PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S Arikian

Publications and source records attributed to S Arikian.

16 recordsLinked to original sources

A cost-effectiveness evaluation of amlodipine usage in patients with coronary artery disease in Sweden.

The objective of this analysis was to calculate the cost-effectiveness of amlodipine therapy in patients with coronary artery disease in Sweden. It is hypothesised that treatment with amlodipine will have an impact on overall cardiovascular disease treatment costs, resulting in a positive cost-effectiveness profile. A Markov cohort simulation model was constructed to simulate event-related and procedure-related health economic outcomes of coronary artery disease populations on amlodipine versus those on placebo. Patient level data from the Prospective Evaluation of the Vascular Effects of Norvasc Trial was used to populate the model. The total number of adverse cardiovascular clinical outcomes experienced over a three-year period was lower for patient on amlodipine than for those on placebo. The rate of hospitalisation per patient due to angina, coronary artery bypass graft, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, congestive heart failure, and myocardial infarction in the placebo cohort was 64.7%, while the rate in the amlodipine cohort was 46.9%. The cost per patient was Swedish kroner (SEK)26,600 for amlodipine patients and SEK27,400 for placebo patients. The use of amlodipine resulted in improved clinical outcomes as well as a slight savings in cost over a three-year period.

Amlodipine↗

A retrospective analysis comparing the costs and cost effectiveness of amlodipine and enalapril in the treatment of hypertension.

A comparison of treatment costs and cost effectiveness was performed retrospectively by using patient-level data from a randomized, controlled, one-year clinical trial of amlodipine and enalapril in the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension. Unit costs of amlodipine and enalapril were applied to the daily dosages of individual patients to calculate the total costs and average costs per patient in each treatment group in the clinical trial on an intent-to-treat basis. Efficacy rates were used to calculate the average treatment costs per success in blood pressure control. Although not statistically significant, amlodipine treatment resulted in a higher efficacy (89.5%) vs. enalapril (85.2%). The average costs per amlodipine-treated patient were consistently lower (-$112.30) than for the enalapril-treated patient by week 50. Treatment with amlodipine resulted in an average cost per success of $609 per patient compared with $772 per enalapril-treated patient. A sensitivity analysis revealed that, in the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension over the 50-week treatment period, amlodipine would remain less costly than enalapril, with a decrease in the cost of enalapril of up to 17%, and would remain more cost effective, with a 21% decrease in the cost of enalapril.

Amlodipine↗

The cost-effectiveness of doxazosin for the treatment of hypertension in type II diabetic patients in the UK and Italy.

The objective of this analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of achieving 'tight control' versus 'less tight control' of blood pressure, as defined in the UK Prospective Diabetics Study 38, in type II diabetic patients in the UK and Italy. The effect of including doxazosin in a 'tight control' combination therapy was analysed. Given doxazosin's positive impact on lipid levels in addition to its antihypertensive effect, it is hypothesised that treatment including doxazosin will reduce the incidence of macrovascular complications. For each country, a Markov model was constructed to simulate macrovascular outcomes of patients on various drug combinations. Transitional probabilities were based on the risk rates presented in UKPDS 38. Risk rates were adjusted for the ageing of the cohort and the lipid-lowering properties of doxazosin using Framingham risk equations. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from 2224 Pounds to 4867 Pounds (US$3225-7057) per life-year saved for the UK and from L1.8-9.3 million (US$818-4159) per life-year saved for Italy. Doxazosin is a cost-effective agent when included in a combination therapy in the treatment of hypertension in the diabetic populations of the UK and Italy.

Antihypertensive Agents↗

The health economic impact of antidepressant usage from a payer's perspective: a multinational study.

A multinational decision analytic model was developed to examine the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in 10 European and American countries. Input to the model was obtained from a meta-analysis of current clinical trial data obtained from the published literature, and local clinical and health economic experts in each market. The patient- and policy-level impact of MDD treatment was measured in each of the 10 markets. The total expected cost per patient for treating MDD with venlafaxine XR during the six-month acute phase of MDD was the lowest expected cost in nine of the 10 countries studied, resulting in savings to the primary payer in almost all markets. As well as the cost savings, the higher efficacy and lower rate of dropout found for venlafaxine XR translate to a greater number of symptom-free-days (SFDs) per patient. The results of this investigation show that use of venlafaxine XR in most settings across Europe and the Americas will have a favourable impact on healthcare payer budgets and the overall mental health of MDD patients.

