Cost-effectiveness of linaclotide compared to antidepressants in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation in Scotland

Cost-Effectiveness of Linaclotide Compared to Osmotic Laxatives in the Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation in China

INTRODUCTION

Linaclotide, a selective agonist of guanylate cyclase C, was highly recommended for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). However, the cost-effectiveness of linaclotide in Chinese is not known, and this study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of linaclotide for patients with IBS-C.

METHODS

An economic evaluation was conducted with a Markov model from a societal perspective. The Markov model was structured to simulate the discontinuation and continuation of medication in IBS-C patients in clinical practice, as well as the revisit and non-visit of non-responding patients. The cycle of the model was 4 weeks, and the time horizon was 1 year. The efficacy data in the model was from the risk ratios obtained by the meta-analysis and the calculation of the response rate of the three medications. The utility, discontinuation rate of the medication, and revisit rate data were from published literature, while the cost data were obtained from experts' opinions and published literature. A series of sensitivity analyses was performed on parameters potentially having impact on the model outputs.

RESULTS

The QALYs (quality-adjusted life years) gained for 1-year treatment with linaclotide, polyethylene glycol, and lactulose were 0.821, 0.795, and 0.781, respectively. The corresponding total costs were CNY 7,721 (USD 1,120), CNY 8,797 (USD 1,276) and CNY 9,481 (USD 1,375). In both comparisons, linaclotide was dominant. Compared with polyethylene glycol and lactulose, the likelihood of linaclotide being cost-effective was 100% for both, using 1 times per capita GDP per QALY as willingness-to-pay threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

IBS-C seriously affects the quality of life of patients with IBS-C, and linaclotide can improve symptoms and quality of life at less cost.

Economic burden of moderate to severe irritable bowel syndrome with constipation in six European countries

Background

Irritable bowel syndrome with predominant constipation (IBS-C) is a complex disorder with gastrointestinal and nervous system components. The study aim was to assess the economic burden of moderate to severe IBS-C in six European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK).

Methods

An observational, one year retrospective-prospective (6 months each) study of patients diagnosed in the last five years with IBS-C (Rome III criteria) and moderate to severe disease at inclusion (IBS Symptom Severity Scale score ≥ 175). The primary objective was to assess the direct cost to European healthcare systems.

Results

Five hundred twenty-five patients were included, 60% (range: 43.1–78.8%) suffered from severe IBS-C. During follow-up 11.1–24.0% of patients had a hospitalisation/emergency room (ER) visit, median stay range: 1.5–12.0 days and 41.1–90.4% took prescription drugs for IBS-C. 21.4–50.8% of employed patients took sick leave (mean: 11.6–64.1 days). The mean annual direct cost to the healthcare systems was €937.1- €2108.0. The total direct cost (combined costs to healthcare systems and patient) for IBS-C was €1421.7–€2487.1.

Conclusions

IBS-C is not a life-threatening condition; however, it has large impact on healthcare systems and society. Direct and indirect costs for moderate to severe IBS-C were high with the largest direct cost driver being hospitalisations/ER visits.

Efficacy of Secretagogues in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several secretagogues have been approved for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). However, their relative efficacy is unclear because there have been no head-to-head randomized controlled trials. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare their efficacies in patients with IBS-C.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMBASE Classic, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through June 2018 to identify randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of secretagogues in adults with IBS-C. Trials included in the analysis reported a dichotomous assessment of overall response to therapy, and data were pooled using a random-effects model. Efficacy and safety of secretagogues were reported as a pooled relative risk with 95% confidence interval to summarize the effect of each comparison tested, and treatments were ranked according to their P score.

RESULTS

We identified 15 eligible randomized controlled trials of secretagogues that included 8462 patients. Linaclotide, lubiprostone, plecanatide, and tenapanor were superior to placebo for the treatment of IBS-C. Linaclotide (290 μg once daily) was ranked first in efficacy based on the end point recommended by the Food and Drug Administration for trials in IBS-C, the primary end point used in each trial, abdominal pain, and complete spontaneous bowel movements. Tenapanor (50 mg twice daily) was ranked first for decreasing bloating. Total numbers of adverse events were significantly larger with linaclotide (290 and 500 μg once daily) and plecanatide (3 mg once daily) compared with placebo. However, plecanatide 6 mg once daily ranked first for safety. Diarrhea was significantly more common with all drugs, except lubiprostone (8 μg twice daily). Nausea was significantly more common in patients who received lubiprostone.

