Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24554474›Full record

Observational studyPharmacoEconomics2014

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmaceutical treatment options in the first-line management of major depressive disorder in Belgium.

Lieven Annemans, Mélanie Brignone, Sylvain Druais, Ann De Pauw, Aline Gauthier, Koen Demyttenaere

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PharmacoEconomics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Use of Expert Elicitation among Computational Modeling Studies in Health Research: A Systematic Review.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

6 authors.

Lieven AnnemansGhent University Hospital, Block A, 2nd fl., De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium, Lieven.annemans@ugent.be.
Mélanie Brignone
Sylvain Druais
Ann De Pauw
Aline Gauthier
Koen Demyttenaere

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of commonly used antidepressants as first-line treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in Belgium.

methodsThe model structure was based on a decision tree developed by the Swedish TLV (Tandvårds- och läkemedelsförmånsverket) and adapted to the Belgium healthcare setting, using primary local data on the patterns of treatment and following KCE [Federal Knowledge Center (Federaal Kenniscentrum voor de Gezondheidszorg)] recommendations. Comparators were escitalopram, citalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, duloxetine, venlafaxine, and mirtazapine. In the model, patients not achieving remission or relapsing after remission on the assessed treatment moved to a second therapeutic step (titration, switch, add-on, or transfer to a specialist). In case of failure in the second step or following a suicide attempt, patients were assumed to be referred to secondary care. The time horizon was 1 year and the analysis was conducted from the National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance (NIHDI; national health insurance) and societal perspectives. Remission rates were obtained from the TLV network meta-analysis and risk of relapse, efficacy following therapeutic change, risk of suicide attempts and related death, utilities, costs (2012), and resources were derived from the published literature and expert opinion. The effect of uncertainty in model parameters was estimated through scenario analyses and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA).

resultsIn the base-case analysis, escitalopram was identified as the optimal strategy: it dominated all other treatments except venlafaxine from the NIHDI perspective, against which it was cost effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of <euro>6,352 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Escitalopram also dominated all other treatments from the societal perspective. At a threshold of <euro>30,000 per QALY and from the NIHDI perspective, the PSA showed that the probability of escitalopram being identified as the optimal strategy ranged from 61 % (vs. venlafaxine) to 100 % (vs. fluoxetine).

conclusionEscitalopram was associated with the highest probability of being the optimal treatment from the NIHDI and societal perspectives. This analysis, based on new Belgian clinical practice data and following KCE requirements, provides additional information that may be used to guide the choice of treatments in the management of MDD in Belgium.

Indexed as

Drug CostsAntidepressive AgentsBelgiumCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision MakingDecision TreesHumansLongitudinal StudiesMajor Depressive DisorderModels, EconomicProbabilityQuality-Adjusted Life YearsAntidepressive Agents

Identifiers

PMID24554474
PMCPMC4013445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.