[Topical haemostatic agents in neurosurgery].

Haemostasis is of fundamental significance in neurosurgery, and insufficient control of bleeding is associated with morbidity and mortality. Topical haemostatic agents play an important role, as the characteristics of neuronal tissue limit the use of classical surgical haemostasis techniques. Appropriate choice of agent depends on the location and type of bleeding, but also on knowledge of the products' mechanisms of action, indications, price and accessibility. Biological products are superior to the mechanical in efficacy but require more preparation and are significantly more cost-intensive.

Cost-effectiveness of aripiprazole once-monthly compared with paliperidone palmitate once-monthly injectable for the treatment of schizophrenia in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a decision-analytic model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of initiating maintenance treatment with aripiprazole once-monthly (AOM) vs paliperidone long-acting injectable (PLAI) once-monthly among patients with schizophrenia in the US. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed to evaluate a hypothetical cohort of patients initiating maintenance treatment with AOM or PLAI. Rates of relapse, adverse events (AEs), and direct medical costs were estimated for 1 year. Patients either remained on initial treatment or discontinued treatment due to lack of efficacy, AEs, or other reasons, including non-adherence. Data from placebo-controlled pivotal trials and product prescribing information (PI) were used to estimate treatment efficacy and AEs. Analyses were performed assuming dosing of clinical trials, real-world practice, PIs, and highest therapeutic dose available, because of variation in practice settings. The main outcome of interest was incremental cost per schizophrenia hospitalization averted with AOM vs PLAI. RESULTS: Based on placebo-controlled pivotal trials' dosing, AOM improved clinical outcomes by reducing schizophrenia relapses vs PLAI (0.181 vs 0.277 per person per year [pppy]) at an additional cost of US$1276 pppy, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$13,280/relapse averted. When PI dosing was assumed, this ICER increased to US$19,968/relapse averted. When real-world dosing and highest available dosing were assumed, AOM was associated with fewer relapses and lower overall treatment costs vs PLAI. CONCLUSIONS: AOM consistently provided favorable clinical benefits. Under various dosing scenarios, AOM results indicated fewer relapses at lower overall costs or a reasonable cost-effectiveness threshold (i.e., less than the cost of a hospitalization relapse) vs PLAI. Given the heterogeneous nature of schizophrenia and variability in treatment response, health plans may consider open access for treatments like AOM. Since model inputs were based on data from separate placebo-controlled trials, generalization of results to the real-world setting is limited.

Validation of an economic model of paliperidone palmitate for chronic schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Model validation is important, but seldom applied in chronic schizophrenia. Validation consists of verifying the model itself for face validity (i.e., structure and inputs), cross-validation with other models assessing the same issue, and comparison with real-life outcomes. The primary purpose was to cross-validate a recent pharmacoeconomic model comparing long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics for treating chronic schizophrenia in Sweden. The secondary purpose was to provide external validation. METHODS: The model of interest was a decision tree analysis with a 1-year time horizon with costs in 2011 Swedish kroner. Drugs analyzed included paliperidone palmitate (PP-LAI), olanzapine pamoate (OLZ-LAI), risperidone (RIS-LAI), haloperidol (HAL-LAI), and oral olanzapine (oral-OLZ). Embase and Medline were searched from 1990-2012 for models examining LAIs. Articles were retrieved, with data extracted for all drugs compared including: expected costs, rates of hospitalization, proportion of time not in relapse, and associated QALYs. Outcomes from the model of interest were compared with those from other articles; costs were projected to 2012 using the consumer price index. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies were used for validation; 14 of them provided evidence for cross-validation, 13 for external validation, and four for cost. In cross-validation, cost estimates varied -1.8% (range: -12.4-20.1%), hospitalizations 5.2% (-12.1-3.1%), stable disease 2.5% (-5.6-1.5%), QALYs 9.0% (4.3% after removing outliers). All estimates of clinical outcomes were within 15%. In external validation, hospitalization rates varied by 6.3% (-0.7-11.3%). The research was limited by data availability and validity of the original results. CONCLUSION: Other models validated the outputs of our model very well.

