Subcutaneous foslevodopa/foscarbidopa (LDp/CDp) in advanced Parkinson's disease (aPD): societal cost impact analysis for the UK, France, Germany, Spain, and Canada.
A 5-year economic model across five countries finds subcutaneous foslevodopa/foscarbidopa reduces OFF-time in advanced PD and produces substantial net societal cost savings despite higher drug acquisition costs.
What the AI sees
A 5-year economic model across five countries finds subcutaneous foslevodopa/foscarbidopa reduces OFF-time in advanced PD and produces substantial net societal cost savings despite higher drug acquisition costs.
Research significance
Clinically and policy-relevant evidence that continuous subcutaneous LD/CD can lower care burden and overall costs—valuable for adoption and trial/pricing decisions—though it offers no novel mechanistic or biomarker insights for therapeutic discovery.
Source abstract
BACKGROUND: The costs associated with advanced Parkinson's disease (aPD) extend beyond direct medical expenditure. As symptoms become more severe, professional and informal personal care costs are likely to exceed those incurred for medical and pharmacological treatment. The objective of this analysis is to explore the impact of treatment with subcutaneous foslevodopa/foscarbidopa (LDp/CDp) on the societal cost impact in the UK, France, Germany, Spain, and Canada. METHODS: A model was developed to aggregate expected costs incurred by a cohort with aPD over a 5-year time frame. Resource use for direct medical, non-medical, and informal care are estimated from a real world data source (Adelphi), mapped to the severity of disease as estimated by the extent of OFF-time experienced by patients. Indirect societal costs are estimated from published literature. Unit costs for each of the included countries are then applied to these resource use estimates. Symptom progression of individuals within the cohort are derived from a previously developed Markov model, which captures the differential effect on OFF-time of LDp/CDp versus best medical treatment (BMT). RESULTS: Overall costs for aDP patients were shown to rise over the 5-year time horizon, as symptom progression occurred. The use of LDp/CDp incurred greater drug costs than BMT, but, by delaying exacerbation of OFF-time, this additional cost was more than offset by other savings - principally attributable to professional and informal care. Aggregated results showed a net cumulative saving of €96,273 per patient over the 5 year time horizon. Results for the five individual countries evaluated ranged from €50,297 to €135,208 per patient saving. CONCLUSION: LDp/CDp has been shown to significantly improve OFF-time burden in patients with aPD, compared with BMT. Once the costs of professional and informal care are taken into account, the additional acquisition costs of LDp/CDp are more than offset, yielding a net societal saving.