Esketamine Nasal Spray vs Quetiapine Extended-Release: Examining Work Productivity Loss and Related Costs in Patients With Treatment-Resistant Depression.
Kristin Clemens, Amanda Teeple, Maryia Zhdanava, Aditi Shah, Kruti Joshi, Jozefien Buyze, Dominic Pilon, Hannah E Bowrey, Yordan Godinov
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry January 27, 2025 DOI: 10.4088/JCP.24m15425 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 321 |
| Population | Adults with treatment-resistant depression |
| Interventions | Esketamine nasal spray Quetiapine extended release |
| Dose | 56/84 mg esketamine, 150-300 mg quetiapine |
| Duration | 32 weeks |
| Topics | Depression Esketamine |
| Keywords | Mental health Workplace productivity Depression treatment Pharmaceutical research Employee wellness |
| Citations | 2 |
| Key findings | Esketamine treatment was associated with significantly larger improvements in work productivity loss and related costs compared to quetiapine among employed adults with treatment-resistant depression. |
Abstract
Objective: This post hoc analysis of the ESCAPE-TRD trial compared work productivity loss (WPL) and related costs among patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) receiving esketamine nasal spray or quetiapine extended release in combination with an oral antidepressant.
Methods: Adults with TRD randomized to receive esketamine (56/84 mg) or quetiapine (150-300 mg) combined with ongoing antidepressant therapy were included. WPL was assessed using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. Least squares (LS) mean WPL change versus baseline (treatment initiation date), and LS mean differences (MDs) between esketamine and quetiapine cohorts were reported at weeks 8-32 of treatment using mixed models for repeated measurements. Per patient productivity cost savings were estimated using mean 2021 weekly wages from US Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Results: The esketamine cohort included 165 patients, and quetiapine cohort included 156 patients. At baseline, total WPL was 77.0% and 72.5% in the esketamine and quetiapine cohorts, respectively. By week 8, total WPL decreased from baseline by 30.3 and 17.3 percentage points (pp) in the esketamine and quetiapine cohorts (MD = 13.0 pp; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3-19.8 pp), resulting in weekly cost savings of $363 and $207 (MD = $156; 95% CI, $76-$237), respectively. By week 32, total WPL decreased from baseline by 45.3 pp and 32.5 pp in the esketamine and quetiapine cohorts (MD = 12.7 pp; 95% CI, 4.7-20.7 pp), with weekly cost savings of $543 and $390 (MD = $153; 95% CI, $57-$250), respectively.
Conclusion: Among employed adults with TRD, esketamine treatment was associated with significantly larger improvements in WPL and related costs compared to quetiapine, suggesting greater benefits from patient well-being and employer perspectives.
Comparable studies
Other randomized controlled trials on esketamine for depression, most cited first.