Cost effectiveness of paliperidone palmitate for the treatment of schizophrenia in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with antipsychotic medication is an important element of relapse prevention in the management of schizophrenia, and can reduce inpatient stays. Recently, the long-acting atypical antipsychotic paliperidone long-acting injectable (PLAI), a once-monthly LAI antipsychotic, was approved for treatment of schizophrenia in Germany. OBJECTIVE: To estimate, based on a previously published model, the cost effectiveness of PLAI compared with other common antipsychotic treatment strategies in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia in Germany. METHODS: A Markov decision analytic model was adapted to the German healthcare system. The model considers the cost effectiveness for PLAI as a maintenance treatment for patients with schizophrenia from the payer perspective. The patients transition between eight health states on a monthly basis over a 5-year time horizon. As therapeutic strategies, PLAI, quetiapine, risperidone long-acting injections (RLAI), oral olanzapine, oral risperidone, zuclopenthixol decanoate, olanzapine long-acting injections (OLAI), oral typical and oral atypical were compared. Probability of relapse, level of adherence, side effects and treatment discontinuation were derived from the Swedish original model. Input factors regarding resource use and costs were estimated and adjusted for the German healthcare system. A probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) using cost-effectiveness scatter plots was performed to visualize the robustness of the results. RESULTS: In base-case scenario, PLAI is superior to RLAI in gained quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and avoided relapses. Relative to all other treatment strategies, PLAI is more effective with regard to gained QALYs and avoided relapses but results in higher treatment costs over a 5-year horizon in base-case scenario. The results were tested in PSA. If a cost-effectiveness threshold of 30,000 is assumed, for example, PLAI can be considered to be cost effective compared with RLAI in about 92.5 % of cases regarding gained QALYs, and in 78.6 % of cases regarding avoided relapse. Compared with OLAI, in about 94.4 % of cases regarding gained QALYs and in 99.9 % of cases regarding avoided relapse, cost effectiveness can be considered. Comparing PLAI and zuclopenthixol decanoate, cost effectiveness can be assumed in about 90.4 % of cases regarding gained QALYs, and in all cases regarding avoided relapse. CONCLUSIONS: PLAI dominates RLAI and compared with the other treatment strategies PLAI has shown to be more effective but results in higher costs in base-case scenario.

The threshold rate of oral atypical anti-psychotic adherence at which paliperidone palmitate is cost saving.

OBJECTIVE: To identify, estimate, and compare 'real world' costs and outcomes associated with paliperidone palmitate compared with branded oral atypical anti-psychotics, and to estimate the threshold rate of oral atypical adherence at which paliperidone palmitate is cost saving. METHODS: Decision analytic modeling techniques developed by Glazer and Ereshefsky have previously been used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of depot haloperidol, LAI risperidone, and, more recently, LAI olanzapine. This study used those same techniques, along with updated comparative published clinical data, to evaluate paliperidone palmitate. Adherence rates were based on strict Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) criteria. The evaluation was conducted from the perspective of US healthcare payers. RESULTS: Paliperidone palmitate patients had fewer mean annual days of relapse (8.7 days; 6.0 requiring hospitalization, 2.7 not requiring hospitalization vs 17.8 days; 12.4 requiring hospitalization, 5.4 not requiring hospitalization), and lower annual total cost ($20,995) compared to oral atypicals (mean $22,481). Because paliperidone palmitate was both more effective and less costly, it is considered economically dominant. Paliperidone palmitate saved costs when the rate of adherence of oral atypical anti-psychotics was below 44.9% using strict MEMS criteria. Sensitivity analyses showed results were robust to changes in parameter values. For patients receiving 156 mg paliperidone palmitate, the annual incremental cost was $1216 per patient (ICER = $191 per day of relapse averted). Inclusion of generic risperidone (market share 18.6%) also resulted in net incremental cost for paliperidone palmitate ($120; ICER = $13). Limitations of this evaluation include use of simplifying assumptions, data from multiple sources, and generalizability of results. CONCLUSIONS: Although uptake of LAIs in the US has not been as rapid as elsewhere, many thought leaders emphasize their importance in optimizing outcomes in patients with adherence problems. The findings of this analysis support the cost-effectiveness of paliperidone palmitate in these patients.

