Estimated impact of fezolinetant versus placebo on work productivity and indirect costs among women experiencing vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the impact of fezolinetant versus placebo on work productivity and indirect costs among women with moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) associated with menopause in seven countries. METHODS: This post hoc analysis used Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire data from the SKYLIGHT 1 (NCT04003155), SKYLIGHT 2 (NCT04003142), and DAYLIGHT (NCT05033886) trials to compare absenteeism, presenteeism, and productivity loss among fezolinetant-treated versus placebo-treated women with moderate to severe VMS (population 1) and among these women for whom hormone therapy (HT) was unsuitable (population 2). Missed work time was calculated as the product of patient-reported work productivity loss and country-specific work hours and employment rates extracted from publicly available, country-specific sources. Annualized indirect costs were estimated based on missed work time and country-specific estimated salaries. RESULTS: Over 1 year, fezolinetant improved work productivity versus placebo. In population 1, increases ranged from 2.8 (Brazil) to 4.2 (United States) weekly work hours per woman with fezolinetant versus placebo. Fezolinetant resulted in estimated annualized cost savings per woman versus placebo in population 1 of 7,791 USD (United States), 7,295 CAD (Canada), 3,878 GBP (United Kingdom), 8,953 AUD (Australia), 6,193 EUR (Germany), 3,901 EUR (France), and 2,754 BRL (Brazil). Overall work productivity loss improved with fezolinetant versus placebo (population 1: -12.4% [P<0.0001]; population 2: -10.2% [P<0.0001]). CONCLUSIONS: Fezolinetant demonstrated improvements in work productivity and reduced estimated indirect costs versus placebo for women with moderate to severe VMS, including HT-unsuitable women who often face limited treatment options, maintained through 52 weeks.