Acute Disease↗

Pharmacoeconomic analysis of antidepressants for major depressive disorder in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost effectiveness of different classes of antidepressants in the UK National Health Service. DESIGN, PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: The use of the serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT) and noradrenaline (norepinephrine) reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) venlafaxine was compared with that of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). A meta-analysis determined the clinical success rate, and a decision tree was constructed by interviewing general practitioners and psychiatrists. Adding pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment costs, meta-analytic rates were applied to the decision tree to calculate the expected cost and outcome for each drug. Cost effectiveness was determined using a composite measure of outcome [symptom-free days (SFD)]. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: The meta-analysis included data from 44 studies on 4033 patients. The highest overall efficacy rate for outpatients with MDD was with venlafaxine use (73.7%), compared with 61.4% for SSRIs and 59.3% for TCAs. Treatment with venlafaxine yielded the lowest outpatient cost for a SFD (10.53 Pounds), compared with 13.23 Pounds for SSRIs and 15.52 Pounds for TCAs (1998 values). CONCLUSIONS: Using this economic model, venlafaxine appears to be a cost-effective treatment for outpatients with MDD in the UK.

Antidepressive Agents↗

The management of depression: the implications for managed care--roundtable discussion: Part 2.

One of the most commonly utilized drug classes today is antidepressant therapy, which accounts for billions of dollars in spending. Pharmacoeconomic tools may play an influential role in formulary decision making, particularly in this drug class. In part 2 of the roundtable discussion, a pharmacoeconomic model is presented that may clarify the health economic effects of placing serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors on the drug formulary, particularly in the context of other antidepressant medications.

Antidepressive Agents↗

Analysis of the cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel as alternative combination therapy for advanced ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: A phase III trial by the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) provides strong evidence that a new alternative therapy--paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers Squibb Co, Princeton, NJ) in combination with cisplatin (Platinol; Bristol-Myers Squibb Co)--is clinically more effective than the standard therapy using cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan; Bristol-Myers Squibb Co) in combination with cisplatin in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. We conducted a pharmacoeconomic analysis to determine whether the alternative paclitaxel-cisplatin (TP) therapy is cost-effective (CE) in comparison to standard cyclophosphamide-cisplatin (CP) therapy. METHODS: Using an economic model, we applied cost data figures to resource utilization data derived from the two arms of the GOG trial. We examined paclitaxel benefits in terms of increased mean survival time, as well as median survival time. Estimates of the cumulative proportion surviving in the trial were based on Kaplan-Meier procedures. RESULTS: Per year of life gained (YLG), TP therapy costs more ($19,820 more for inpatient treatment; $21,222 outpatient) than CP treatment. CONCLUSION: The TP regimen's increased mean survival cost per YLG (inpatient and outpatient settings) adds a substantial benefit at an acceptable cost compared with CP therapy.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

A pharmacoeconomic comparison of UFT and 5-FU chemotherapy for colorectal cancer in South America.

The escalating role played by managed care organizations in the health-care system is reflected in the increased demand for cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) to assess the balance between economic impact and clinical efficacy. For example, the high incidence and costs associated with colorectal cancer in Latin America calls for a comprehensive economic evaluation to ensure appropriate allocation of limited health-care funds. In addition, the current call for a "societal" perspective of such analyses indicates the need for increased consideration of the concerns of both patient and health-care provider. The introduction of oral tegafur and uracil (UFT) provided the opportunity to evaluate the pharmacoeconomic advantage of the new agent compared with the standard fluorouracil (5-FU). Results of this study indicated an economic advantage for oral UFT vs a 5-FU-based regimen in the treatment of colorectal cancer in Brazil and Argentina. It was further noted that the mild toxicity profile of UFT reduced both the number of clinic visits and the need for venipuncture procedures. Noting that oral UFT may have a positive impact on quality of life in addition to its estimated economic benefit, it was concluded that prospective economic research and quality-of-life evaluations are needed to fully assess the pharmacoeconomic impact of oral UFT.

