Cargando…

Economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: A lifetime decision analytic model

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to estimate the cost‐effectiveness of deep brain stimulation (DBS) compared with vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and care as usual (CAU) for adult patients with refractory epilepsy from a health care perspective using a lifetime decision analytic model. METHODS: A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chan, Hoi Yau, Wijnen, Ben F. M., Majoie, Marian H. J. M., Evers, Silvia M. A. A., Hiligsmann, Mickaël
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9306584/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34967942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/epi.17158
_version_ 1784752572164210688
author Chan, Hoi Yau
Wijnen, Ben F. M.
Majoie, Marian H. J. M.
Evers, Silvia M. A. A.
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
author_facet Chan, Hoi Yau
Wijnen, Ben F. M.
Majoie, Marian H. J. M.
Evers, Silvia M. A. A.
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
author_sort Chan, Hoi Yau
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to estimate the cost‐effectiveness of deep brain stimulation (DBS) compared with vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and care as usual (CAU) for adult patients with refractory epilepsy from a health care perspective using a lifetime decision analytic model. METHODS: A Markov decision analytic model was constructed to estimate the lifetime cost‐effectiveness of DBS compared with VNS and CAU. Transition probabilities were estimated from a randomized controlled trial, and assumptions were made in consensus with an expert panel. Primary outcomes were expressed as incremental costs per quality‐adjusted life‐year (QALY) and per responder. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to characterize parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: In DBS, 28.4% of the patients were responders, with an average of 21.38 QALYs per patient and expected lifetime health care costs of €187 791. VNS had fewer responders (22.3%), fewer QALYs (20.70), and lower lifetime costs (€156 871). CAU had the fewest responders (6.2%), fewest QALYs (18.74), and lowest total health care costs (€64 670). When comparing with CAU, incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs) showed that costs per QALY gained were slightly lower for DBS (€46 640) than for VNS (€47 155). When comparing DBS with VNS, an incremental cost per additional QALY gained of €45 170 was found for DBS. Sensitivity analyses showed that ICERs were heavily dependent on assumptions regarding loss to follow‐up in the respective clinical trial. SIGNIFICANCE: This study suggests that, given current limited evidence, VNS and DBS are potentially cost‐effective treatment strategies compared to CAU for patients with refractory epilepsy. However, results for DBS were heavily impacted by assumptions made to extrapolate nonresponse from the original trial. More stringent assumptions regarding nonresponse resulted in an ICER just above an acceptable willingness to pay threshold. Given the uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of DBS and the large impact of assumptions related to nonresponse, further empirical research is needed to reduce uncertainty.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9306584
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93065842022-07-28 Economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: A lifetime decision analytic model Chan, Hoi Yau Wijnen, Ben F. M. Majoie, Marian H. J. M. Evers, Silvia M. A. A. Hiligsmann, Mickaël Epilepsia Research Article OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to estimate the cost‐effectiveness of deep brain stimulation (DBS) compared with vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) and care as usual (CAU) for adult patients with refractory epilepsy from a health care perspective using a lifetime decision analytic model. METHODS: A Markov decision analytic model was constructed to estimate the lifetime cost‐effectiveness of DBS compared with VNS and CAU. Transition probabilities were estimated from a randomized controlled trial, and assumptions were made in consensus with an expert panel. Primary outcomes were expressed as incremental costs per quality‐adjusted life‐year (QALY) and per responder. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to characterize parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: In DBS, 28.4% of the patients were responders, with an average of 21.38 QALYs per patient and expected lifetime health care costs of €187 791. VNS had fewer responders (22.3%), fewer QALYs (20.70), and lower lifetime costs (€156 871). CAU had the fewest responders (6.2%), fewest QALYs (18.74), and lowest total health care costs (€64 670). When comparing with CAU, incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs) showed that costs per QALY gained were slightly lower for DBS (€46 640) than for VNS (€47 155). When comparing DBS with VNS, an incremental cost per additional QALY gained of €45 170 was found for DBS. Sensitivity analyses showed that ICERs were heavily dependent on assumptions regarding loss to follow‐up in the respective clinical trial. SIGNIFICANCE: This study suggests that, given current limited evidence, VNS and DBS are potentially cost‐effective treatment strategies compared to CAU for patients with refractory epilepsy. However, results for DBS were heavily impacted by assumptions made to extrapolate nonresponse from the original trial. More stringent assumptions regarding nonresponse resulted in an ICER just above an acceptable willingness to pay threshold. Given the uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness of DBS and the large impact of assumptions related to nonresponse, further empirical research is needed to reduce uncertainty. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-12-30 2022-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9306584/ /pubmed/34967942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/epi.17158 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Epilepsia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Article
Chan, Hoi Yau
Wijnen, Ben F. M.
Majoie, Marian H. J. M.
Evers, Silvia M. A. A.
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
Economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: A lifetime decision analytic model
title Economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: A lifetime decision analytic model
title_full Economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: A lifetime decision analytic model
title_fullStr Economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: A lifetime decision analytic model
title_full_unstemmed Economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: A lifetime decision analytic model
title_short Economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: A lifetime decision analytic model
title_sort economic evaluation of deep brain stimulation compared with vagus nerve stimulation and usual care for patients with refractory epilepsy: a lifetime decision analytic model
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9306584/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34967942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/epi.17158
work_keys_str_mv AT chanhoiyau economicevaluationofdeepbrainstimulationcomparedwithvagusnervestimulationandusualcareforpatientswithrefractoryepilepsyalifetimedecisionanalyticmodel
AT wijnenbenfm economicevaluationofdeepbrainstimulationcomparedwithvagusnervestimulationandusualcareforpatientswithrefractoryepilepsyalifetimedecisionanalyticmodel
AT majoiemarianhjm economicevaluationofdeepbrainstimulationcomparedwithvagusnervestimulationandusualcareforpatientswithrefractoryepilepsyalifetimedecisionanalyticmodel
AT everssilviamaa economicevaluationofdeepbrainstimulationcomparedwithvagusnervestimulationandusualcareforpatientswithrefractoryepilepsyalifetimedecisionanalyticmodel
AT hiligsmannmickael economicevaluationofdeepbrainstimulationcomparedwithvagusnervestimulationandusualcareforpatientswithrefractoryepilepsyalifetimedecisionanalyticmodel