Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis

Robert A. Rosenheck, Douglas L. Leslie

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

In the United States, second-generation antipsychotics have become the most widely used drugs in the treatment of schizophrenia, with total annual costs in 2007 of over $12 billion. Earlier studies of patients with chronic schizophrenia reported that these medications were not only more effective than older drugs with fewer side effects, but that they also lowered the risk of hospitalization, generating sufficient savings to offset their greater drug costs entirely. However, many of these studies were based on non-experimental designs, and a small number of randomized trials showed either much smaller net savings or even increased total costs. Two more recent 12-month trials failed to find advantages for the newer drugs in either clinical effectiveness, reduced Parkinsonian side effects, or lowered costs, and an economic analysis showed increased costs to the California Medicaid program in association with the introduction of these medications. A recent literature review of cost-effectiveness studies involving second-generation antipsychotics also failed to find evidence of greater cost-effectiveness for these agents To further evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these medications, the Clinical Antipsychotic Trial of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia trial included extensive data collection on health service use to allow estimation of health care costs incurred by study participants, along with several measures of effectiveness, including a disease-specific estimate of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), that together would support a comparative analysis of the cost-effectiveness of one first-generation antipsychotic (perphenazine) and all four second-generation antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone), with the exception of clozapine, that were available in the US in 2001–2004 when CATIE was implemented.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationAntipsychotic Trials in Schizophrenia
Subtitle of host publicationThe CATIE Project
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages57-79
Number of pages23
ISBN (Electronic)9780511712265
ISBN (Print)9780521895330
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2010

Fingerprint

Antipsychotic Agents
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Schizophrenia
olanzapine
Clinical Trials
Perphenazine
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Drug Costs
Risperidone
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Clozapine
Medicaid
Health Care Costs
Health Services
Hospitalization
Economics

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Rosenheck, R. A., & Leslie, D. L. (2010). Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis. In Antipsychotic Trials in Schizophrenia: The CATIE Project (pp. 57-79). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511712265.005
Rosenheck, Robert A. ; Leslie, Douglas L. / Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis. Antipsychotic Trials in Schizophrenia: The CATIE Project. Cambridge University Press, 2010. pp. 57-79
@inbook{9dc8ed44bc1d4bac8aa64c841edd4fc6,
title = "Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis",
abstract = "In the United States, second-generation antipsychotics have become the most widely used drugs in the treatment of schizophrenia, with total annual costs in 2007 of over $12 billion. Earlier studies of patients with chronic schizophrenia reported that these medications were not only more effective than older drugs with fewer side effects, but that they also lowered the risk of hospitalization, generating sufficient savings to offset their greater drug costs entirely. However, many of these studies were based on non-experimental designs, and a small number of randomized trials showed either much smaller net savings or even increased total costs. Two more recent 12-month trials failed to find advantages for the newer drugs in either clinical effectiveness, reduced Parkinsonian side effects, or lowered costs, and an economic analysis showed increased costs to the California Medicaid program in association with the introduction of these medications. A recent literature review of cost-effectiveness studies involving second-generation antipsychotics also failed to find evidence of greater cost-effectiveness for these agents To further evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these medications, the Clinical Antipsychotic Trial of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia trial included extensive data collection on health service use to allow estimation of health care costs incurred by study participants, along with several measures of effectiveness, including a disease-specific estimate of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), that together would support a comparative analysis of the cost-effectiveness of one first-generation antipsychotic (perphenazine) and all four second-generation antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone), with the exception of clozapine, that were available in the US in 2001–2004 when CATIE was implemented.",
author = "Rosenheck, {Robert A.} and Leslie, {Douglas L.}",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/CBO9780511712265.005",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780521895330",
pages = "57--79",
booktitle = "Antipsychotic Trials in Schizophrenia",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
address = "United Kingdom",

}

Rosenheck, RA & Leslie, DL 2010, Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis. in Antipsychotic Trials in Schizophrenia: The CATIE Project. Cambridge University Press, pp. 57-79. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511712265.005

Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis. / Rosenheck, Robert A.; Leslie, Douglas L.

Antipsychotic Trials in Schizophrenia: The CATIE Project. Cambridge University Press, 2010. p. 57-79.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis

AU - Rosenheck, Robert A.

AU - Leslie, Douglas L.

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - In the United States, second-generation antipsychotics have become the most widely used drugs in the treatment of schizophrenia, with total annual costs in 2007 of over $12 billion. Earlier studies of patients with chronic schizophrenia reported that these medications were not only more effective than older drugs with fewer side effects, but that they also lowered the risk of hospitalization, generating sufficient savings to offset their greater drug costs entirely. However, many of these studies were based on non-experimental designs, and a small number of randomized trials showed either much smaller net savings or even increased total costs. Two more recent 12-month trials failed to find advantages for the newer drugs in either clinical effectiveness, reduced Parkinsonian side effects, or lowered costs, and an economic analysis showed increased costs to the California Medicaid program in association with the introduction of these medications. A recent literature review of cost-effectiveness studies involving second-generation antipsychotics also failed to find evidence of greater cost-effectiveness for these agents To further evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these medications, the Clinical Antipsychotic Trial of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia trial included extensive data collection on health service use to allow estimation of health care costs incurred by study participants, along with several measures of effectiveness, including a disease-specific estimate of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), that together would support a comparative analysis of the cost-effectiveness of one first-generation antipsychotic (perphenazine) and all four second-generation antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone), with the exception of clozapine, that were available in the US in 2001–2004 when CATIE was implemented.

AB - In the United States, second-generation antipsychotics have become the most widely used drugs in the treatment of schizophrenia, with total annual costs in 2007 of over $12 billion. Earlier studies of patients with chronic schizophrenia reported that these medications were not only more effective than older drugs with fewer side effects, but that they also lowered the risk of hospitalization, generating sufficient savings to offset their greater drug costs entirely. However, many of these studies were based on non-experimental designs, and a small number of randomized trials showed either much smaller net savings or even increased total costs. Two more recent 12-month trials failed to find advantages for the newer drugs in either clinical effectiveness, reduced Parkinsonian side effects, or lowered costs, and an economic analysis showed increased costs to the California Medicaid program in association with the introduction of these medications. A recent literature review of cost-effectiveness studies involving second-generation antipsychotics also failed to find evidence of greater cost-effectiveness for these agents To further evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these medications, the Clinical Antipsychotic Trial of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia trial included extensive data collection on health service use to allow estimation of health care costs incurred by study participants, along with several measures of effectiveness, including a disease-specific estimate of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), that together would support a comparative analysis of the cost-effectiveness of one first-generation antipsychotic (perphenazine) and all four second-generation antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone), with the exception of clozapine, that were available in the US in 2001–2004 when CATIE was implemented.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926962688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84926962688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/CBO9780511712265.005

DO - 10.1017/CBO9780511712265.005

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84926962688

SN - 9780521895330

SP - 57

EP - 79

BT - Antipsychotic Trials in Schizophrenia

PB - Cambridge University Press

ER -

Rosenheck RA, Leslie DL. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis. In Antipsychotic Trials in Schizophrenia: The CATIE Project. Cambridge University Press. 2010. p. 57-79 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511712265.005