Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of lisdexamfetamine versus methylphenidate for patients under 18 with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in Iran

Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health

Research

Sepideh Elyasi¹  Omid Rajabi²  Shekoufeh Nikfar³  Amirmohammad Tajik⁴  Mehdi Varmaghani⁵ 

[1] Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran;Department of Pharmaceutical Control, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran;Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, School of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran;School of Pharmacy, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran;Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran;Department of Management Sciences and Health Economics, School of Health, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran;

关键词: Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate;    Methylphenidate;    Attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity;    Cost-effectiveness analysis;    Iran;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13034-023-00664-1

 received in 2023-06-04, accepted in 2023-09-29,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundLisdexamfetamine (LDX) and Methylphenidate (MPH) are stimulant agents that have been shown to provide significant benefits in the management of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in patients.AimThis study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness and the budget impact of LDX compared to MPH as the first-line treatment for ADHD.MethodsA one-year cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was conducted to compare the effects of LDX and MPH in reducing disease symptoms and patient costs and improving quality of life (QoL) from a social perspective. Clinical data were obtained using the EQ-5D questionnaire. In contrast, economic data were sourced from the official website of the Iranian Food and Drug Association (FDA), the national book of tariffs, and specific questionnaires designed to evaluate patients' direct and indirect costs. 197 patients were included in the study, including individuals who sought psychiatric evaluation at a hospital in Mashhad and those who obtained ADHD medications from governmental pharmacies. The cost-effectiveness of the study medicine was assessed using the decision tree method, and the results were presented as the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER). Deterministic Sensitivity Analysis (DSA) and Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis (PSA) were performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Additionally, a Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) was conducted over five years, considering three different scenarios, to evaluate the financial implications of incorporating LDX into the national pharmaceutical system.ResultsThe ICER for LDX therapy compared to MPH was estimated at USD 264.28 (with an incremental cost of USD 54.9, incremental effectiveness of 0.208, and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) gained of 0.765). The PSA indicated a 0.994% probability of LDX being cost-effective, considering a threshold of USD 2450 per QALY. Furthermore, the DSA revealed that the acquisition cost of LDX influenced the model's sensitivity. The BIA demonstrated that incorporating LDX into Iran's healthcare system would result in a financial burden of approximately $368,566 in the first year, representing an additional cost of $11,154 compared to the non-availability of this medicine and the use of previous medications. It is projected that by 2027, the financial burden of treating ADHD with LDX will reach approximately USD 443,879 over five years, amounting to an increase of $71,154 compared to the absence of this medicine.ConclusionFrom a social perspective, the inclusion of LDX in the treatment regimen for ADHD is associated with higher costs and an increased financial burden. However, based on our analysis, LDX appears to be a cost-effective choice for managing ADHD in Iran when compared to MPH.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

【 图 表 】

Fig. 2

Fig. 1

12951_2015_155_Article_IEq65.gif

Fig. 1