Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMJ Open. 2014 Sep 16;4(9):e005376. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005376.

The cost-effectiveness and public health benefit of nalmefene added to psychosocial support for the reduction of alcohol consumption in alcohol-dependent patients with high/very high drinking risk levels: a Markov model.

Author information

1
Université Claude Bernard Lyon I, Villeurbanne, France Lundbeck S.A.S., Issy-les-Moulineaux Cedex, France.
2
RTI Health Solutions, Ljungskile, Sweden.
3
Lundbeck S.A.S., Issy-les-Moulineaux Cedex, France.
4
BresMed Health Solutions, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK.
5
Behavioral Health Economics Program, RTI International, Chicago,Illinois, USA.
6
Université Claude Bernard Lyon I, Villeurbanne, France.
7
Alcohol Treatment Centre, Lausanne University Hospital/CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland.
8
Social and Epidemiological Research Department, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada Klinische Psychologie und Psychotherapie, TU Dresden, Germany.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

To determine whether nalmefene combined with psychosocial support is cost-effective compared with psychosocial support alone for reducing alcohol consumption in alcohol-dependent patients with high/very high drinking risk levels (DRLs) as defined by the WHO, and to evaluate the public health benefit of reducing harmful alcohol-attributable diseases, injuries and deaths.

DESIGN:

Decision modelling using Markov chains compared costs and effects over 5 years.

SETTING:

The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS:

The model considered the licensed population for nalmefene, specifically adults with both alcohol dependence and high/very high DRLs, who do not require immediate detoxification and who continue to have high/very high DRLs after initial assessment.

DATA SOURCES:

We modelled treatment effect using data from three clinical trials for nalmefene (ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720), ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461) and SENSE (NCT00811941)). Baseline characteristics of the model population, treatment resource utilisation and utilities were from these trials. We estimated the number of alcohol-attributable events occurring at different levels of alcohol consumption based on published epidemiological risk-relation studies. Health-related costs were from UK sources.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

We measured incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and number of alcohol-attributable harmful events avoided.

RESULTS:

Nalmefene in combination with psychosocial support had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £5204 per QALY gained, and was therefore cost-effective at the £20,000 per QALY gained decision threshold. Sensitivity analyses showed that the conclusion was robust. Nalmefene plus psychosocial support led to the avoidance of 7179 alcohol-attributable diseases/injuries and 309 deaths per 100,000 patients compared to psychosocial support alone over the course of 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS:

Nalmefene can be seen as a cost-effective treatment for alcohol dependence, with substantial public health benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS:

This cost-effectiveness analysis was developed based on data from three randomised clinical trials: ESENSE 1 (NCT00811720), ESENSE 2 (NCT00812461) and SENSE (NCT00811941).

KEYWORDS:

Alcohol dependence; Cost-effectiveness; Cost-utility; Economic analysis; Nalmefene; QALY

PMID:
25227627
PMCID:
PMC4166142
DOI:
10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005376
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for HighWire Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center