Rufinamide: A Pharmacoeconomic Profile of its Use as Adjunctive Therapy in Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome
Abstract
Rufinamide (Inovelon), a triazole derivative, is an oral antiepileptic drug approved in the EU as adjunctive therapy in the treatment of seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) in patients aged ≥4 years. The efficacy of oral rufinamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with LGS uncontrolled on one to three concomitant antiepileptic drugs was demonstrated in a pivotal, 12-week, randomized, double-blind trial. Rufinamide significantly reduced the 28-day frequency of both drop attacks and total seizures compared with placebo, and significantly increased the proportions of patients experiencing a ≥50% reduction in each seizure frequency. A significantly higher proportion of rufinamide than placebo recipients recorded an improvement in seizure severity at the end of treatment. Reductions in the frequency of drop attacks and total seizures were maintained in a long-term (up to 3 years), open-label extension study. Oral rufinamide was generally well tolerated in patients with LGS. Somnolence and vomiting were the most common adverse events occurring more frequently with rufinamide than with placebo. Two pharmacoeconomic analyses, using decision-analysis models with 3-month cycles over a time horizon of 3 years, assessed the cost effectiveness and cost utility, respectively, of rufinamide compared with topiramate and lamotrigine as adjunctive therapy in patients with LGS from the perspective of the UK NHS. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that rufinamide would be associated with incremental costs of £62 (drop attacks) or £2151 (total seizures) per 1% increase in the number of patients achieving a >50% reduction in seizure frequency over 3 years. The cost-utility analysis predicted that the incremental cost per QALY gained for rufinamide compared with the next less-costly and undominated therapy would be more than 5-fold higher than the commonly accepted willingness-to-pay threshold range in the UK. In conclusion, the available pharmacoeconomic data indicate that rufinamide is more effective, but more expensive, than alternative adjunctive therapies approved for use in patients with LGS in the UK. Rufinamide would appear to be a cost-effective alternative to topiramate. Although rufinamide exceeds conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds when compared with lamotrigine, it may still be considered a valuable treatment option for a devastating orphan disease such as LGS.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic Info
Article provided by Springer Healthcare | Adis in its journal PharmacoEconomics.
Volume (Year): 30 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 247-256
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://pharmacoeconomics.adisonline.com/
Related research
Keywords: Adis-Drug-Profiles; Cost-effectiveness; Cost-utility; Epilepsy; Lennox-Gastaut-syndrome; Pharmacoeconomics; Rufinamide; therapeutic use;Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods
- D - Microeconomics
- I - Health, Education, and Welfare
- Z - Other Special Topics
- I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
- I19 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Other
- I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
- I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
References
No references listed on IDEASYou can help add them by filling out this form.
Citations
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:30:y:2012:i:3:p:247-256For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dave Dustin).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

