Cost-utility comparison of escitalopram and sertraline in the treatment of major depressive disorder

Edward P Armstrong, Grant H. Skrepnek, M. Haim Erder

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To construct a cost-utility model comparing escitalopram with sertraline in the treatment of major depressive disorders. Methods: A decision analytic model was created to compare the cost-utility of these two antidepressants from the perspective of a managed-care organization. The model was designed to compare 10-20 mg/day of escitalopram to 50-200 mg/day of sertraline. Benefits (utility) scores were calculated based on clinical and utility data obtained from the literature. Direct medical costs included costs of the antidepressants, titration, treatment failures, and adverse events. Costs and benefits were modeled for a 6-month period and the model was subjected to thorough sensitivity analyses. Results: The estimated 6-month total cost was $919 for escitalopram and $1351 for sertraline. The estimated QALYs were 0.40296 for escitalopram and 0.39268 for sertraline. These differences were mostly due to differences in drug acquisition costs and adverse events. The robustness of the cost-utility model results were tested in a Monte Carlo simulation of 10 000 patients and it indicated an 88.5% probability that escitalopram was the dominant therapy, suggesting both lower costs and greater QALYs. Conclusion: This cost-utility model that incorporated the costs of titration and impact of side-effects comparing escitalopram 10-20 mg per day and sertraline 50-200 mg per day shows that escitalopram appeared to be less costly and produced efficacy (utility) at least as good as and maybe slightly better than that of sertraline.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)251-258
Number of pages8
JournalCurrent Medical Research and Opinion
Volume23
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2007

Fingerprint

Sertraline
Citalopram
Major Depressive Disorder
Costs and Cost Analysis
Therapeutics
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Antidepressive Agents
Drug Costs
Managed Care Programs
Treatment Failure
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Organizations

Keywords

  • Cost-utility
  • Escitalopram
  • Major depressive disorder
  • Sertraline

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Cost-utility comparison of escitalopram and sertraline in the treatment of major depressive disorder. / Armstrong, Edward P; Skrepnek, Grant H.; Erder, M. Haim.

In: Current Medical Research and Opinion, Vol. 23, No. 2, 02.2007, p. 251-258.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8f2ecd0db7944e67a183e01b91eeb72d,
title = "Cost-utility comparison of escitalopram and sertraline in the treatment of major depressive disorder",
abstract = "Objective: To construct a cost-utility model comparing escitalopram with sertraline in the treatment of major depressive disorders. Methods: A decision analytic model was created to compare the cost-utility of these two antidepressants from the perspective of a managed-care organization. The model was designed to compare 10-20 mg/day of escitalopram to 50-200 mg/day of sertraline. Benefits (utility) scores were calculated based on clinical and utility data obtained from the literature. Direct medical costs included costs of the antidepressants, titration, treatment failures, and adverse events. Costs and benefits were modeled for a 6-month period and the model was subjected to thorough sensitivity analyses. Results: The estimated 6-month total cost was $919 for escitalopram and $1351 for sertraline. The estimated QALYs were 0.40296 for escitalopram and 0.39268 for sertraline. These differences were mostly due to differences in drug acquisition costs and adverse events. The robustness of the cost-utility model results were tested in a Monte Carlo simulation of 10 000 patients and it indicated an 88.5{\%} probability that escitalopram was the dominant therapy, suggesting both lower costs and greater QALYs. Conclusion: This cost-utility model that incorporated the costs of titration and impact of side-effects comparing escitalopram 10-20 mg per day and sertraline 50-200 mg per day shows that escitalopram appeared to be less costly and produced efficacy (utility) at least as good as and maybe slightly better than that of sertraline.",
keywords = "Cost-utility, Escitalopram, Major depressive disorder, Sertraline",
author = "Armstrong, {Edward P} and Skrepnek, {Grant H.} and Erder, {M. Haim}",
year = "2007",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1185/030079907X159498",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "251--258",
journal = "Current Medical Research and Opinion",
issn = "0300-7995",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-utility comparison of escitalopram and sertraline in the treatment of major depressive disorder

AU - Armstrong, Edward P

AU - Skrepnek, Grant H.

AU - Erder, M. Haim

PY - 2007/2

Y1 - 2007/2

N2 - Objective: To construct a cost-utility model comparing escitalopram with sertraline in the treatment of major depressive disorders. Methods: A decision analytic model was created to compare the cost-utility of these two antidepressants from the perspective of a managed-care organization. The model was designed to compare 10-20 mg/day of escitalopram to 50-200 mg/day of sertraline. Benefits (utility) scores were calculated based on clinical and utility data obtained from the literature. Direct medical costs included costs of the antidepressants, titration, treatment failures, and adverse events. Costs and benefits were modeled for a 6-month period and the model was subjected to thorough sensitivity analyses. Results: The estimated 6-month total cost was $919 for escitalopram and $1351 for sertraline. The estimated QALYs were 0.40296 for escitalopram and 0.39268 for sertraline. These differences were mostly due to differences in drug acquisition costs and adverse events. The robustness of the cost-utility model results were tested in a Monte Carlo simulation of 10 000 patients and it indicated an 88.5% probability that escitalopram was the dominant therapy, suggesting both lower costs and greater QALYs. Conclusion: This cost-utility model that incorporated the costs of titration and impact of side-effects comparing escitalopram 10-20 mg per day and sertraline 50-200 mg per day shows that escitalopram appeared to be less costly and produced efficacy (utility) at least as good as and maybe slightly better than that of sertraline.

AB - Objective: To construct a cost-utility model comparing escitalopram with sertraline in the treatment of major depressive disorders. Methods: A decision analytic model was created to compare the cost-utility of these two antidepressants from the perspective of a managed-care organization. The model was designed to compare 10-20 mg/day of escitalopram to 50-200 mg/day of sertraline. Benefits (utility) scores were calculated based on clinical and utility data obtained from the literature. Direct medical costs included costs of the antidepressants, titration, treatment failures, and adverse events. Costs and benefits were modeled for a 6-month period and the model was subjected to thorough sensitivity analyses. Results: The estimated 6-month total cost was $919 for escitalopram and $1351 for sertraline. The estimated QALYs were 0.40296 for escitalopram and 0.39268 for sertraline. These differences were mostly due to differences in drug acquisition costs and adverse events. The robustness of the cost-utility model results were tested in a Monte Carlo simulation of 10 000 patients and it indicated an 88.5% probability that escitalopram was the dominant therapy, suggesting both lower costs and greater QALYs. Conclusion: This cost-utility model that incorporated the costs of titration and impact of side-effects comparing escitalopram 10-20 mg per day and sertraline 50-200 mg per day shows that escitalopram appeared to be less costly and produced efficacy (utility) at least as good as and maybe slightly better than that of sertraline.

KW - Cost-utility

KW - Escitalopram

KW - Major depressive disorder

KW - Sertraline

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33847414682&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33847414682&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1185/030079907X159498

DO - 10.1185/030079907X159498

M3 - Article

C2 - 17288678

AN - SCOPUS:33847414682

VL - 23

SP - 251

EP - 258

JO - Current Medical Research and Opinion

JF - Current Medical Research and Opinion

SN - 0300-7995

IS - 2

ER -