On heterogeneity of treatment effects and clinical freedom.

Three decades ago, John R Hampton announced the death of clinical freedom. Since then, evidence-based medicine has been the predominant paradigm in clinical research. By applying a population-based approach, the randomised controlled trial has become the cornerstone for demonstrating the overall effect of a treatment and for developing guidelines. The new patient-centred medicine movement is rediscovering the important implications of heterogeneity of treatment effects for clinical practice and that a better understanding of such variability can contribute to improve health outcomes for individual patients through practicing a science-based clinical freedom.

A Cost-per-Number Needed to Treat Analysis Assessing the Efficiency of Biologic Drugs in Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis. / Evaluación de la eficiencia de los tratamientos biológicos en la psoriasis moderada a grave en España: análisis de coste por número necesario a tratar (NNT).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with an estimated prevalence in Spain of 2.3% of the population. Approximately 30% of patients have moderate-to-severe forms. Treatment with biologic agents is proving to be a step forward in the management of the disease, although these treatments are very expensive. The objective of this study was to determine the efficiency, in terms of cost per number needed to treat (NNT), of the biologic drugs available in Spain for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: NNT data were obtained from a network meta-analysis that included all randomized clinical trials of biologic drugs sold in Spain. The cost of each treatment was calculated based on the approved dosage for the first year of treatment, as indicated in the Summary of Product Characteristics. These data were used to calculate the cost per NNT of the drugs for various PASI scores (75, 90, and 100). A sensitivity analysis was performed taking into consideration only the PASI-response measurement time (after 10, 12, or 16 weeks, depending on the drug). RESULTS: The order of efficiency, from most to least efficient, in the case of a PASI 75 response was ixekizumab > ustekinumab 45mg > ustekinumab 90mg > secukinumab > infliximab > etanercept > adalimumab. The order for PASI 90 was ixekizumab >secukinumab >ustekinumab 45mg > ustekinumab 90mg > infliximab > adalimumab > etanercept. The order for PASI 100 was ixekizumab > secukinumab > infliximab > ustekinumab 90mg > ustekinumab 45mg > adalimumab > etanercept. The sensitivity analysis showed some changes in the order, depending on the response-assessment period. CONCLUSIONS: The findings show a link between the efficacy of the biologic therapies available in Spain for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and their efficiency. Ixekizumab had the lowest cost per NNT for all PASI-response scores (75, 90, and 100) during the first year of treatment.

Cost of severe hypoglycaemia in patients with type 1 diabetes in Spain and the cost-effectiveness of insulin lispro compared with regular human insulin in preventing severe hypoglycaemia.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the costs of severe hypoglycaemia (SH) in a population of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus in the Spanish healthcare system and the cost-effectiveness of insulin lispro over regular insulin in preventing SH episodes. METHODS: A retrospective study of 100 patients in three Spanish health centres was performed. Resource utilisation data were collected only for interventions specifically relating to the hypoglycaemic episode. The direct medical costs determined in the analyses were: costs of hospitalisation, diagnostic tests carried out, costs of treatment administered and other associated costs such as visits to the endocrinologist and re-training in glucose control, transportation and assistance of a care-giver. In addition, indirect costs such as days of lost productivity were measured. The incidence rates of SH for insulin lispro and regular insulin were obtained from the literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness of insulin lispro over regular insulin was calculated. RESULTS: The overall mean cost per episode of SH was 366 euro, comprised of 65.4% direct costs and 35.6% indirect costs. The largest cost was for hospitalisation at 183 euro per episode. The SH episodes incidence rates for 100 patients per year were 33 and 73 for insulin lispro and 48 (p < 0.05) and 117 (p < 0.01) for regular insulin, in the two clinical trials found in the literature. The additional cost to prevent one episode of SH with insulin lispro over regular insulin ranged from 277 euro to insulin lispro dominance. CONCLUSIONS: Severe hypoglycaemia has a significant impact on the total cost of diabetes. The use of insulin lispro is associated with reductions in annual costs because of SH and, possibly, the overall effect may be cost neutral or cost saving when total costs are considered. The cost of SH should be included in the analysis of total socio-economic burden of diabetes.

