Opicapone versus entacapone: Head‐to‐head retrospective data‐based comparison of healthcare resource utilization in people with Parkinson's disease new to catechol‐O‐methyltransferase (COMT) inhibitor treatment

Abstract

AbstractBackground and purposeMotor fluctuations are a significant driver of healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) in people with Parkinson's disease (pwPD). A common management strategy is to include catechol‐O‐methyltransferase (COMT) inhibition with either opicapone or entacapone in the levodopa regimen. However, to date, there has been a lack of head‐to‐head data comparing the two COMT inhibitors in real‐world settings. The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in HCRU and effect on sleep medications when opicapone was initiated as first COMT inhibitor versus entacapone.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we assessed HCRU outcomes in pwPD naïve to COMT inhibition via UK electronic healthcare records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episodes Statistics databases, June 2016 to December 2019). HCRU outcomes were assessed before (baseline) and after COMT inhibitor prescription at 0–6 months, 7–12 months and 13–18 months. Opicapone‐treated pwPD were algorithm‐matched (1:4) to entacapone‐treated pwPD.ResultsBy 6 months, treatment with opicapone resulted in 18.5% fewer neurology outpatient visits compared to entacapone treatment; this effect was maintained until the last follow‐up (18 months). In the opicapone group, the mean levodopa equivalent daily dose decreased over the first year and then stabilized, whereas the entacapone‐treated group showed an initial decrease in the first 6 months followed by a dose increase between 7 and 18 months. Neither COMT inhibitor had a significant impact on sleep medication use.ConclusionsThis head‐to‐head study is the first to demonstrate, using ‘real‐world’ data, that initiating COMT inhibition with opicapone is likely to decrease the need for post‐treatment HCRU versus initiation of COMT inhibition with entacapone.