Genotype-Specific Tricyclic Antidepressant Dosing in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: A Trial-Based Economic Evaluation.

IF 6 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Sophie E Ter Hark, Wietske Kievit, Gerjon Hannink, Cornelis F Vos, Jan Spijker, Annemarie van der Meij, Anne J Grotenhuis, Raluca Mihaescu, Rogier Donders, Rob E Aarnoutse, Arnt F A Schellekens, Marieke J H Coenen, Joost G E Janzing
{"title":"Genotype-Specific Tricyclic Antidepressant Dosing in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: A Trial-Based Economic Evaluation.","authors":"Sophie E Ter Hark, Wietske Kievit, Gerjon Hannink, Cornelis F Vos, Jan Spijker, Annemarie van der Meij, Anne J Grotenhuis, Raluca Mihaescu, Rogier Donders, Rob E Aarnoutse, Arnt F A Schellekens, Marieke J H Coenen, Joost G E Janzing","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.07.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of preemptive CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotype-informed tricyclic antidepressant dosing from a societal and a healthcare perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with data from the Pharmacogenetics for Individualized Tricyclic Antidepressant dosing study. This multicenter randomized controlled trial (n = 111) compared pharmacogenetic-informed treatment (PIT) with treatment as usual. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and costs were measured at 13 and 26 weeks. Prices were based on or indexed to 2022 tariffs. Single imputation nested in the bootstrap percentile method (using 5000 bootstrap replications) was performed to address missing data and to estimate uncertainty around cost-effectiveness outcomes. Incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) was calculated based on a willingness to pay (WTP) of €50 000/QALY.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our data showed a marginal difference of -0.0125 QALYs (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.0404 to 0.0149, week 13) and 0.0012 QALYs (95% CI -0.0491 to 0.0574, week 26) for PIT versus treatment as usual. From the healthcare perspective, a cost saving of €148 (week 13) and €521 (26 week) was found for PIT. The societal perspective showed increased costs of €1300 (week 13) and €1704 (26 weeks) for PIT. The mean iNMB from a healthcare perspective was positive at 26 weeks, the other iNMBs (13 weeks and societal perspective) were negative.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We observed marginal differences of QALYs in both the healthcare and societal perspective with cost savings from the healthcare perspective and additional cost from the societal perspective. These mixed results warrant more long-term observational studies to determine whether preemptive genotyping in tricyclic antidepressant dosing will be cost-effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.07.018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of preemptive CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotype-informed tricyclic antidepressant dosing from a societal and a healthcare perspective.

Methods: A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with data from the Pharmacogenetics for Individualized Tricyclic Antidepressant dosing study. This multicenter randomized controlled trial (n = 111) compared pharmacogenetic-informed treatment (PIT) with treatment as usual. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and costs were measured at 13 and 26 weeks. Prices were based on or indexed to 2022 tariffs. Single imputation nested in the bootstrap percentile method (using 5000 bootstrap replications) was performed to address missing data and to estimate uncertainty around cost-effectiveness outcomes. Incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) was calculated based on a willingness to pay (WTP) of €50 000/QALY.

Results: Our data showed a marginal difference of -0.0125 QALYs (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.0404 to 0.0149, week 13) and 0.0012 QALYs (95% CI -0.0491 to 0.0574, week 26) for PIT versus treatment as usual. From the healthcare perspective, a cost saving of €148 (week 13) and €521 (26 week) was found for PIT. The societal perspective showed increased costs of €1300 (week 13) and €1704 (26 weeks) for PIT. The mean iNMB from a healthcare perspective was positive at 26 weeks, the other iNMBs (13 weeks and societal perspective) were negative.

Conclusions: We observed marginal differences of QALYs in both the healthcare and societal perspective with cost savings from the healthcare perspective and additional cost from the societal perspective. These mixed results warrant more long-term observational studies to determine whether preemptive genotyping in tricyclic antidepressant dosing will be cost-effective.

重度抑郁症患者基因型特异性三环抗抑郁药剂量:一项基于试验的经济评估。
目的:从社会和医疗保健的角度评估预先使用CYP2D6和CYP2C19基因型三环抗抑郁药的成本-效果。方法:利用个体化三环抗抑郁药给药(PITA)研究的药物遗传学数据进行基于试验的成本-效果分析。这项多中心随机对照试验(n=111)比较了药理学知情治疗(PIT)和常规治疗(TAU)。在13周和26周时测量质量调整生命年(QALY)和成本。价格基于或与2022年的关税挂钩。在自举百分位法(使用5000次自举重复)中嵌套单次输入,以解决缺失数据并估计成本效益结果的不确定性。增量净货币效益(iNMB)是根据支付意愿(WTP)为€50,000 /QALY计算的。结果:我们的数据显示PIT与TAU的边际差异为-0.0125 QALYs(95%可信区间(CI) -0.0404至0.0149,第13周)和0.0012 QALYs (95%-CI -0.0517至0.0491,第26周)。从医疗保健的角度来看,PIT可节省148欧元(第13周)和521欧元(第26周)的成本。从社会角度来看,PIT的成本增加了1300欧元(第13周)和1704欧元(第26周)。从医疗保健角度来看,平均iNMB在26周时为阳性,其他iNMB(13周和社会角度)为阴性。结论:我们从医疗保健和社会的角度观察到质量aly的边际差异,从医疗保健的角度观察到成本节约,从社会的角度观察到额外的成本。这些混杂的结果需要进行更长期的观察性研究,以确定三环抗抑郁药剂量中先发制人的基因分型是否具有成本效益。
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
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
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