[Spanish scientific production in diagnostic and therapeutic research area of respiratory system in international journals from 1990 to 2002]. / Producción española en revistas internacionales en el área de técnicas diagnósticas y terapéuticas del sistema respiratorio en el periodo 1990 a 2002.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study were: to analyze the spanish production in diagnostic and therapeutics research area of respiratory system in international journals from 1990 to 2002. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Papers published in diagnostic and therapeutics area of respiratory system during this period of time were selected by the PUBMED system. We delimited the production with key words: respiratory system and the one that is used by the diagnostic and therapeutics research area. RESULTS: We obtain a total of 67 document published in international journals by spanish authors. The scientific production in the diagnostic and therapeutics area have stabilized in this 12 years period. The distribution of articles by the institutional affiliation and province of authors also showed a wide dispersion: Barcelona and Clinic and Provincial Hospital of Barcelona were responsible for 43.1% and 23.8% of all the production. Bronchoalveolar lavage and the use of telescopic catheter were the type of diagnostic and therapeutic procedure more productive. CONCLUSIONS: The scientific production in the diagnostic and therapeutics area of respiratory system have stabilized in this 12 years period, this evidence contrast with the high growth detected in respiratory system in general.

Economic value of gemcitabine in non-small cell lung cancer.

Although cost considerations traditionally have not been important in cancer treatment decision making, there is increasing concern worldwide about the economic impact of therapeutic alternatives in the field of oncology. In particular, there is greater pressure for pharmaceutical companies to assess the economic value of new products. We have investigated and compared the clinical outcomes and corresponding cost savings of a novel nucleoside analog, gemcitabine, with other chemotherapy options in three different health care settings: Germany, the United States, and Spain. To date, most of the work with gemcitabine has been done in non-small cell lung cancer. Most non-small cell lung cancer patients present with advanced disease that is unsuitable for surgery and, in many cases, unsuitable for potentially curative chemotherapy. Chemotherapy for the majority of patients is therefore administered with palliative intent. For this reason, the comparative agents chosen for the economic models were palliative treatments (cisplatin/etoposide and ifosfamide/etoposide). As is customary with oncolytics, gemcitabine was investigated first as a single agent in noncomparative trials. Since data were not available from a comparator trial, we estimated comparative data from the literature sources and expert opinion (German and Spanish cost models) and from retrospective chart reviews (US cost model). In all three models, the efficacy was assumed to be equal, so a cost-minimization approach was used. Gemcitabine monotherapy showed cost savings compared with both cisplatin/etoposide and ifosfamide/etoposide in all treatment settings. The majority of these savings were due to differences in hospitalization for drug administration, and the incidence and treatment of nausea and vomiting and febrile neutropenia.

The safety of olanzapine compared with other antipsychotic drugs: results of an observational prospective study in patients with schizophrenia (EFESO Study). Pharmacoepidemiologic Study of Olanzapine in Schizophrenia.

INTRODUCTION: Results of controlled clinical trials should be confirmed through safety and effectiveness studies in nonselected patient cohorts treated according to routine clinical practice. METHOD: Outpatients with schizophrenia (ICD-10 criteria) entered this prospective, naturalistic study when they received a new prescription for an antipsychotic drug. Treatment assignment was based on purely clinical criteria, as the study did not include any experimental intervention. Safety was evaluated through the collection of spontaneous adverse events and a specific questionnaire for extrapyramidal symptoms. Global clinical status was measured through the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) and the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scales. RESULTS: From the 2967 patients included, 2128 patients were treated with olanzapine as monotherapy or combined with other drugs (olanzapine group), and 821 were treated with other antipsychotic drugs as monotherapy or combined with other drugs (control group). There were no statistical differences between treatment groups at baseline regarding age, gender, disease duration, or severity of symptoms. Olanzapine was well tolerated and effective in this study. Overall incidence of adverse events was significantly lower in the olanzapine group compared with the control group (p < .001). Somnolence and weight gain were significantly more frequent in the olanzapine group, and akathisia, dystonia, extrapyramidal syndrome, hypertonia, hypokinesia, and tremor were significantly higher in the control group. Clinical improvement at endpoint, measured through the mean change in the CGI-S and the GAF, was significantly higher in the olanzapine group compared with the control group (p = .004). CONCLUSION: These results show that olanzapine is safe and effective in nonselected schizophrenic outpatients and are consistent with the efficacy and safety profile that olanzapine has shown in previous controlled clinical trials.

Global index of safety (GIS): a new instrument to assess drug safety.

