Cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for major depression in children and adolescents

Objective: To assess from a health sector perspective the incremental cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in children and adolescents, compared to 'current practice'. Method: The health benefit is measured as a reduction in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), based on effect size calculations from meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. An assessment on second stage filter criteria ('equity'; 'strength of evidence', 'feasibility' and 'acceptability to stakeholders') is also undertaken to incorporate additional factors that impact on resource allocation decisions. Costs and benefits are tracked for the duration of a new episode of MDD arising in eligible children (age 6-17 years) in the Australian population in the year 2000. Simulation-modelling techniques are used to present a 95% uncertainty interval (UI) around the cost-effectiveness ratios. Results: Compared to current practice, CBT by public psychologists is the most cost-effective intervention for MDD in children and adolescents at A$9000 per DALY saved (95% UI A$3900 to A$24 000). SSRIs and CBT by other providers are less cost-effective but likely to be less than A$50 000 per DALY saved (> 80% chance). CBT is more effective than SSRIs in children and adolescents, resulting in a greater total health benefit (DALYs saved) than could be achieved with SSRIs. Issues that require attention for the CBT intervention include equity concerns, ensuring an adequate workforce, funding arrangements and acceptability to various stakeholders. Conclusions: Cognitive behavioural therapy provided by a public psychologist is the most effective and cost-effective option for the first-line treatment of MDD in children and adolescents. However, this option is not currently accessible by all patients and will require change in policy to allow more widespread uptake. It will also require 'start-up' costs and attention to ensuring an adequate workforce.

Subtype-selective noncompetitive or competitive inhibition of human alpha(1)-adrenergic receptors by rho-TIA

The 19-amino acid conopeptide (rho-TIA) was shown previously to antagonize noncompetitively alpha(1B)-adrenergic receptors (ARs). Because this is the first peptide ligand for these receptors, we compared its interactions with the three recombinant human alpha(1)-AR subtypes (alpha(1A), alpha(1B), and alpha(1D)). Radioligand binding assays showed that rho-TIA was 10-fold selective for human alpha(1B)- over alpha(1A)- and alpha(1D)-ARs. As observed with hamster alpha(1B)-ARs, rho-TIA decreased the number of binding sites (B-max) for human alpha(1B)-ARs without changing affinity (K-D), and this inhibition was unaffected by the length of incubation but was reversed by washing. However, rho-TIA had opposite effects at human alpha(1A)-ARs and alpha(1D)-ARs, decreasing KD without changing Bmax, suggesting it acts competitively at these subtypes. rho-TIA reduced maximal NE-stimulated [H-3] inositol phosphate formation in HEK293 cells expressing human alpha(1B)-ARs but competitively inhibited responses in cells expressing alpha(1A)- or alpha(1D)-ARs. Truncation mutants showed that the amino-terminal domains of alpha(1B)- or alpha(1D)-ARs are not involved in interaction with rho-TIA. Alanine-scanning mutagenesis of rho-TIA showed F18A had an increased selectivity for alpha(1B)-ARs, and F18N also increased subtype selectivity. I8A had a slightly reduced potency at alpha(1B)-ARs and was found to be a competitive, rather than noncompetitive, inhibitor in both radioligand and functional assays. Thus rho-TIA noncompetitively inhibits alpha(1B)-ARs but competitively inhibits the other two subtypes, and this selectivity can be increased by mutation. These differential interactions do not involve the receptor amino termini and are not because of the charged nature of the peptide, and isoleucine 8 is critical for its noncompetitive inhibition at alpha(1B)-ARs.

Late-season non-selective herbicide application reduces Lolium rigidum seed numbers, seed viability, and seedling fitness

Experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of Lolium rigidum (annual ryegrass) seed developmental stage and application rate of glyphosate and SpraySeed (paraquat 135 g/L+ diquat 115 g/L) on the number, germinability, and fitness of seeds produced. Glyphosate (450 g/L) was most effective when applied at a rate of 0.5-1 L/ha during heading and anthesis, reducing the number of filled seeds produced compared with unsprayed plants. Application post-anthesis, when seeds were at the milk to soft dough stage, was less effective. SpraySeed was most effective when applied post-anthesis, during the milk and early dough stages of seed development at a rate of 0.5-1L/ha, resulting in the production of few viable seeds. Although some filled seeds were produced, most of the seeds were dead. Application during anthesis or once the seeds reached soft dough stage was less effective. For both herbicides, those seeds that were capable of germinating were smaller and had slower radicle and coleoptile growth, resulting in slower early seedling growth and reduced biomass production within the first month of growth. Additionally, glyphosate application reduced the proportion of seeds exhibiting dormancy. The anticipated reduction in seed competitive ability and altered emergence timing resulting from late-season herbicide application, even when application timing is not optimal, could be exploited to reduce the likelihood of successful L. rigidum establishment in the following season.