Costs and efficacy ofolanzapine and risperidone in schizophrenia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v8i2.241Keywords:
Olanzapine, Risperidone, Cost-effectiveness, HoNOS, GAF, CGIAbstract
Introduction: schizophrenia is a serious and long lasting psychiatric disease. The new “atypical” antipsychotic drugs, introduced in the 90s, have substantially improved the effectiveness of medical treatments, compared to previous neuroleptic drugs. Nowadays they tend to be used as first choice drugs. The ddd cost of atypicals may differ by 20% and health authorities may have an incentive to deliver the less costly drug, especially if they are generic. However the various drugs show differential effectiveness rates and a rational choice should consider both cost and effectiveness. Objective: the purpose of this analysis is to review the existing evidence on cost-effectiveness studies of olanzapine and risperidone, the two most prescribed drugs in Italy. Six published studies were identified, but attention was focused on two articles that reported consistent and methodologically sound results. Results: most reviewed studies are cost-minimization analyses, since effectiveness indicators show no significant statistical difference between the two drugs, and are inconclusive since the results depend on the evaluation setting. However one observational retrospective study showed a significant severity reduction over 12 months for patients treated with olanzapine (-2.46 on HoNOS scale; p<0.05), compared to a smaller non significant reduction of the risperidone group (-0.57). Despite the higher drug cost, the average total cost per reduced severity score was lower for olanzapine than for risperidone patients (€ 4,554 vs. € 10,897). The only medical and related health care costs for risperidone patients were higher than total costs for olanzapine patients. Another study comparing cohorts of patients with similar starting severity showed a significant severity reduction and global functioning increase over 12 months for olanzapine but no significant increase for risperidone patients (-0.35, p<0.01 on CGI scale; +3.66, p <0.05 on GAF scale, compared respectively to -0.27, p<0.05 and +2.00 n.s.). Again average cost per reduced severity/increased functioning score was higher for risperidone than olanzapine patients (€ 4,568 vs. € 4,170 for CGI and € 2,284 vs. € 1,139 for GAF scales respectively). Conclusion: the use of olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia is the most cost-effective alternative for the SSN (Italian National health service), as it minimizes the cost per score of severity reduction or functioning increase. Even if the price of risperidone were to be reduced by 50% (becoming a generic), total 12 months treatment costs would exceed those of olanzapine in its highest ddd (30 mg).Downloads
Published
2007-06-15
How to Cite
Mapelli, V. (2007). Costs and efficacy ofolanzapine and risperidone in schizophrenia. Farmeconomia. Health Economics and Therapeutic Pathways, 8(2), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.7175/fe.v8i2.241
Issue
Section
Review (Economic Analysis)
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. The Publication Agreement can be downloaded here, and should be signed by the Authors and sent to the Publisher when the article has been accepted for publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
- Authors are permitted to post their work online after publication (the article must link to publisher version, in html format)