Are the long-acting intramuscular formulations of risperidone or paliperidone palmitate associated with post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome? An assessment of safety databases.

Long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations of antipsychotics are valuable treatment alternatives for patients with psychotic disorders, and understanding their safe use is critical. Post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS) has been reported following treatment with one atypical antipsychotic LAI. Clinical databases of risperidone LAI and paliperidone palmitate were explored to identify if cases of PDSS had been observed. No cases of PDSS were identified in 15 completed trials of 3,164 subjects (approximately 115,000 injections) or the postmarketing safety database of risperidone LAI. Only one case of PDSS was identified among 10 completed trials (3,817 subjects, 33,906 injections) of paliperidone palmitate-that case having been reported in a patient randomized to treatment with placebo. Examination of these prospective databases finds no evidence that risperidone LAI and paliperidone palmitate are associated with PDSS and suggest that findings seen with another antipsychotic LAI are not generalizable.

Paliperidone palmitate - review of the efficacy, safety and cost of a new second-generation depot antipsychotic medication.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the efficacy, safety and cost of paliperidone palmitate, a depot antipsychotic medication recently approved for the treatment of schizophrenia. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted by querying the websites http://www.pubmed.gov, http://www.fda.gov, http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda and http://www.clinicaltrials.gov for the search term 'paliperidone palmitate'. Cost information was obtained from the pharmaceutical vendor servicing a local state-operated psychiatric facility. STUDY SELECTION: All available reports of studies were identified. Product labelling provided additional information. DATA EXTRACTION: Descriptions of the principal results and calculation of the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) for relevant dichotomous outcomes were extracted from the study reports and synopses. Additional safety outcomes subject to NNH analysis were obtained from product labelling. DATA SYNTHESIS: Paliperidone palmitate is a newly available depot formulation of paliperidone (the 9-OH metabolite of risperidone). Upon injection into the deltoid or gluteal muscle, the release of the drug starts as early as day 1, reaches maximum plasma concentrations at 13 days and lasts for as long as 126 days. Maximum concentration following deltoid injection is approximately 28% higher compared with injection into the gluteal muscle, and thus paliperidone palmitate requires initiation by two initial deltoid injections spread 1 week apart to achieve therapeutic concentrations rapidly. Subsequent injections are at 4-week intervals. Acute efficacy was evidenced by four short-term double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose studies of acutely relapsed adult inpatients who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia. NNT for a 30% or greater decrease in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score compared with placebo was consistently lower for the higher dose strengths of 156 and 234 mg, suggesting a therapeutic dose-response. Treatment with paliperidone palmitate at doses between 39 and 156 mg significantly delayed the time to recurrence of symptoms of schizophrenia after 24 weeks of maintained symptom stability. The NNT vs. placebo to avoid a recurrence of symptoms was 5 (95% CI 4-7). Overall, paliperidone palmitate was reasonably well tolerated, with low rates of extrapyramidal symptoms or body weight gain; however, these may be more common at higher doses. Injection site reactions occurred at a rate ranging from 4% to 10%, depending on the dose regimen, compared with 2% for the pooled placebo arms. The acquisition cost of a maintenance dose of paliperidone palmitate calculated on a per day basis is similar to that for risperidone microspheres, but about double the cost for oral paliperidone and approximately 19 times the cost of oral generic risperidone. CONCLUSIONS: Paliperidone palmitate is efficacious for the acute and maintenance treatment of schizophrenia and is reasonably well tolerated. It offers several advantages over other available second-generation depot antipsychotics: it comes in prefilled syringes in a number of different dosage strengths; it does not require refrigeration; it does not require supplementation with oral antipsychotics; it can be administered once monthly; it can be administered with a very small bore needle; the injection volume is small; the injection site can be either the deltoid or gluteal muscles; it does not require an additional precautionary observation period after the injection. For patients for whom oral risperidone or paliperidone is otherwise effective, paliperidone palmitate offers a guaranteed delivery system that enhances adherence. However, the high acquisition cost of paliperidone palmitate will likely be an important obstacle to its routine use.