medigraphic.com
Academia Mexicana de Neurología, A.C.

2013, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Neuroci 2013; 14 (6)

Economic evaluation of the use of rasagiline in early Parkinson’s disease from the perspective of the Mexican Institute of Social Security

Pizarro CM, Rizzoli CA, Salmerón GG, Cervantes CMA, Soto MH

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 321-327
PDF size: 167.41 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder with an estimated incidence of 40-50 cases per 100,000 inhabitants per year. Inhibitors of the enzyme monoamine oxidase B have neuroprotective properties that benefit patients in the early stages of the disease.
Objectve: To perform a cost-effectiveness and a cost-utility evaluation of rasagiline in the treatment of early PD in comparison with pramipexol.
Methods: We performed a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis to compare rasagiline and pramipexole in the early treatment of early PD using a Markov model, from the perspective of the health sector in Mexico. The Markov model had a time horizon of five years, with semiannual cycles. An analysis of deterministic sensitivity (change in the price of rasagiline, change in daily doses of pramipexole, discount rate, changes in quality-adjusted life years, QALY) and Monte Carlo simulations to determine the robustness of the model.
Results: The total cost of rasagiline treatment (start, tracing to 5 years and treating dyskinesia) was $ 190,646.45, and of pramipexole $183, 822.60. However, the gain in QALYs for patients with early-stage PD was 3.70 for patients treated with rasagiline and 3.50 for those treated with pramipexole. The cost per QALY is $ 33,400.00, which is less than one per capita gross product of Mexico.
Conclusions: From the perspective of the Mexican public health sector, the use of rasagiline could imply greater gains in QALYs, at an acceptable cost, compared with the use of pramipexole in the early treatment of PD.


REFERENCES

  1. Calne. Treatment of Parkinson’s disease. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1021-7.

  2. Strickland D, Bertoni JM. Parkinson’s prevalence estimated by a state registry. Mov Disord 2004; 19: 318-23.

  3. Siderowf A. Parkinson’s disease: clinical features, epidemiology and genetics. Neurol Clin 2001; 19: 565-78.

  4. Chen JJ, Vuong Ly A. Rasagiline: a second-generation monoamine oxidase type B inhibitor for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. Am J Heatlh Syst Pharm 2006; 63: 915-28.

  5. Briggs A. Decision modeling for health economic evaluation. Oxford University Pres; 2006.

  6. Rascol O, Brooks DJ, Melamed E, Oertel W, Poewe W, Stocci F, et al. Rasagiline as an adjunct to levodopa in patients with Parkinson’s disease and motor fluctuations (LARGO, Lasting effecto in adjunct therapy with Rasagiline Given Once daily, study): a randomized, double blind, parallel-group trial. Lancet 2005; 365: 947-54.

  7. Parkinson Study Group. A controlled, randomized, delayed-start study of rasagiline in early Parkinson disease. Arch Neurol 2004; 61: 561-6.

  8. Parkinson Study Group. A controlled trial of rasagiline in early Parkinson disease: the TEMPO study. Arch Neuro 2002; 59: 1937-43.

  9. Parkinson Study Group. Pramipexole vs levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000; 284: 931-8.

  10. Haycox A, Armand C, Murteira S, Cochran J. Cost effectiveness of rasagiline and pramipexole as treatment strategies in early Parkinson’s disease in the UK setting: an economic Makov model evaluation. Drugs Aging 2009; 26: 791-801.

  11. Hauser RA, Rascol O, Korczyn AD, Jon Stoessl A, Watts RL, Poewe W, De Deyn PP, et al. Ten-year follow-up of Parkinson’s disease patients randomized to initial therapy with ropinirole or levodopa. Mov Disord 2007; 22: 2409-17.

  12. Goetz CG, Schwid SR, Eberly SW, Oakes D. Safety of rasagiline in elderly patients with Parkinson disease. Neurology 2006; 66: 1427-9.

  13. Sistema electrónico de Contrataciones Gubernamentales. COMPRANET. Página web: www.compranet.gob.mx/. Fecha de la búsqueda: 22 de octubre de 2012.

  14. Diario Federal de la Federación 2010 Página web: www.dof.gob.mx. Fecha de la búsqueda 10 de octubre de 2012.

  15. Drummond M, Sculpher M, Torrance G. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programs. 3rd. Ed. Oxford University Press; 2005.

  16. World Bank 2010 Página web:http://datos.bancomundial.org/. Fecha de la búsqueda: el 14 de octubre de 2012.

  17. González-Pier E, Gutiérrez-Delgado C, Stevens G, Barraza-Llorens M, Porras-Condey R, Carvalho N, et al. Priority setting for health interventions in Mexico’s System for Social Protection in Health. Lancet 2006; 368: 1608-18.

  18. Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH .Mirapexin: summary of products characteristic 2007. http://www.boehringer-ingelheim.com. Fecha de consulta junio 2012

  19. Servicios de Salud. 06 de jun de 2011. Licitación OA19GYR047T8- 10. México, D.F.

  20. Servicios de Salud,11. Licitación LA19GYR047T5-10. México, D.F.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com