Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29761351›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2018

Economic Evaluation of Stiripentol for Dravet Syndrome: A Cost-Utility Analysis.

Jesse Elliott, Bláthnaid McCoy, Tammy Clifford, George A Wells, Doug Coyle

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jesse ElliottSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. jcrai065@uottawa.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2501-1641
Bláthnaid McCoyDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Tammy CliffordSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2356-2300
George A WellsSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2289-9139
Doug CoyleSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3492-2268
University of Ottawa · CACanadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDravet syndrome is a catastrophic form of pediatric treatment-resistant epilepsy with few effective treatment options. Stiripentol is approved for use in Canada for treatment of Dravet syndrome, but the associated long-term costs and benefits have not been well-studied and its cost effectiveness is unclear.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of stiripentol as an adjunctive treatment to clobazam and valproate for treatment of Dravet syndrome from the perspective of the Canadian public healthcare payer.

methodsA cost-utility analysis was performed to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with adjunctive stiripentol treatment compared with clobazam and valproate alone in children with Dravet syndrome. Transition probabilities, drug efficacy, utility weights, and costs were obtained from a review of the literature. Probabilistic analyses were conducted using a Markov model with health states related to seizure frequency. A 10-year horizon was used. The incremental cost per QALY gained (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]) for adjunctive use of stiripentol was calculated, and assumptions were explored in scenario analyses. All costs are expressed in 2017 Canadian dollars ($Can).

resultsCompared with clobazam and valproate alone, the adjunctive use of stiripentol is associated with an ICER of $Can151,310. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $Can50,000, the probability that stiripentol was the optimal treatment was 5.2%. The cost of stiripentol would need to be reduced by 61.4% for stiripentol to be cost effective.

conclusionFrom the perspective of the Canadian public healthcare payer, stiripentol is not cost effective at its current price at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $Can50,000. Funding stiripentol will be associated with important opportunity costs that bear consideration.

Indexed as

AnticonvulsantsCanadaChildClobazamCost-Benefit AnalysisDioxolanesDrug Therapy, CombinationEpilepsies, MyoclonicHumansQuality-Adjusted Life YearsValproic AcidAnticonvulsantsClobazamDioxolanesstiripentolValproic Acid

Identifiers

PMID29761351
OpenAlexW2800669514

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.