The journal of nutrition, health & aging

, Volume 14, Issue 8, pp 664–668 | Cite as

Savings from sub-groups?: Policy guidance and Alzheimer's disease treatments

  • Paul McNamee
  • A. Vanoli
  • D. Hutchings
  • I. Mckeith
  • J. Bond
Savings From Sub-Groups?: Policy Guidance and Alzheimer's Disease Treatments

Abstract

Background

A range of new therapeutic agents are now available for the management of Alzheimer's disease. With limited resources available however, policy-makers and other health care professionals have to prioritise and judge competing treatments on criteria such as the magnitude of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Policy guidance that restricts treatments to defined patient sub-groups can improve the cost-effectiveness of treatments, and can help limit rises in health care expenditures. Budget impact models that estimate the amount of additional costs and potential savings are being increasingly used by policy-makers. However, the amount of savings estimated in such models depends on the effectiveness of treatment in changing morbidity, and the association between morbidity and costs.

Aim

To examine the magnitude of cost savings arising from provision of treatment to different patient sub-groups, using policy guidance decisions made by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) for cholinesterase inhibitor therapies in Alzheimer's Disease (AD) in the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS).

Method

Cohort simulation modelling.

Results

Policy guidance decisions that restricted treatment to smaller patient sub-groups were associated with lower overall care costs, but did not reduce drug costs.

Conclusions

Given increasing recognition by health policy-makers of the importance of affordability of new treatments, greater attention should be paid to measurement of cost impacts by sub-groups within health economic modelling.