Argentina↗

Clinical and economic factors in the treatment of onychomycosis.

Onychomycosis is a fungal infection of fingernails and toenails, most cases of which are caused by dermatophytes. The disease accounts for 15% of all nail disease, and affects approximately 2 to 3% of people of all ages and both sexes. Topical treatment with tioconazole, amorolfine or ciclopirox has limited effectiveness. Oral griseofulvin 500 to 1000mg daily has been the mainstay of treatment, but prolonged therapy is required and success rates are low. Therapy with itraconazole 200mg daily for 3 to 6 months is more effective (70 to 85% success), although so-called 'pulse' therapy has shown similar success with potentially fewer adverse effects. Terbinafine 250mg daily produces clinical and mycological cure in approximately 80% of patients treated for 6 and 12 weeks for fingernail and toenail infections, respectively. The overall costs of treating onychomycosis are substantial, and it has been estimated that direct costs for Medicare patients with the disease were $US43 million in 1 year. In addition, the disease has a negative impact on quality of life, in the domains of mental functioning, health concern, social functioning, and physical appearance. Few pharmacoeconomic analyses have been published, but all have indicated an advantage of oral terbinafine over griseofulvin and other oral agents. To date, no economic studies have been performed on topical agents, pulse therapy or combination treatments.

Animals↗

Low rectovaginal fistulas.

Twelve patients aged between 25 and 48 years with parity ranging from 2 to 4 were treated for rectovaginal fistula at the First Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catania University Medical School, Catania, Italy from 1965 to 1985. In all patients the rectovaginal fistula was in the inferior third of the vagina and of maximum diameter of 5 cm. Therapy consisted of surgical correction in 9 patients with transformation of the fistula into a complete perineal tear cutting the bridge of healthy tissue under the fistula. Follow-up period varying from 2 to 16 years showed no recurrence.

Adult↗

Dermoid cysts of the ovary.

From 1965 to 1984, 105 cases of ovarian dermoid cysts have been diagnosed and treated at the First Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catania University, Catania, Italy. The patients were aged between 9 and 70 years, with a higher frequency of dermoid cysts between 26 and 30 years (21.91%, 23 cases). In 0.95% (1 case) the patient was premenarchal, 84.76% (89 cases) in fertile age, and in 14.29 (15 cases) in menopause. 35.22% (37 cases) were nulliparous with an average of 31 years, and 64.76% (68 cases) pluriparous with an average age of 38.9 years. In 4.76% (5 cases) the patients had already been treated for dermoid cysts. The asymptomatic form occurred in 13.33% (14 cases), while in 9.52% (10 cases) of cases there was torsion of the cyst. In 89.53% (95 cases) the cyst was monolateral, double in the same ovary in 0.95% (1 cases), and bilateral in 9.52% (10 cases). Epithelial cancerous degeneration occurred in 1.95% of cases (2 cases). In 11.43% (12 cases) enucleation of the cyst was performed while in the other cases therapy was chosen in relation to age, parity, and associated gynecological pathology of the patients. The Authors compare their data with that in literature.

Adolescent↗

A model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of oral therapies in the management of patients with major depressive disorders.

The introduction of a new antidepressant, venlafaxine, a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), has provided researchers with the opportunity to take a closer look at the issues involved in selecting a product for a formulary. To aid decision makers in considering the adoption of this new therapy, a pharmacoeconomic simulation model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of SNRIs versus traditional oral therapies in the management of patients with major depressive disorders (MDDs) from a cost-based payer perspective. Four treatment regimens for MDD were compared: tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, heterocyclic antidepressants, and SNRIs. The principles of decision analysis were used to calculate outcome probabilities based on data from a meta-analysis. The expected cost of each regimen was calculated using cost data from a survey of three health maintenance organizations located in Missouri, Massachusetts, and California. The model suggests that SNRI therapy demonstrates the highest level of cost-effectiveness in an inpatient setting when using both brand and generic acquisition costs of the drugs. When comparing treatment regimens for out-patients, the generic heterocyclic antidepressants demonstrate the highest level of cost-effectiveness: when using band acquisition costs, the SNRIs demonstrate the highest level of cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis calculated the robustness of the conclusions to all major parameters.

