthcare costs were sourced from health economic literature and the RED BOOK® drug pricing database. Indirect costs were derived from a separate analysis of ESCAPE-TRD using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Depression questionnaire. Adults not remitting/responding either stayed on current treatment or discontinued current treatment and initiated either augmented therapy with antipsychotics or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. In a scenario analysis, all individuals who did not achieve response and discontinued treatment initiated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Results: The remission rate at 32 weeks was 50% for adults receiving ESK NS + OAD and 33% for adults receiving QTP XR + OAD. The cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD compared with QTP XR + OAD was $3102.17 lower in the commercial setting and $456.12 lower in the Medicaid setting. Under the scenario analysis, the cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD compared with QTP XR + OAD was $15,133.66 lower in the commercial setting and $12,487.62 lower in the Medicaid setting. Conclusion: The findings suggest that ESK NS + OAD is a cost-effective treatment for adults with TRD compared with QTP XR + OAD in the commercial and Medicaid settings.

艾氯胺酮鼻喷雾剂与奎硫平治疗难治性抑郁症的成本比较。
目的:评估艾氯胺酮鼻喷雾剂加口服抗抑郁药(ESK NS + OAD)与喹硫平缓释加口服抗抑郁药(QTP XR + OAD)在成人难治性抑郁症(TRD)患者中的成本。材料与方法:开发了基于excel的模型,从美国商业保险计划和医疗补助的角度估计ESK NS + OAD和QTP XR + OAD的每个汇款人的成本。使用ESCAPE-TRD IIIb期临床试验的数据,比较ESK NS + OAD与QTP XR + OAD对成人TRD患者的缓解率和缓解率,每隔4周评估一次,超过32周。直接医疗成本来源于卫生经济学文献和RED BOOK®药品定价数据库。间接成本来自ESCAPE-TRD的单独分析,使用工作效率和活动障碍:抑郁症问卷。未缓解/无反应的成人要么继续目前的治疗,要么停止目前的治疗,并开始抗精神病药物或重复经颅磁刺激的强化治疗。在一项情景分析中,所有未达到反应并停止治疗的个体开始重复经颅磁刺激。结果:32周时,接受ESK NS + OAD的成人缓解率为50%,接受QTP XR + OAD的成人缓解率为33%。与QTP XR + OAD相比,ESK NS + OAD的每发送者成本在商业环境中降低了3102.17美元,在医疗补助环境中降低了456.12美元。在情景分析中,与QTP XR + OAD相比,ESK NS + OAD的每个汇款人的成本在商业环境中低15,133.66美元,在医疗补助环境中低12,487.62美元。结论:研究结果表明,在商业和医疗补助环境下,与QTP XR + OAD相比,ESK NS + OAD是一种具有成本效益的成人TRD治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of comparative effectiveness research
Journal of comparative effectiveness research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides a rapid-publication platform for debate, and for the presentation of new findings and research methodologies. Through rigorous evaluation and comprehensive coverage, the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides stakeholders (including patients, clinicians, healthcare purchasers, and health policy makers) with the key data and opinions to make informed and specific decisions on clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信