QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Résumé Extracto Full Text PDF Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Articles Ahead of Print [Order Reprint] Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hemels, M. E. Articles by Einarson, T. R Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hemels, M. E. Articles by Einarson, T. R

PHARMACOECONOMICS

Cost-Effectiveness of Escitalopram Versus Citalopram in the Treatment of Severe Depression

International Department of Health Economics and Epidemiology, H. Lundbeck A/S, Paris, France

Siegfried Kasper, MD PhD

Department of General Psychiatry, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Evelyn Walter, PhD

Institute for Pharmacoeconomic Research, Vienna

Thomas R Einarson, PhD

Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Reprints: Michiel EH Hemels MSc Drs, International Department of Health Economics and Epidemiology, H. Lundbeck A/S, 37 avenue Pierre 1er de Serbie, 75008 Paris, France, fax 33 153674267, MEHH{at}Lundbeck.com

BACKGROUND: Severe depression is associated with an extensive economic burden on both the patient and society.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness in Austria of escitalopram compared with citalopram in the management of severe depression (Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score 30).

METHODS: A decision model incorporated treatment paths and associated direct resource use (psychiatric hospitalization, medications, general practitioner and psychiatrist visits, treatment discontinuation, suicide attempts) associated with managing severe depression and the indirect cost of work absenteeism over a 6-month period. Main outcomes were clinical success (remission at 6 mo) and cost (2002 Euros equals 1.25 US) of treatment. The analysis was performed from the Austrian societal and Social Healthcare Insurance System (SHIS) perspectives. Clinical input data were derived from a meta-analysis of 8-week randomized clinical trials. Costs were derived from standard Austrian price lists or from the literature.

RESULTS: Six months after the start of treatment, the overall clinical success remission rate was higher for escitalopram (53.7%) than for citalopram (48.7%). From the SHIS perspective, the total expected cost per successfully treated severely depressed patient was 924 (32.1%) lower for escitalopram (2879) compared with citalopram (3803). From the societal perspective, the total expected cost per successfully treated severely depressed patient was 1369 (24.4%) lower for escitalopram (5610) than for citalopram (6979). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the model was robust and that, even if citalopram had no acquisition cost, escitalopram remained the dominant strategy for both perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with escitalopram was the dominant strategy. These data suggest that escitalopram is a cost-effective antidepressant compared with citalopram in the management of severe depression in Austria.

Key Words: Austria, citalopram, cost-effectiveness, escitalopram, severe depression

Published Online, April 27, 2004. www.theannals.com, DOI 10.1345/aph.1E010

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Correction: cost-effectiveness of escitalopram versus citalopram in the treatment of severe depression Ann. Pharmacother., September 1, 2004; 38(9): 1545 - 1545. [Full Text] [PDF]