There is an asymmetry between the extraordinary development of measures and tools aimed at studying the beneficial effects of the drugs and the more limited methods to assess their safety profile. The goal of our study was to develop a global measuring tool to assess drugs' safety. We conducted a survey of Spanish psychiatrists in mental health centers and outpatient treatment units to assess the severity scores that they would assign to a list of the most common adverse events (AEs) that usually occur with antipsychotic treatment. The severity scores were then applied to the list of AEs that really occurred along a naturalistic pharmacoepidemiological study on the use of different antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia. The Global Index of Safety (GIS) of the experimental group treated with olanzapine (OLZ) was compared with the GIS of the control group and with the GIS of specific antipsychotics for which the number of treated patients was greater than 100. A total of 194 psychiatrists rated the severity of each AE on a scale of 1 (insignificant) to 5 (extremely severe). The individual severity was applied to the 2949 schizophrenic patients included in a pharmacoepidemiological study. A GIS was calculated for every group of patients receiving the same treatments. The GIS of the control group was higher (4.3) than that calculated from the experimental group (2.5) (P < 0.001). The GIS of the risperidone (3.6) and haloperidol (6.0) subgroups were higher than that calculated from the OLZ group (P < 0.001). The development of a GIS may facilitate the comparison of the safety of several drugs and may constitute a very valuable aid for those involved in selecting drugs.

Randomized database studies: a new method to assess drugs' effectiveness?

The need to evaluate drugs' effects in real clinical practice is increasingly important. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and database analyses (DBA) are the two main methods to assess treatments effectiveness. RCTs remain the "gold standard" for comparing alternative treatments. However, they are conducted under strict, protocol-driven conditions that may limit their generalizability. Advantages of new high quality clinical databases, on the other hand, include the simple and economic access to large number and range of cases, and the ability to capture all aspects of actual medical practice. The main potential limitation of DBA is the potential for comparison bias due to the lack of randomization. Despite the efforts to design naturalistic trials and to use sophisticated statistical techniques to minimize selection bias, the inherent limitations of both methods (problems of external and internal validity, respectively) have not been completely solved. Thus, the actual challenge is the development of some new strategy capable of generating results with an acceptable balance between internal and external validity. As randomization is essential to minimize comparison bias, we point out the possibility to include randomization modules in computer-based patient records. The theoretical foundation of these "randomized database studies" is the simultaneous use of both experimental and observational methods in the assessment of drugs' effectiveness. The progressive standardization of clinical practice and the development and adoption of improved computer-based patient records could facilitate the use of this new research strategy.

Economic evaluation in a randomized phase III clinical trial comparing gemcitabine/cisplatin and etoposide/cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Information on the relative cost-effectiveness of treatments for cancer is being increasingly sought as pressure on health care resources increases. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) versus cisplatin/etoposide (CE) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), using resource utilization data collected in conjunction with the first randomized clinical trial comparing both combinations. METHODS: Efficacy and medical care resource utilization data were collected prospectively in an open-label, multicenter, randomized, comparative, phase III trial conducted in Spain which compared gemcitabine/cisplatin and cisplatin/etoposide in 135 chemonaive patients with Stage IIIB or IV NSCLC. There were no differences between both regimens when survival was used as primary end-point, so a cost-minimization analysis was used to compare them. In addition, cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted when percentage of responses and time to progression were used as secondary end-points. RESULTS: There were no differences between both regimens when survival was selected as the efficacy end-point. Despite the higher chemotherapy cost of GC when compared to CE, there were no differences in total direct costs (584523 pts for GC and 589630 pts for CE; P=NS) between both regimens. Potential savings with GC were mainly associated with a decrease in hospitalization rate. There were differences in favor of GC when response rate (40.6% for GC and 21.9% for CE; P<0.05) and time to disease progression (8.7 months for GC and 7.2 months for CE; P<0. 05) were used as clinical end-points. GC presented a favorable cost-effectiveness profile when compared to CE. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective economic evaluation conducted alongside a clinical trial offers valuable preliminary information on the potential efficiency of the combination gemcitabine-cisplatin in NSCLC. Future assessments based on larger clinical trials focused on survival and naturalistic economic studies conducted in real clinical practice settings are necessary to confirm these findings.

A review of methodologies for assessing drug effectiveness and a new proposal: randomized database studies.

The need to evaluate the effects of health technologies in clinical practice is increasingly important. In this article, we review the advantages and limitations of naturalistic randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and database analyses, the two primary methods for evaluating treatment effectiveness. Also, we comment on a newer research strategy, cross-design synthesis, which proposes the complementary use of both experimental RCTs and observational database methodologies to avoid the main weaknesses of each: respectively, the lack of external and internal validity. Finally, we propose a new strategy--randomized database studies--capable of generating results with an acceptable balance between internal and external validity. This strategy consists of the simultaneous use of both experimental and observational tools in the assessment of drugs' effectiveness. Randomization is essential to minimize comparison bias, and one possibility for such studies is that randomization modules could be included in computer-based patient records. Although we identify some of the difficulties in implementing the process, the progressive standardization of clinical practice and the development and widespread adoption of improved computer-based patient records could facilitate the use of randomized database studies as a new method of research.

