Cost‐effectiveness of cenobamate for focal seizures in people with drug‐resistant epilepsy

Author:

Laskier Vicki1ORCID,Agyei‐Kyeremateng Kenneth K.1,Eddy Alex E.1,Patel Dilip2,Mulheron Stuart2,James Samuel2,Thomas Rhys H.34ORCID,Sander Josemir W.5678ORCID

Affiliation:

1. FIECON, Hodgkin Huxley House London UK

2. Angelini Pharma UK‐I London UK

3. Department of Neurology Royal Victoria Infirmary Newcastle Upon Tyne UK

4. Translational and Clinical Research Institute Newcastle UK

5. UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology London UK

6. Chalfont Centre for Epilepsy Chalfont St Peter UK

7. Stichting Epilepsie Instellingen Nederland Heemstede The Netherlands

8. Department of Neurology, West China Hospital Sichuan University Chengdu China

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveThis study was undertaken to estimate the cost‐effectiveness of add‐on cenobamate in the UK when used to treat drug‐resistant focal seizures in adults who are not adequately controlled with at least two prior antiseizure medications, including at least one used adjunctively.MethodsWe estimated the cost per quality‐adjusted life‐year (QALY) for cenobamate compared to brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, and perampanel in the UK National Health Service over a lifetime time horizon. We used a Markov cohort structure to determine response to treatment, using pooled data from three long‐term studies of cenobamate. A network meta‐analysis informed the likelihood of response to therapy with brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, and perampanel relative to cenobamate. Once individuals discontinued treatment, they transitioned to subsequent treatment health states, including other antiseizure medicines, surgery, and vagus nerve stimulation. Costs included treatment, administration, routine monitoring, event management, and adverse events. Published evidence and expert opinion informed the likelihood of response to subsequent treatments, associated adverse events, and costs. Utility data were based on Short‐Form six‐dimension form utility. Discounting was applied at 3.5% per annum as per National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. Uncertainty was explored through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.ResultsIn the base case, cenobamate led to cost savings of £51 967 (compared to brivaracetam), £21 080 (compared to eslicarbazepine), £33 619 (compared to lacosamide), and £28 296 (compared to perampanel) and increased QALYs of 1.047 (compared to brivaracetam), 0.598 (compared to eslicarbazepine), 0.776 (compared to lacosamide), and 0.703 (compared to perampanel) per individual over a lifetime time horizon. Cenobamate also dominated the four drugs across most sensitivity analyses. Differences were due to reduced seizure frequency with cenobamate relative to comparators.SignificanceCenobamate improved QALYs and was less costly than brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, and perampanel. Therefore, cenobamate may be considered as a cost‐effective adjunctive antiseizure medication for people with drug‐resistant focal seizures.

Funder

Angelini Pharma

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Neurology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3