Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16336020›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2005

Modelling the cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors in the management of mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease.

Colin Green, Joanna Picot, Emma Loveman, Andrea Takeda, Jo Kirby, Andrew Clegg

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Dependence as a unifying construct in defining Alzheimer's disease severity.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2010
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Progress update: Pharmacological treatment of Alzheimer's disease.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2007
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Colin GreenSouthampton Health Technology Assessments Centre, Wessex Institute for Health Research and Development, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. c.green@soton.ac.uk
Joanna Picot
Emma Loveman
Andrea Takeda
Jo Kirby
Andrew Clegg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo estimate the cost effectiveness (from the UK NHS and personal social services perspective) of the cholinesterase inhibitors donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine compared with usual care in the treatment of mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. Patients had a mean age of 74 years, a mean disease duration of 1 year and a mean Alzheimer's disease assessment scale-cognitive subscale score of 24.

methodsA pharmacoeconomic model was used to predict long-term outcomes over a 5-year time horizon and to estimate the cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors for the management of Alzheimer's disease. The model structure is informed by a systematic review of the literature on the clinical and cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors and a review of the literature on the costs and outcomes associated with treatment for Alzheimer's disease. The main outcome measure used was the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. All healthcare costs (excluding cholinesterase inhibitor costs) were indexed to pounds sterling (2003 values). Drug costs are 2005 values. Multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis were undertaken to assess uncertainty in the results.

resultsThe clinical benefits on cognition from treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors resulted in an incremental cost per QALY gained ranging from 53,780 pounds sterling to 74,735 pounds sterling, over 5 years (vs usual care). Uncertainty analysis suggests that the probability of any of these treatments having an incremental cost per QALY of < 30,000 pounds sterling is < 21%. The key determinants of cost effectiveness were the effectiveness of treatment, the mean treatment cost and the cost savings associated with an expected delay in disease progression.

conclusionsResults presented in this paper suggest that the use of cholinesterase inhibitors may not be a cost-effective use of NHS resources. Guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Effectiveness (NICE) in the UK on their judgements surrounding the acceptability of technologies as an effective use of resources, indicates there would need to be special reasons for accepting cholinesterase inhibitors as a cost-effective use of NHS resources.

Indexed as

Models, EconomicAgedAlzheimer DiseaseCholinesterase InhibitorsConfidence IntervalsCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareDrug Administration ScheduleHome Care ServicesHumansLong-Term CarePatient Care PlanningPrognosisSeverity of Illness IndexTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeCholinesterase Inhibitors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.