IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v38y2020i11d10.1007_s40273-020-00945-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness of Cannabidiol Adjunct Therapy versus Usual Care for the Treatment of Seizures in Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome

Author

Listed:
  • Edward E. Neuberger

    (University of Washington)

  • Josh J. Carlson

    (University of Washington)

  • David L. Veenstra

    (University of Washington)

Abstract

Background Cannabidiol (CBD) is a novel therapy for the treatment of Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome (LGS), a rare, treatment-refractory epileptic encephalopathy. Two pivotal trials found CBD 20 mg/kg/day conferred a reduction from baseline in median drop seizure frequency of 44% and 42%, respectively, compared with 22% and 17%, respectively, in the usual care arms. No economic evaluations have been published to date. This analysis assessed the cost effectiveness of CBD adjunct therapy compared with usual care alone in LGS from the US payer perspective. Methods We developed a lifetime horizon Markov decision analytic model. Efficacy, healthcare costs (2020 US$), and health state utilities were ascertained from published clinical trials, retrospective analyses, and time trade-off interviews conducted in the UK, respectively. Fifteen-year-old patients entering the model transitioned to states representing a percentage reduction in drop seizure frequency from baseline, where they remained until reverting back to baseline drop seizure frequency, or death. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate parameter uncertainty, and scenario analyses investigated the impact of various assumptions. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3%. Results Compared with usual care alone, CBD yielded 0.7 additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and $314,900 additional healthcare expenditure, resulting in $451,800 per QALY. Uncertainty in health state utilities were the largest contributor to uncertainty in the results. Results from the 5000-simulation probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a 0% chance of CBD being cost effective at a $150,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, with a 95% credible range for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $325,300–$690,000 per QALY. Conclusion CBD does not appear to be a cost-effective therapeutic option in LGS patients at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY.

Suggested Citation

  • Edward E. Neuberger & Josh J. Carlson & David L. Veenstra, 2020. "Cost-Effectiveness of Cannabidiol Adjunct Therapy versus Usual Care for the Treatment of Seizures in Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(11), pages 1237-1245, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:11:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00945-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00945-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-020-00945-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-020-00945-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:11:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00945-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.