Article contents
Cost–utility Analysis of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate in the Treatment of Adults with Attention-deficit/hyperactivity Disorder in the United Kingdom
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 April 2020
Abstract
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a chronic neurobehavioural disorder with considerable costs. Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is approved in the UK for ADHD treatment in children and adolescents.
To perform an economic analysis of LDX for adults with ADHD from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective.
To estimate cost-effectiveness of LDX compared with methylphenidate (MPH) and atomoxetine (ATX).
A 1-year decision-analytic model was developed. Health events included response, non-response and unable to tolerate. Efficacy data were taken from a mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) analysis of all clinical trials. Response was defined as a score of 1 or 2 on the Clinical Global Impression–Improvement scale. Tolerability was assessed by discontinuation rates due to adverse events. Utility weights were identified via a systematic literature review. Healthcare resource use estimates were obtained via a survey of clinicians. Daily drug costs were based on mean doses reported in the trials used in the MTC. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
The comparison of LDX and MPH for 100 people resulted in an increased annual cost of £34 and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of 0.5, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £64 per QALY. When compared with ATX for 100 people, LDX was a dominant strategy, with lower annual costs (–£26,700) and higher QALYs (1.0). There was a 62% probability of LDX being cost-effective versus MPH-ER at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY.
From the perspective of the UK NHS, LDX provides a cost-effective treatment option for adults with ADHD.
- Type
- Article: 1607
- Information
- European Psychiatry , Volume 30 , Issue S1: Abstracts of the 23rd European Congress of Psychiatry , March 2015 , pp. 1
- Copyright
- Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2015
- 1
- Cited by
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.