Doses of olanzapine, risperidone, and haloperidol used in clinical practice: results of a prospective pharmacoepidemiologic study. EFESO Study Group. Estudio Farmacoepidemiologico en la Esquizofrenia con Olanzapina.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to determine the doses of olanzapine (OLZ), risperidone (RIS), and haloperidol (HAL) used in clinical practice in outpatients with schizophrenia and the rates of occurrence of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) and other adverse events, clinical response, and use of concomitant medications. METHODS: The present study involved a subset of patients from a 6-month, open-label, prospective observational study. Data were collected by 293 psychiatrists at mental health centers and other outpatient treatment facilities in Spain. Medications and doses used, occurrence of EPS and other adverse events, and scores on the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) of Severity Scale and Global Assessment of Function (GAF) were recorded. Clinical response was defined as a decrease of > or = 2 points on the CGI, with a final CGI score < or = 4. RESULTS: A total of 2657 patients were included in the analysis. The initial and overall mean daily doses for the 3 groups were as follows: OLZ, 12.2 and 13.0 mg, respectively; RIS, 5.2 and 5.4 mg; and HAL, 13.9 and 13.6 mg. Initial and overall median daily doses were the same in each group: OLZ, 10 mg; RIS, 6 mg; and HAL, 10 mg. A significantly lower proportion of OLZ-treated patients (36.9%) experienced EPS compared with RIS-treated (49.6%) and HAL-treated (76.0%) patients (P < or = 0.001). A significantly lower proportion of patients in the OLZ group (47.8%) experienced adverse events compared with patients in the RIS (57.2%) and HAL (79.8%) groups (P < or = 0.001). A significantly greater proportion of OLZ-treated patients (37.3%) were responders compared with RIS-treated patients (31.5%) (P < 0.05). In all 3 groups, patients who had an initial CGI score > or = 5 received significantly higher overall mean daily doses than did patients with an initial CGI score < 5 (P < 0.001). A significantly lower proportion of OLZ-treated patients (10.2%) were receiving concomitant anticholinergic medication at the end of the study (month 6) compared with RIS-treated (19.9%) and HAL-treated (44.0%) patients (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The mean daily doses recorded in this analysis based on data from a naturalistic setting are consistent with recommendations based on clinical trials. Compared with both RIS- and HAL-treated patients, OLZ-treated patients were less likely to experience EPS or other adverse events, and less likely to use concomitant anticholinergic medications. OLZ-treated patients were also more likely to respond to treatment than were RIS-treated patients.

Comparative pharmacoeconomic study of vancomycin and teicoplanin in intensive care patients.

Randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses have not demonstrated any statistically significant differences between teicoplanin and vancomycin with regard to efficacy. A cost-minimization analysis was conducted to compare the economical impact of the treatment with vancomycin and teicoplanin in intensive care patients. Information on resource utilization was retrospectively collected from 100 consecutive clinical histories of patients hospitalized in a Spanish Intensive Care Unit, who had been given a glycopeptide antibiotic (50 teicoplanin and 50 vancomycin) for the treatment of a suspected or proven infection. Although personnel, material, and monitoring costs were higher in the vancomycin group, the acquisition costs and the total costs were much lower in this group, so the resulting total costs per day were 5508 ptas (33 euros) for vancomycin-treated patients and 9893 ptas (59.5 euros) for teicoplanin-treated patients. The savings with vancomycin for a 10-day course of treatment would be approximately 40697 ptas (244.5 euros) per patient. Results were consistent for a variety of conditions that were included in the sensitivity analysis.

The validity and reliability of the global index of safety (GIS).

