RESUMO
Objective: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of donepezil and rivastigmine therapy for mild and moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified Health System. Method: A hypothetical cohort of 1,000 individuals of both sexes, aged >65 years, and diagnosed with AD was simulated using a Markov model. The time horizon was 10 years, with 1-year cycles. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results: For mild AD, the study showed an increase in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 0.61 QALY/21,907.38 Brazilian reais (BRL) for patients treated with donepezil and 0.58 QALY/BRL 24,683.33 for patients treated with rivastigmine. In the moderate AD group, QALY increases of 0.05/BRL 27,414.96 were observed for patients treated with donepezil and 0.06/BRL 34,222.96 for patients treated with rivastigmine. Conclusions: The findings of this study contradict the standard of care for mild and moderate AD in Brazil, which is based on rivastigmine. A pharmacological treatment option based on current Brazilian clinical practice guidelines for AD suggests that rivastigmine is less cost-effective (0.39 QALY/BRL 32,685.77) than donepezil. Probabilistic analysis indicates that donepezil is the most cost-effective treatment for mild and moderate AD.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Inibidores da Colinesterase/economia , Inibidores da Colinesterase/uso terapêutico , Doença de Alzheimer/economia , Doença de Alzheimer/tratamento farmacológico , Rivastigmina/economia , Rivastigmina/uso terapêutico , Donepezila/economia , Donepezila/uso terapêutico , Brasil , Estudos de Coortes , Resultado do Tratamento , Análise Custo-Benefício , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Doença de Alzheimer/diagnóstico , Programas Nacionais de SaúdeRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of donepezil and rivastigmine therapy for mild and moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified Health System. METHOD: A hypothetical cohort of 1,000 individuals of both sexes, aged >65 years, and diagnosed with AD was simulated using a Markov model. The time horizon was 10 years, with 1-year cycles. A deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: For mild AD, the study showed an increase in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of 0.61 QALY/21,907.38 Brazilian reais (BRL) for patients treated with donepezil and 0.58 QALY/BRL 24,683.33 for patients treated with rivastigmine. In the moderate AD group, QALY increases of 0.05/BRL 27,414.96 were observed for patients treated with donepezil and 0.06/BRL 34,222.96 for patients treated with rivastigmine. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study contradict the standard of care for mild and moderate AD in Brazil, which is based on rivastigmine. A pharmacological treatment option based on current Brazilian clinical practice guidelines for AD suggests that rivastigmine is less cost-effective (0.39 QALY/BRL 32,685.77) than donepezil. Probabilistic analysis indicates that donepezil is the most cost-effective treatment for mild and moderate AD.