Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Real life cost and quality of life associated with continuous intraduodenal levodopa infusion compared with oral treatment in Parkinson patients

  • Original Communication
  • Published:
Journal of Neurology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Advanced-stage Parkinson’s disease (PD) strongly affects quality of life (QoL). Continuous intraduodenal administration of levodopa (IDL) is efficacious, but entails high costs. This study aims to estimate these costs in routine care. 10 patients with advanced-PD who switched from oral medication to IDL were assessed at baseline, and subsequently at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up. We used the Unified PD Rating Scale (UPDRS) for function and 15D for Quality of Life (QoL). Costs were assessed using quarterly structured patient questionnaires and hospital registries. Costs per quality adjusted life year (QALY) were estimated for conventional treatment prior to switch and for 1-year treatment with IDL. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was based on bootstrapping. IDL significantly improved functional scores and was safe to use. One-year conventional oral treatment entailed 0.63 QALY while IDL entailed 0.68 (p > 0.05). The estimated total 1-year treatment cost was NOK419,160 on conventional treatment and NOK890,920 on IDL, representing a cost of NOK9.2 million (€1.18 mill) per additional QALY. The incremental cost per unit UPDRS improvement was NOK25,000 (€3,250). Medication was the dominant cost during IDL (45 % of total costs), it represented only 6.4 % of the total for conventional treatment. IDL improves function but is not cost effective using recommended thresholds for cost/QALY in Norway.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Benabid AL (2003) Deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease. Curr Opin Neurobiol 13:696–706

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Colzi A, Turner K, Lees AJ (1998) Continuous subcutaneous waking day apomorphine in the long term treatment of levodopa induced interdose dyskinesias in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 64:573–576

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Desser AS, Gyrd-Hansen D, Olsen JA, Grepperud S, Kristiansen IS (2010) Societal views on orphan drugs: cross sectional survey of Norwegians aged 40 to 67. BMJ 341:c4715

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dodel R, Eggert KM, Singer MS, Eichhorn TE, Pogarell O, Oertel WH (1998) Costs of drug treatment in Parkinsons disease. Mov Disord 13:249–254

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dodel RC, Berger K, Oertel WH (2001) Health-related quality of life and healthcare utilisation in patients with Parkinson’s disease: impact of motor fluctuations and dyskinesias. Pharmacoeconomics 19:1013–1038

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL (2007) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  7. Elia AE, Dollenz C, Soliveri P, Albanese A (2012) Motor features and response to oral levodopa in patients with Parkinson’s disease under continuous dopaminergic infusion or deep brain stimulation. Eur J Neurol 19:76–83

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fraix V, Houeto JL, Lagrange C, Le PC, Krystkowiak P, Guehl D, Ardouin C, Welter ML, Maurel F, Defebvre L, Rougier A, Benabid AL, Mesnage V, Ligier M, Blond S, Burbaud P, Bioulac B, Destee A, Cornu P, Pollak P (2006) Clinical and economic results of bilateral subthalamic nucleus stimulation in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 77:443–449

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Goetz CG, Poewe W, Rascol O, Sampaio C (2006) Eidence based medical review update: pharmacological and surgical treatments of Parkinsons disease: 2001 to 2004. Mov Disord 20:523–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Haapaniemi TH, Sotaniemi KA, Sintonen H, Taimela E (2004) The generic 15D instrument is valid and feasible for measuring health related quality of life in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 75:976–983

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Horstink M, Tolosa E, Bonuccelli U, Deuschl G, Friedman A, Kanovsky P, Larsen JP, Lees A, Oertel W, Poewe W, Rascol O, Sampaio C (2006) Review of the therapeutic management of Parkinson’s disease. Report of a joint task force of the European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS) and the Movement Disorder Society-European Section (MDS-ES). Part II: late (complicated) Parkinson’s disease. Eur J Neurol 13:1186–1202

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Isacson D, Bingefors K, Kristiansen IS, Nyholm D (2008) Fluctuating functions related to quality of life in advanced Parkinson disease: effects of duodenal levodopa infusion. Acta Neurol Scand 118:379–386

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kristiansen IS, Bingefors K, Nyholm D, Isacson D (2009) Short-term cost and health consequences of duodenal levodopa infusion in advanced Parkinson’s disease in Sweden: an exploratory study. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 7:167–180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lindgren P, von Campenhausen S, Spottke E, Siebert U, Dodel R (2005) Cost of Parkinsons disease in Europe. Eur J Neurol 12:68–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lowin J, Bergman A, Chaudhuri KR, Findley LJ, Roeder C, Schifflers M, Wood E, Morris S (2011) A cost-effectiveness analysis of levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel compared to standard care in late stage Parkinson’s disease in the UK. J Med Econ 14:584–593

