Depressive DisordersSchizophreniaMajor Depressive Disorder (MDD)Treatment-Resistant Depression (TRD)Health Economics & ReimbursementEsketamineKetamine

Cost-per-remitter for esketamine nasal spray versus quetiapine for treatment-resistant depression

Using ESCAPE-TRD trial data in an Excel-based model, esketamine nasal spray plus an oral antidepressant achieved a 50% remission rate at 32 weeks versus 33% for quetiapine XR plus an oral antidepressant. The model estimated lower cost-per-remitter for esketamine (about $3,102 lower in a commercial setting and $456 lower in Medicaid), suggesting esketamine plus an oral antidepressant is cost‑effective for adults with treatment‑resistant depression.

Authors

  • Kruti Joshi

Published

Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
meta Study

Abstract

Aim

Estimate the cost-per-remitter with esketamine nasal spray plus an oral antidepressant (ESK NS + OAD) versus quetiapine extended release plus an oral antidepressant (QTP XR + OAD) among adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Materials & methods: An Excel-based model was developed to estimate the cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD and QTP XR + OAD from the perspective of a US commercial insurance plan and Medicaid. Remission and response rates were estimated in 4-week intervals over 32 weeks using data from the ESCAPE-TRD phase IIIb clinical trial comparing ESK NS + OAD versus QTP XR + OAD in adults with TRD. Direct healthcare costs were sourced from health economic literature and the RED BOOK ® drug pricing database. Indirect costs were derived from a separate analysis of ESCAPE-TRD using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: Depression questionnaire. Adults not remitting/responding either stayed on current treatment or discontinued current treatment and initiated either augmented therapy with antipsychotics or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. In a scenario analysis, all individuals who did not achieve response and discontinued treatment initiated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Results

The remission rate at 32 weeks was 50% for adults receiving ESK NS + OAD and 33% for adults receiving QTP XR + OAD. The cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD compared with QTP XR + OAD was $3102.17 lower in the commercial setting and $456.12 lower in the Medicaid setting. Under the scenario analysis, the cost-per-remitter for ESK NS + OAD compared with QTP XR + OAD was $15,133.66 lower in the commercial setting and $12,487.62 lower in the Medicaid setting.

Conclusion

The findings suggest that ESK NS + OAD is a cost-effective treatment for adults with TRD compared with QTP XR + OAD in the commercial and Medicaid settings.

Available with Blossom Pro

Research Summary of 'Cost-per-remitter for esketamine nasal spray versus quetiapine for treatment-resistant depression'

Introduction

Major depressive disorder is common in the United States and imposes substantial clinical, economic and societal burden. A sizeable subset of people with MDD meet criteria for treatment-resistant depression (TRD), commonly defined as failure to respond to at least two adequate antidepressant trials; recent estimates place TRD prevalence at about 30.9% of medication-treated MDD patients. Standard approaches for TRD include further oral antidepressants, augmentation with atypical antipsychotics (for example quetiapine), esketamine and brain stimulation modalities such as electroconvulsive therapy or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Antipsychotic augmentation and brain stimulation each have practical or safety drawbacks—low adherence and metabolic adverse effects for antipsychotics, and clinical and economic burden for some brain stimulation approaches—so there is interest in treatments that combine clinical effectiveness with feasible use for patients and payers. Clemens and colleagues used the ESCAPE-TRD phase IIIb trial, which compared esketamine nasal spray plus an oral antidepressant (ESK NS + OAD) versus quetiapine extended release plus an oral antidepressant (QTP XR + OAD), as the clinical efficacy source for an economic modelling exercise. The present study develops an Excel-based cost model to estimate cost-per-remitter over 32 weeks from US commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives, incorporating direct healthcare costs and indirect productivity losses. The investigators also tested an alternative post-discontinuation care scenario and conducted probabilistic sensitivity analysis to explore parameter uncertainty.

Expert Research Summaries

Go Pro to access AI-powered section-by-section summaries, editorial takes, and the full research toolkit.

Full Text PDF

Full Paper PDF

Pro members can view the original manuscript directly in the browser.

Study Details

References (5)

Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom

Management of treatment-resistant depression: Challenges and strategies

Voineskos, D., Daskalakis, Z. J., Blumberger, D. M. · Neuropsychiatric Disease And Treatment (2020)

Esketamine Nasal Spray versus Quetiapine for Treatment-Resistant Depression

Reif, A., Bitter, I., Buyze, J. et al. · New England Journal of Medicine (2023)

98 cited
The correlation of Esketamine with specific adverse events: a deep dive into the FAERS database

Jiang, Y., Du, Z., Shen, Y. et al. · European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience (2023)

Your Personal Research Library

Go Pro to save papers, add notes, rate studies, and organize your research into custom shelves.

Cost-per-remitter for esketamine nasal spray... — Research Summary & Context | Blossom