Table 9 |
||||||||
|
Test 2: Adverse Event Rates |
||||||||
|
Treatment-Emergent Diabetes |
Treatment-Emergent Hyperlipidemia |
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
New Event Rate* (Base Case Rate) |
Total Mean Cost |
QALYs |
ICER Cost/QALYs |
New Event Rate** (Base Case Value) |
Total Mean Cost |
QALYs |
ICER Cost/QALYs |
|
|
|
||||||||
|
OLZ |
4.6% (3.3%) |
$8567 |
0.733 |
Dominant |
21.8% (16.8%) |
$8582 |
0.731 |
Dominant |
|
RIS |
4.1% (3.2%) |
$9095 |
0.719 |
- |
21.4% (14.0%) |
$9122 |
0.717 |
- |
|
QUE |
4.3% (3.6%) |
$13628 |
0.708 |
- |
21.3% (14.1%) |
$13666 |
0.706 |
- |
|
ZIP |
4.1% (2.0%) |
$11445 |
0.715 |
- |
19.6% (8.1%) |
$11478 |
0.711 |
- |
|
ARIP |
4.1% (2.0%) |
$11632 |
0.710 |
- |
16.7% (3.6%) |
$11678 |
0.707 |
- |
|
|
||||||||
|
*Source: Leslie and Rosenheck, 2005 [84] **Source: Olfson et al., 2006 [70] QALYs = quality-adjusted life years; ICER = incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; OLZ = olanzapine; RIS = risperidone; QUE = quetiapine; ZIP = ziprasidone; ARIP = aripiprazole Further analysis showed that olanzapine remained dominant when the rates of diabetes for aripiprazole and ziprasidone were kept at the base case value and all others were increased. |
||||||||
|
Furiak et al. Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2009 7:4 doi:10.1186/1478-7547-7-4 |
||||||||