Cost-effectiveness of midomafetamine-assisted therapy (MDMA-AT) in chronic and treatment-resistant post-traumatic stress disorder of moderate or higher severity: A health-economic model

Filip Stanicic,Vladimir Zah,Dimitrije Grbic,Debra De Angelo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0313569
IF: 3.7
2024-11-13
PLoS ONE
Abstract:To explore the cost-effectiveness of midomafetamine-assisted therapy (MDMA-AT) compared to placebo with therapy (PT) in US healthcare settings. A health state-transition model was used to analyze the cost-effectiveness of MDMA-AT for treating patients with chronic PTSD of moderate or higher severity. Both treatment arms consisted of 3 preparation (90-min), 3 interventional (8-h), and 9 integration (90-min) sessions, lasting ~4 months total. All sessions included psychotherapy, with interventional also including MDMA or placebo. After receiving treatment, patients were distributed across health states of No PTSD (not meeting PTSD diagnostic criteria), Non-Severe PTSD (treatment responders), Severe PTSD (treatment non-responders), and death. Each state had unique healthcare costs and utilities sourced from real-world data analysis and patient data from MDMA-AT clinical trials (including long-term follow-up). The base-case analysis considered the payer's perspective with a 5-year horizon, 3.5% annual cost and effect discounts, and an assumed MDMA medication price of 150,000 willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. The base-case ICER was 64,745 in the MDMA-AT and 31,613 increment). The costs of intervention were 12,376 for PT. The highest MDMA medication cost to fit under the WTP threshold was 2,511 and -$1,877 increments, respectively). Utility benefits were higher in MDMA-AT than PT, with 3.691 and 3.314 QALYs generated over 5 years, respectively (0.377 QALY increment). These data suggest MDMA-AT may be a cost-effective treatment compared to PT for patients with chronic PTSD of moderate or higher severity.
multidisciplinary sciences
What problem does this paper attempt to address?