CONCLUSIONS

In a network analysis of randomized controlled trials of secretagogues for IBS-C, we found all drugs to be superior to placebo. Efficacy was similar among individual drugs and dosages for most end points. However, data were extracted at the 12-week time point, so the long-term relative efficacy of these drugs is unknown.

Cost-effectiveness of interventions for medically unexplained symptoms: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

In primary and secondary care medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) or functional somatic syndromes (FSS) constitute a major burden for patients and society with high healthcare costs and societal costs. Objectives were to provide an overview of the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of interventions for MUS or FSS, and to assess the quality of these studies.

METHODS

We searched the databases PubMed, PsycINFO, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) and the CEA registry to conduct a systematic review. Articles with full economic evaluations on interventions focusing on adult patients with undifferentiated MUS or fibromyalgia (FM), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), with no restrictions on comparators, published until 15 June 2018, were included. We excluded preventive interventions. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and cost-effectiveness data and used the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Checklist to appraise the methodological quality.

RESULTS

A total of 39 studies out of 1,613 articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies reported costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost-utility analyses (CUAs). In 13 CUAs the intervention conditions dominated the control conditions or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the willingness-to-pay threshold of € 50,000 per QALY, meaning that the interventions were (on average) cost-effective in comparison with the control condition. Group interventions focusing on MUS (n = 3) or FM (n = 4) might be more cost-effective than individual interventions. The included studies were heterogeneous with regard to the included patients, interventions, study design, and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This review provides an overview of 39 included studies of interventions for patients with MUS and FSS and the methodological quality of these studies. Considering the limited comparability due to the heterogeneity of the studies, group interventions might be more cost-effective than individual interventions.

REGISTRATION

Study methods were documented in an international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) protocol, registration number: CRD42017060424.

Randomized controlled study of efficacy and safety of drotaverine hydrochloride in patients with irritable bowel syndrome

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of drotaverine hydrochloride (DHC) in Chinese patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

METHODS

Totally, 144 patients with IBS were included and randomly divided into treatment group and placebo group in a 1:1 ratio. Patients received either DHC or placebo 80-mg tablet, 3 times daily for a total of 4 weeks. The primary outcome included abdominal pain, measured by the visual analog scale (VAS), and weekly stool frequency. The secondary outcomes were measured by the Bristol scale, and the 36-item short form health survey (SF-36), as well as the adverse events recorded during the treatment period. All those outcomes were measured at the end of 4-week treatment.

RESULTS

The total and different types of IBS in VAS, stool frequency, and Bristol score were significantly better in the treatment group than those in the placebo group at the end of 4-week treatment. However, no significant difference was found in quality of life, measured by SF-36 scale between 2 groups. Additionally, no serious and significant differences in adverse events were found in and between both groups.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that DHC has promising efficacy to enhance symptoms of IBS in Chinese population.

Diagnosis and treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with predominant constipation in the primary-care setting: focus on linaclotide

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a complex functional gastrointestinal disorder that is exceedingly common in clinical practice. IBS with predominant constipation (IBS-C) is a subtype of IBS that accounts for more than a third of the IBS diagnosed. Diagnosis of IBS requires a careful personalized approach, a comprehensive clinical history, limited but relevant investigations, and continued follow-up. Major IBS societies and guidelines recommend offering a positive diagnosis of IBS based on presenting symptomatology. Abdominal pain that may or may not be relieved by defecation is the cardinal symptom of IBS; distension and bloating are other common symptoms. Careful attention should be paid to alarm symptoms before a diagnosis of IBS is made. Pharmacotherapy with linaclotide is recommended for moderate-severe IBS-C, based on high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials. Diarrhea is the major side effect of linaclotide, and limited cost-effectiveness data currently exist.