Administration, Oral↗

A pharmacoeconomic evaluation of major depressive disorder (Italy).

OBJECTIVE: To determine the most cost-effective oral therapy for the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) in Italy. METHOD: We conducted a pharmacoeconomic evaluation based on a decision analytic model that examined the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in Italy. The analysis compared the serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), venlafaxine extended-release (venlafaxine XR), to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). A meta-analysis was performed to determine the clinical rates of success. The meta-analytic rates were applied to the decision analytic model to calculate the expected cost and expected outcomes for each anti-depressant comparator. Cost-effectiveness was determined using the expected values for both a successful outcome, and a composite measure of outcome termed 'symptom-free days'. A policy analysis was conducted to estimate the financial impact to the Servizio Sanitario Nazionale (SSN). RESULTS: Treatment of MDD with venlafaxine XR yielded the highest overall efficacy rates for outpatients (73.7%) versus SSRIs (61.4%) and TCAs (59.3%), and inpatients (62.3%) versus SSRIs (58.6%) and TCAs (58.2%). Venlafaxine XR had the lowest dropout rates due to lack of efficacy (4.8%) versus SSRIs (8.4%) and TCAs (6.8%), and adverse drug reactions (10.9%) versus SSRIs (17.4%) and TCAs (23.1%). Initiating treatment of MDD with venlafaxine XR yielded the lowest expected cost for outpatients and for inpatients. The total resulting savings for the SSN at a 5% venlafaxine XR utilization was estimated between L 963 million and L 3,210 million. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that venlafaxine XR is generally a cost-effective treatment of MDD. Additionally, the results of this investigation suggest that increased utilization of venlafaxine XR will favorably impact the SSN.

Antidepressive Agents↗

A multinational pharmacoeconomic evaluation of acute major depressive disorder (MDD): a comparison of cost-effectiveness between venlafaxine, SSRIs and TCAs.

METHODS: We conducted a multinational pharmacoeconomic evaluation comparing the immediate release form of a new class of serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), venlafaxine IR to the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and the tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) in the treatment of acute major depressive disorder (MDD) in 10 countries (Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States, and Venezuela). We designed a decision analytic model assessing the acute phase of MDD treatment within a 6-month time horizon. Six decision tree models were customized with country-specific estimates from a clinical management analysis, meta-analytic rates from two published meta-analyses, and a resource valuation of treatment costs representing the inpatient and outpatient settings within each country. The meta-analyses provided the clinical rates of success defined as a 50% reduction in depression scores on the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D) or the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Treatment regimen costs were determined from standard lists, fee schedules, and communication with local health economists in each country. The meta-analytic rates were applied to the decision analytic model to calculate the expected cost and expected outcomes for each antidepressant comparator. Cost-effectiveness was determined using the expected values for both a successful outcome, and a composite measure of outcome termed symptom-free days. A policy analysis was conducted to examine the health system budget impact in each country of increasing the utilization of the most effective antidepressant found in our study. RESULTS: Initiating treatment of MDD with venlafaxine IR yielded a lower expected cost compared to the SSRIs and TCAs in all countries except Poland in the inpatient setting, and Italy and Poland within the outpatient settings. The weighted average expected cost per patient varied from US$632 (Poland) to US$5647 (US) in the six-month acute phase treatment of MDD. The estimated total budgetary impact for each 1% of venlafaxine utilization, assuming a population of one million MDD patients, ranged from US$1600 (Italy) to US$29,049 (US). CONCLUSIONS: Within the inpatient and outpatient treatment settings, venlafaxine IR was a more cost-effective treatment of MDD compared to the SSRIs and TCAs. Additionally, the results of this investigation indicate that increased utilization of venlafaxine in most settings across Europe and the Americas will have favorable impact on health care payer budgets. ADR, adverse drug reaction; CMA, clinical management analysis; ECT, electroconvulsive therapy; HAM-D, Hamilton Depression Scale; MADRS, Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale; MDD, major depressive disorder; SFD, symptom-free day; SNRI, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; TCA, tricyclic antidepressant; WHO, world health organization.

Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation↗