ArticleBMC medicine2025
Value of cannabidiol as adjunctive treatment for Lennox Gastaut syndrome: cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis.
Article in BMC medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a severe encephalopathic disease that leads to a decrease in the quality of life, physical injury, psychosocial impairment, and a significant increase in treatment costs. Cannabidiol (CBD) is approved for the adjunctive treatment of tonic-colonic seizures in LGS. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of CBD compared to the usual treatment in patients with LGS syndrome.
methodsWe developed a lifetime-horizon Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of adjunctive CBD versus usual care. Additionally, we performed a budget impact analysis over a 5-year time horizon. The findings were presented as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for CEA, with a willingness to pay threshold of $18,261 per QALY gained, and as the difference in the overall budget ($) between the scenarios with and without CBD for budget impact assessment.
resultsIn the base case scenario, CBD was cost-effective compared with usual care $6573 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses substantiated these results. From a healthcare perspective, there is a 77% probability that CBD is cost-effective at a willingness to pay of $18,261 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Overall, the market access of CBD was associated to an increased budget of about $3,459,846 (+ 33%) in the next 5 years simulated.
conclusionsCompared to usual care, CBD seems to be cost-effective in LGS patients and sustainable, with less than 34% overall budget increased in the next 5 years. Future studies need to confirm our results in the real word setting and in other countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.