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Meissner W, Schreiter D, Volkmann J, Trottenberg T, Schneider GH, Sturm V, Deuschl G, Kupsch A (2005) Deep brain stimulation in late stage Parkinson’s disease: a retrospective cost analysis in Germany. J Neurol 252:218–223

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Meissner W, Trottenberg T, Klaffke S, Paul G, Kühn AA, Arnold G, Einhäupl K-M, Kupsch A (2001) Apomorphinterapi versus tiefe Hirnstimulation. Nervenarzt 72:924–927

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nyholm D, Klangemo K, Johansson A (2012) Levodopa/carbidopa intestinal gel infusion long-term therapy in advanced Parkinson’s disease. Eur J Neurol

  19. Olanow CW, Agid Y, Mizuno Y, Albanese A, Bonucelli U, Damier P, DeYebenes J, Gershanik O, Guttman M, Grandas F et al (2004) Levodopa in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease: current controversies. Mov Disord 19:997–1005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pahwa R, Factor SA, Lyons KE, Ondo WG, Gronseth G, Bronte-Stewart H, Hallett M, Miyasaki J, Stevens J, Weiner WJ (2006) Practice parameter: treatment of Parkinson disease with motor fluctuations and dyskinesia (an evidence-based review): report of the Quality standards subcommittee of the American Academy of Neruology. Neurology 66:983–995

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Saelensminde K (2007) Helseeffekter i samfunnsøkonomiske analyser (Eng: Health effects in society economic analyses). Sosial og helsedirektoratet (The Norwegian directorate of health), Oslo (IS-1435)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sintonen H (1994) The 15D-measure of health-related quality of life. I. Reliability, validity and sensitivity of its health state descriptive system. National Centre for Health Program Evaluation, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  23. Sintonen H (2001) The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: properties and applications. Ann Med 33:328–336

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sintonen H (2012) The homepage of the 15D instrument: http://www.15d-instrument.net/15d. Terraventum

  25. Stavem K (1999) Reliability, validity and responsiveness of two multiattribute utility measures in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Qual Life Res 8:45–54

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stavem K, Bjornaes H, Lossius MI (2001) Properties of the 15D and EQ-5D utility measures in a community sample of people with epilepsy. Epilepsy Res 44:179–189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Stocchi F, Olanow CW (2004) Continuous dopaminergic stimulation in early and advanced Parkinson’s disease. Neurology 62:S56–S63

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tomaszewski KJ, Holloway RG (2001) Deep brain stimulation in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Neurology 57:663–671

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Valldeoriola F, Morsi O, Tolosa E, Rumia J, Marti MJ, Martinez-Martin P (2007) Prospective comparative study on cost-effectiveness of subthalamic stimulation and best medical treatment in advanced Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 22:2183–2191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Verhagen Metman L, Gillespie M, Farmer C, Bibbiani F, Konitsiosis S, Morris M, Shill H, Bara-Jimenez W, Mouradian MM, Chase TN (2001) Continuous transdermal dopaminergic stimulation in advanced Parkinsons disease. Clin Neuropharmacol 24:163–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Widner H (2003) Strategies to modify levodopa treatment. Adv Neurol 91:229–236

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Willis M, Persson U, Zoellner Y, Gradl B (2010) Reducing uncertainty in value-based pricing using evidence development agreements: the case of continuous intraduodenal infusion of levodopa/carbidopa (Duodopa(R)) in Sweden. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 8:377–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Halldis Nedrebø and Hilde Slorafoss are gratefully acknowledged for help and support of the patients and data collection. Harri Sintonen is acknowledged for permission to use the 15D instrument and valuation algorithms. The study was performed with the help of an unspecified study grant from Solvay pharma which is gratefully acknowledged. Katarina Engman, Umbilicus Nordica AB, Umeå, Sweden is acknowledged for excellent monitoring of the study.

Conflicts of interest

Dr Lundqvist reports a study grant from Solvay Pharma during the conduct of the study and grants and personal fees from Abbvie (present manufacturer of the treatment studied) outside the study. Dr Sønbø Kristiansen reports collaboration with the manufacturer of Duodopa® about 10 years ago, and later with Abbvie on other products. Dr Reiertsen reports lecture fees from Abbvie outside the present work. There are no other conflicts of interests reported by the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christofer Lundqvist.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lundqvist, C., Beiske, A.G., Reiertsen, O. et al. Real life cost and quality of life associated with continuous intraduodenal levodopa infusion compared with oral treatment in Parkinson patients. J Neurol 261, 2438–2445 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-014-7515-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-014-7515-4

Keywords

Navigation