OBJECTIVE: The global index of safety (GIS) is an adverse event (AE) based instrument designed to evaluate the safety profile of drugs. This paper presents the evaluation of the inter-rater reliability and validity of a 94-item GIS for antipsychotics through Rasch analysis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 194 psychiatrists participating in an outpatient pharmacoepidemiologic study of olanzapine in schizophrenia rated the severity that each AE would have on a 5-point scale. Reliability was determined through a paired comparison design involving the new independent ratings of 101 different psychiatrists participating in another study of olanzapine in acute inpatient units. Spearman's, Pearson's and Intra-class correlation (ICC) coefficients were used to estimate the inter-rater reliability of the AE weights. Validity was analyzed through the Rasch rating scale model. RESULTS: Reliability coefficient estimates were excellent (Spearman = 0.99, Pearson = 0.99, ICC = 0.98), supporting the inter-rater reliability of the item weights. Through goodness-of-fit statistics and the investigation of the hierarchy of item calibrations, Rasch analysis confirmed the validity of the instrument. CONCLUSION: The data presented here on inter-rater reliability estimates of adverse events related to antipsychotic drugs indicate that GIS is a promising alternative for the evaluation of the safety profile of drugs.

Psychometric validation of a generic health-related quality of life measure (EQ-5D) in a sample of schizophrenic patients.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the construct validity of a generic health related quality of life (HRQOL) instrument - the EQ-5D - in a sample of schizophrenic patients receiving antipsychotic treatment. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 2128 schizophrenic patients treated with olanzapine, 417 treated with risperidone, and 112 with haloperidol responded to the EQ-5D. The study also assessed the effect of patient age, gender, and co-morbidity variables on patient's HRQOL Main outcomes measures: EQ-5D scores at the start of treatment and after 3 and 6 months of therapy were compared with results from the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) severity of illness scale and the (GAF) scale. The effect of antipsychotics and sociodemographic variables on patient's HRQOL over time was tested through a three-factor doubly multivariate repeated measures MANCOVA. RESULTS: High scores in the GAF scale and low scores in the CGI were linked with high scores on the EQ-5D scale. The correlational effects observed between the EQ-5D and the clinical indices ranged from 0.33 to 0.54. A significant effect of 'visit time' as well as an interaction of 'visit time' x drug, 'visit time' x gender, and 'visit time' x co-morbidity was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the EQ-5D is a valid instrument capable of detecting HRQOL differences between schizophrenic patients with different degrees of severity of illness.

Assessment of the time course of drugs with inhibitory effects on hepatic metabolic activity using successive salivary caffeine tests.

In clinical practice is very important to know the time course of the inhibitory effects of drugs to avoid side effects when several agents are taken concomitantly. We attempted to validate the effectiveness of successive salivary caffeine tests establishing the time for cimetidine to inhibit hepatic metabolism. The time of cimetidine's inhibitory effect as reported in other studies was chosen as the reference. In this open-label, prospective longitudinal, 16-day study, five healthy volunteers were treated with cimetidine 1 g/day for 5 days. After the intake of caffeine 300 mg, salivary caffeine tests were carried out on days -1 (control value), 1, 4, 8, 12, and 16. The mean systemic caffeine clearance was decreased after 24 hours of cimetidine. The drug's maximum inhibitory effect was reached after 5 days of administration, returning to previous values progressively 1-7 days after discontinuing cimetidine. No change occurred in the apparent volume of distribution. The time course of cimetidine's inhibitory effect was similar to that described with other methodologies. Although this was a pilot trial and the results have to be confirmed, it seems that successive salivary caffeine measurements could be a safe, reliable, noninvasive test for exploring the time course of the inhibitory effects of drugs on hepatic metabolism.

SSRI antidepressant use patterns and their relation to clinical global impression scores: a naturalistic study.

BACKGROUND: A cascade of events follows initial antidepressant selection which includes the subsequent antidepressant use pattern, resultant clinical outcomes, and associated health care expenditures. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study using data from a clinical practice setting was to test whether the pattern of antidepressant use was correlated with patients' treatment response as measured by the score on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale. DATA AND METHODS: A retrospective dataset of patients who initiated therapy on fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, or sertraline in a primary care setting in Spain was used. A Cox proportional hazard analysis was used to predict the likelihood of treatment response based upon the pattern of initial antidepressant use, while minimizing the influence of other factors. RESULTS: After controlling for other observed baseline characteristics including initial disease severity, (a) patients who remained on their initial antidepressant therapy for at least 2 months with no switching, augmentation, or upward dose titration were 1.63 times more likely to experience a treatment response than patients who had an adjustment to therapy; and (b) patients who initiated therapy on sertraline were 0.46 times as likely to experience a treatment response as patients who initiated therapy on the most common study antidepressant, fluoxetine. CONCLUSION: The pattern of antidepressant use is an important determinant of treatment response among patients initiating therapy on the newer antidepressants in clinical practice.

