Cost-effectiveness comparisons between antidepressant treatments in depression: Evidence from database analyses and prospective studies

Background dge regarding the relative cost-effectiveness of different antidepressants is crucial for the planning of depression treatment. However, there have been only a small number of reviews of such evidence and synthesizing economic evidence across studies is methodologically challenging. In particular, there have been few reviews of the methods employed in database analyses (studies that use data from real-world practice). s hed economic evaluations based on database analyses were systematically reviewed to compare antidepressant treatments in depression. Prospective studies of cost-effectiveness were also reviewed to highlight unanswered questions through comparisons between these two different study designs. s papers met the criteria and were included. A relatively large number of industry-sponsored evaluations of escitalopram were identified and these found escitalopram to be potentially cost-effective in depression treatment. Evidence of cost-effectiveness differences between other individual SSRIs was not unequivocally established. Inconsistent findings further emerged concerning the cost-effectiveness of SSRIs versus TCAs between retrospective database analyses and prospective studies. tions ent outcome measures and cost perspectives make it difficult to make comparisons across studies. sions ce regarding the cost-effectiveness of different antidepressants in depression continues to accumulate. Beyond the efficacy or tolerability data found for newer antidepressants in controlled trials, further research from real-world settings is needed to examine the relative cost-effectiveness of different antidepressant agents.