Key words

Alzheimer's disease costs cost analysis dementia economics sub-groups budget impact donepezil cholinesterase inhibitor therapies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Masters CL, Beyreuther K. Science, medicine and the future: Alzheimer's disease. British Medical Journal 1998; 316: 446–448.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Birks JS, Grimley Evans J, Iakovidou V, Tsolaki M. Rivastigmine for Alzheimer's disease. The Cochrane Library, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Issue 2, 2004.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Birks JS, Harvey R. Donepezil for dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (Cochrane Review). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Cochrane Library, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Issue 1, 2006.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olin J, Schneider L. Galantamine for dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (Cochrane Review). The Cochrane Library, Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Issue 2, 2004.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tariot PN, Federoff HJ. Current treatment for Alzheimer's disease and future prospects. Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders 2003; 17: 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mohs RC, Doody RS, Morris JC, Ieni JR, Rogers SL, Perdomo CA, Pratt RD, for the 312 Study Group. A 1-year, placebo-controlled preservation of function survival study of donepezil in AD patients. Neurology 2001; 57: 481–488.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Winblad B, Engedal K, Soininen H, Verhey F, Waldemar G, Wimo A, Wetterholm R, Zhang R, Haglund A, Subbiah P, and the Donepezil Nordic Study Group. 1-year, randomized, placebo-controlled study of donepezil in patients with mild to moderate AD. Neurology 2001; 57: 489–495.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Trinh NH, Hoblyn J, Mohanty S, Yaffe K. Efficacy of cholinesterase inhibitors in the treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms and funcational impairment in Alzheimer disease: a meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 2003; 289: 210–216.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rosler M. The efficacy of cholinesterase inhibitors in treating the behavioural symptoms of dementia. International Journal of Clinical Practice 2002; 127: 20–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fillit H, Gutterman EM, Lewis B. Donepezil use in managed Medicare: effect on health care costs and utilization. Clinical Therapeutics 1999; 21: 2173–2185.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Small GW, Donohue JA, Brooks RL. An economic evaluation severity of donepezil in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Clinical Therapeutics 1998; 20: 838–850.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Neumann PJ, Hermann RC, Kuntz KM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of donepezil in the treatment of mild or moderate Alzheimer's disease. Neurology 1999; 52: 1138–1145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jonsson L, Lindgren W, Wimo A, et al. The cost-effectiveness of donepezil therapy in Swedish patients with Alzheimer's disease: a Markov model. Clinical Therapeutics 1999; 21: 1230–1240.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    O'Brien BJ, Goeree R, Hux M, et al. Economic evaluation of donepezil for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease in Canada. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1999; 47: 570–578.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stewart A, Phillips R, Dempsey G. Pharmacotherapy for people with Alzheimer's disease: a Markov-cycle evaluation of five years’ therapy using donepezil. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 1998; 13: 445–453.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Caro JJ, Salas M, Ward A, et al. Economic analysis of galantamine, a cholinesterase inhibitor, in the treatment of patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease in the Netherlands. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2002; 14: 84–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Getsios D, Caro JJ, Caro G, et al. Assessment of health economics in Alzheimer's disease (AHEAD): galantamine treatment in Canada. Neurology 2001; 57: 972–978.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jonsson B. Pharmacoeconomics of cholinesterase inhibitors in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21(14): 1025–1037.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Green C, Picot J, Loveman E, Takeda A, Kirby J, Clegg A. Modelling the cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors in the management of mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23: 1271–1282.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Birch S, Gafni A. The ‘NICE’ approach to technology assessment: an economics perspective. Health Care Manag Sci 2004;7:35–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine (review) and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Appraisal Consultation Document. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2006.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine, and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Appraisal Consultation Document. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2005.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on the use of donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Technology Appraisal Guidance No.19. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2001.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technical appraisal. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2004.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2006.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing. Guidelines for the Pharmaceutical Industry on Preparation of Submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2002.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    National Statistics. T 03: England and Wales; estimated resident population by single year of age and sex; Mid-2002 Population Estimates 2004. (http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/Expodata/Spreadsheets/D7024.xls).
  28. 28.
    MRC CFAS. Cognitive function and dementia in six areas of England and Wales: the distribution of MMSE and prevalence of GMS organicity level in the MRC CFA Study. Psych Med 1998;28:319–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lopez O, Becker J, Wisniewski S, Saxton J, Kaufer D, DeKosky. Cholinesterase inhibitor treatment alters the natural history of Alzheimer's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 2002;72:310–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mungas D, Reed B, Ellis W, Jagust W. The effects of age on rate of progression of Alzheimer disease and dementia with associated cerebrovascular disease. Arch Neurol 2001;58:1243–1247.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Neale R, Brayne C, Johnson A. Cognition and survival: an exploration in a large multicentre study of the population aged 65 years and over. Int J Epid 2001;30:1383–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Blough DK, Ramsey SD. Using generalized linear models to assess medical costs. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol 2000;1:185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Barber J, Thompson S. Multiple regression of cost data: use of generalised linear models. J Health Serv Res Policy 2004;9:197–204.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McNamee P, Gregson B, Buck D, Bamford C, Bond J, Wright K. Costs of formal care for frail older people in England. Soc Sci Med 1999;48:331–341.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Knapp M, Prince M. Dementia UK. London: Alzheimer's Society, 2007.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    AD2000 Collaborative Group. Long-term donepezil treatment in 565 patients with Alzheimer's disease: randomised double-blind trial. Lancet 2004;363:2105–2115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    British Medical Association, Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British National Formulary. London: BMA, RPS, 2003.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    HM Treasury. The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government. London: TSO, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Serdi and Springer Verlag France 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul McNamee
    • 1
  • A. Vanoli
    • 2
  • D. Hutchings
    • 2
  • I. Mckeith
    • 3
  • J. Bond
    • 4
  1. 1.Health Economics Research Unit, Institute of Applied Health SciencesUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK
  2. 2.School of Population and Health Sciences, Centre for Health Services ResearchUniversity of NewcastleNewcastleUK
  3. 3.Institute for Ageing and Health, Wolfson Research CentreNewcastle General HospitalNewcastle upon TyneUK
  4. 4.Social Gerontology and Health Services Research, School of Population and Health SciencesInstitute of Health and SocietyNewcastleUK

Personalised recommendations