Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18407715›Full record

ArticleClinical drug investigation2008

A markov model of the cost effectiveness of olanzapine treatment for agitation and psychosis in Alzheimer's disease.

Stephanie Kirbach, Kit Simpson, Paul J Nietert, Jacobo Mintzer

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. How relevant are social costs in economic evaluations? The case of Alzheimer's disease.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephanie KirbachDepartment of Biostatistics, Bioinformatics and Epidemiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA. kirbach@musc.edu
Kit Simpson
Paul J Nietert
Jacobo Mintzer
Medical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveAntipsychotics have long been used to treat agitation and psychosis related to Alzheimer's disease, but in a limited fashion because of troubling adverse effects. The new atypical antipsychotics are thought to be at least as effective as first-generation drugs and to cause fewer adverse effects. These drugs, however, are currently not US FDA-approved for use among elderly demented subjects due to a slight increase in the risk of death and serious cardiovascular events within this population. However, their favourable adverse effect profile has led many physicians to prescribe these drugs as first-line therapy for behaviourally disturbed patients with Alzheimer's disease. Clinical trials to evaluate the use of atypical antipsychotics have produced varying results, and clarity has not yet been achieved. Thus, a quantitative summary of the risks and benefits may help inform complex decisions that must be made in this area. In this study we set out to compare the expected costs and outcomes for a community-dwelling cohort of patients with Alzheimer's disease with agitation and/or psychosis who are (a) untreated, or (b) treated with olanzapine.

methodsWe constructed a Markov state-transition model using the best published data from several sources for Alzheimer's disease patient progression and treatment. This model allowed us to compare the expected costs and outcomes associated with olanzapine treatment compared with no treatment for a synthetic cohort of US adults aged > or =65 years. The model cycles every 6 months and continues until all patients die from Alzheimer's disease progression or from co-morbid conditions. Outcome estimates included the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The robustness of the estimates was examined by sensitivity analyses of key parameters, including cost of care, olanzapine effectiveness and Alzheimer's disease progression rates.

resultsResults indicated that olanzapine was a cost-effective treatment for agitation and psychosis related to Alzheimer's disease when compared with no treatment (ICER <$US50,000). In addition, sensitivity analyses demonstrated that olanzapine remained cost effective despite multiple variations of several parameters, both alone and concurrently.

conclusionOlanzapine treatment for agitation and psychosis related to Alzheimer's disease is cost effective when compared with no treatment. Further analysis should be performed as atypical antipsychotics become generic, as more information on health utilities in the Alzheimer's disease population becomes available, and to compare atypical antipsychotics with first-generation antipsychotics.

Indexed as

AgedAlzheimer DiseaseAntipsychotic AgentsBenzodiazepinesCohort StudiesCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug CostsEthnicityHumansMarkov ChainsMortalityOlanzapineProportional Hazards ModelsPsychomotor AgitationPsychotic DisordersQuality-Adjusted Life YearsAntipsychotic AgentsBenzodiazepinesOlanzapine

Identifiers

PMID18407715
OpenAlexW2076667178

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.