Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31808053›Full record

ArticleAdvances in therapy2020

Economic Value of Adjunctive Brivaracetam Treatment Strategy for Focal Onset Seizures in Finland.

Saku Väätäinen, Erkki Soini, Jukka Peltola, Mata Charokopou, Maarit Taiha, Reetta Kälviäinen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Discrete-Event Simulation Modeling in Healthcare: A Comprehensive Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Saku VäätäinenESiOR Oy, Kuopio, Finland.
Erkki SoiniESiOR Oy, Kuopio, Finland. erkki.soini@esior.fi.ORCID 0000-0003-4259-7610
Jukka PeltolaFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Mata CharokopouUCB Pharma Belgium, Brussels, Belgium.
Maarit TaihaUCB Pharma Oy Finland, Espoo, Finland.
Reetta KälviäinenInstitute of Clinical Medicine, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
ESiOR Oy (Finland) · FITampere University · FIUCB Pharma (Belgium) · BEUniversity of Eastern Finland · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is an unmet need for well-tolerated antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) that effectively control focal onset seizures. This study aimed to evaluate the economic value of new AEDs in the treatment of focal onset seizure, with or without secondary generalization, in Finnish adults and adolescents with epilepsy, comparing brivaracetam with perampanel as adjunctive AEDs.

methodsEconomic value was assessed using cost-utility analysis. Periods of AED initiation, titration, response assessment (seizure freedom, ≥ 50% reduction, no response), switching in no response or treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and death were simulated using a discrete-event simulation model. Responses and switching were simulated based on a comprehensive Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary modeled outcome was the 3%/year discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), payer costs (year 2017 Euro) per patient, and net monetary benefit (NMB) were secondary outcomes. Probabilistic and comprehensive deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

resultsBrivaracetam was more efficacious and had fewer TEAEs than perampanel and other AEDs. Modeled average 5-year QALYs and costs were 3.671 and €28,297 for brivaracetam and 3.611 and €27,979 for perampanel, respectively. The resulting ICER for brivaracetam versus perampanel was only €5345/QALY gained in a deterministic base case scenario. Brivaracetam had a positive NMB and high probability of cost-effectiveness of €1190 and 71% or €1944 and 80% with the assumed willingness to pay of €25,358 or €38,036/QALY gained, respectively. The primary result was robust, with a positive NMB persistent in all sensitivity analysis scenarios. When switching from brivaracetam to perampanel was excluded from the modeling or switching from perampanel to brivaracetam was included, brivaracetam was cost-saving and more effective than perampanel (dominant).

conclusionThese simulated comparisons demonstrated that brivaracetam was more effective and potentially also more affordable than perampanel. Thus, brivaracetam is likely a cost-effective and net beneficial alternative to perampanel for treatment of focal onset seizures. Plain language summary available for this article.

Indexed as

Quality-Adjusted Life YearsAdolescentAdultAnticonvulsantsBayes TheoremCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug Therapy, CombinationEpilepsyFemaleFinlandHumansPyrrolidinonesSeizuresTreatment OutcomeAnticonvulsantsbrivaracetamPyrrolidinonesBrivaracetamEconomic evaluationEpilepsyFocal onset seizurePerampanelPICOSTEPS

Identifiers

PMID31808053
PMCPMC6979440
OpenAlexW2992162240

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.