Cost-utility analysis of curative and maintenance repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treatment-resistant unipolar depression: a randomized controlled trial protocol

Trials. 2020 Apr 5;21(1):312. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04255-9.

Abstract

Background: Depression is a debilitating and costly disease for our society, especially in the case of treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an effective adjuvant therapy in treatment-resistant unipolar and non-psychotic depression. It can be applied according to two therapeutic strategies after an initial rTMS cure: a further rTMS cure can be performed at the first sign of relapse or recurrence, or systematic maintenance rTMS (M-rTMS) can be proposed. TMS adjuvant to treatment as usual (TAU) could improve long-term prognosis. However, no controlled study has yet compared the cost-effectiveness of these two additional rTMS therapeutic strategies versus TAU alone.

Methods/design: This paper focuses on the design of a health-economic, prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study with three parallel arms carried out in France. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of the adjunctive and maintenance low frequency rTMS on the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex versus TAU alone. A total of 318 patients suffering from a current TRD will be enrolled. The primary endpoint is to investigate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (ratio costs / quality-adjusted life-years [QALY] measured by the Euroqol Five Dimension Questionnaire) over 12 months in a population of patients assigned to one of three arms: systematic M-rTMS for responders (arm A); additional new rTMS cure in case of mood deterioration among responders (arm B); and a placebo arm (arm C) in which responders are allocated in two subgroups: sham systematic M-rTMS and supplementary rTMS course in case of mood deterioration. ICER and QALYs will be compared between arm A or B versus arm C. The secondary endpoints in each three arms will be: ICER at 24 months; the cost-utility ratio analysis at 12 and 24 months; 5-year budget impact analysis; and prognosis factors of rTMS. The following criteria will be compared between arm A or B and arm C: rates of responders; remission and disease-free survival; clinical evolution; tolerance; observance; treatment modifications; hospitalization; suicide attempts; work stoppage; marital / professional statues; and quality of life at 12 and 24 months.

Discussion: The purpose of our study is to check the cost-effectiveness of rTMS and we will discuss its economic impact over time. In the case of significant decrease in the depression costs and expenditures associated with a good long-term prognosis (sustained response and remission) and tolerance, rTMS could be considered as an efficient treatment within the armamentarium for resistant unipolar depression.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03701724. Registered on 10 October 2018. Protocol Amendment Version 2.0 accepted on 29 June 2019.

Keywords: Cost-effectiveness; Cost-utility; Health-economic; Long-term; Maintenance; Major depressive disorder; Prognosis; Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS); Treatment-resistant depression.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial Protocol

MeSH terms

  • Affect
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant / economics*
  • Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant / psychology
  • Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant / therapy*
  • Double-Blind Method
  • France
  • Humans
  • Multicenter Studies as Topic
  • Prospective Studies
  • Quality of Life
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Time Factors
  • Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation / economics*
  • Treatment Outcome

Associated data

  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT03701724