Cost-Effectiveness of Medicinal Cannabis for Management of Refractory Symptoms Associated With Chronic Conditions: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations

Abstract

ObjectivesAlthough there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that cannabinoids may relieve symptoms of some illnesses, they are relatively high-cost therapies compared with illicit growth and supply. This article aimed to comprehensively review economic evaluations of medicinal cannabis for alleviating refractory symptoms associated with chronic conditions. MethodsSeven electronic databases were searched for articles published up to September 6, 2020. The quality of reporting of economic evaluations was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. The extracted data were grouped into subcategories according to types of medical conditions, organized into tables, and reported narratively. ResultsThis review identified 12 cost-utility analyses conducted across a variety of diseases including multiple sclerosis (MS) (N = 8), pediatric drug-resistant epilepsies (N = 2), and chronic pain (N = 2). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio varied widely from cost saving to more than US$451 800 per quality-adjusted life-year depending on the setting, perspectives, types of medicinal cannabis, and indications. Nabiximols is a cost-effective intervention for MS spasticity in multiple European settings. Cannabidiol was found to be a cost-effective for Dravet syndrome in a Canadian setting whereas a cost-utility analysis conducted in a US setting deemed cannabidiol to be not cost-effective for Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Overall study quality was good, with publications meeting 70% to 100% (median 83%) of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist criteria. ConclusionsMedicinal cannabis-based products may be cost-effective treatment options for MS spasticity, Dravet syndrome, and neuropathic pain, although the literature is nascent. Well-designed clinical trials and health economic evaluations are needed to generate adequate clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence to assist in resource allocation.