Drug utilisation studies as tools in health economics.

Drug utilisation and many pharmacoeconomic studies use pharmacoepidemiological methods characterised by the study of drugs from a socioeconomic perspective. Drug utilisation studies may be defined as studies of the marketing, distribution, prescription and use of drugs in a society, with special emphasis on the resulting medical, social and economic consequences. Pharmacoeconomic studies are used to measure drug efficiency, through comparison of the costs and effects of alternative therapies. Drug utilisation studies can provide highly valuable information, at a reasonable price, on the costs and effects (harmful and beneficial) of drugs. Such studies make available much useful information including indirect data on morbidity, the pharmaceutical component of the treatment cost of an illness, therapeutic compliance, the incidence of adverse reactions, the effectiveness of drug consumption and the choice of comparators. This information can be of great use in the subsequent elaboration of pharmacoeconomic studies, or in the selection of problematic areas in which these studies may be applied. Pharmacoeconomic studies, in turn, can be used to discover the economic repercussions of inappropriate prescribing and to quantify the cost effectiveness of various therapeutic interventions. The use of drug utilisation studies in conjunction with pharmacoeconomic analysis can result in more cost effective utilisation of medicines and a better utilisation of pharmacoeconomic methods, both of which contribute to a more rational use of drugs.

Cost-effectiveness of fluoxetine plus pindolol in patients with major depressive disorder: results from a randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

Some preliminary studies have suggested that the beta-adrenoceptor 5-HT1A antagonist pindolol (PIN) could increase the effect of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). We prospectively estimated the cost-effectiveness of fluoxetine and pindolol versus fluoxetine plus placebo, using results from the first double-blind randomized clinical trial comparing both treatments. Efficacy and medical care resource utilization were collected prospectively in a parallel, randomized, double-blind clinical trial conducted in a single centre in Spain. Average cost-effectiveness (cost/% response and cost/% remission) as well as the incremental cost-effectiveness were calculated for both treatments. A 'bootstrap' method was used to calculate confidence limits around the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. A significantly greater percentage of patients (one-tailed P < 0.05) in the fluoxetine FLX + PIN group than in the FLX + PLA group had experienced a therapeutic response (74.5% versus 58.97%) at 6 weeks. Direct medical costs were lower in the FLX + PIN group (mean 2508 pesetas per patient) than in the FLX + PLA group (mean 31870 pesetas per patient). Hospital admissions due to worsening of depressive symptoms were significantly lower (P < 0.05) in the FLX + PIN group (0/55) than in the FLX + PLA group (4/56). The observed differences in average costs and percentage response in the study were -29362 pesetas (< 0) and 15.6% (> 0), respectively, and the resulting cost-effectiveness ratio was negative. These outcomes indicate that the FLX + PIN option completely dominates FLX + PLA. These results suggest that, over a course of 6 weeks of treatment, the combination of fluoxetine and pindolol incurs lower direct medical costs than treatment with fluoxetine placebo. Despite their limitations, economic assessments in addition to clinical trials allow a 'dynamic assessment' on the potential success of the drug, both from a clinical and an economic point of view, allowing decisions on priorities to be made earlier.

Subjective response to antipsychotic treatment and compliance in schizophrenia. A naturalistic study comparing olanzapine, risperidone and haloperidol (EFESO Study).

BACKGROUND: In order to compare the effectiveness of different antipsychotic drugs in the treatment of schizophrenia it is very important to evaluate subjective response and compliance in patient cohorts treated according to routine clinical practice. METHOD: Outpatients with schizophrenia entered this prospective, naturalistic study when they received a new prescription for an antipsychotic drug. Treatment assignment was based on purely clinical criteria, as the study did not include any experimental intervention. Patients treated with olanzapine, risperidone or haloperidol were included in the analysis. Subjective response was measured using the 10-item version of the Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI-10), and treatment compliance was measured using a physician-rated 4 point categorical scale. RESULTS: A total of 2128 patients initiated treatment (as monotherapy) with olanzapine, 417 with risperidone, and 112 with haloperidol. Olanzapine-treated patients had significantly higher DAI-10 scores and significantly better treatment compliance compared to both risperidone- and haloperidol-treated patients. Risperidone-treated patients had a significantly higher DAI-10 score compared to haloperidol-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Subjective response and compliance were superior in olanzapine-treated patients, compared to patients treated with risperidone and haloperidol, in routine clinical practice. Differences in subjective response were explained largely, but not completely, by differences in incidence of EPS.