[Cost-effectiveness analysis of pre-seasonal medication for cedar pollinosis in Japan].

Pre-seasonal medication is recommended for cases of cedar pollinosis that are expected to manifest severe symptoms during the season, according to the standard clinical guideline in Japan. This study aims to appraise the value for money of additional costs that accompany the choice of pre-seasonal medication from payer's perspective. Based on the 12 reports of controlled clinical trials with Symptom Score (SS) and Medication Score (MS) comparing pre-seasonal medication with intra-seasonal symptomatic medication, 15 incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and 4 integrated ICERs of each group of targeted agents are estimated. Incremental effects are estimated by reading SS charts, and incremental costs are estimated by reading MS charts and using National Health Insurance Medical Fee Schedule and National Health Insurance Drug Price Standard. Estimated ICERs range from ¥322,195 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) to ¥57,088,063 per QALY. Integrated ICERs are: ¥1,128,286 per QALY for 2nd generation histamine H(1) receptor antagonists, ¥2,248,018 per QALY for leukotriene receptor antagonists, ¥2,692,911 per QALY for prostaglandin D(2) and thromboxane A(2) receptor antagonists, ¥1,150,943 per QALY for Th2 cytokine suppressors, and ¥1,291,341 per QALY for all agents. Pre-seasonal medication for cedar pollinosis is cost-effective regardless of the choice of the prophylactic agent among 2nd generation histamine H(1) receptor antagonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists, prostaglandin D(2) and thromboxane A(2) receptor antagonists, or Th2 cytokine suppressors, taking the suggested threshold of ¥5,000,000 per 1 QALY gain in Japan. The use of 2nd generation histamine H(1) receptor antagonists and Th2 cytokine suppressors are found more favourable.

Utility weights for allergic rhinitis based on a community survey with a time trade-off technique in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis is not a fatal disease, but its symptoms deteriorate the quality of life. High morbidity raises a concern about its impact on health care resources. Utility weights, which are required for cost-utility analysis by the level of severity, have not been established to date. This study aims to derive the weights based on a community survey with a time trade-off technique. METHODS: Self-administered monthly time trade-off questionnaires were administered to representative samples in the community. Four levels of severity were defined by clinical stratification proposed in the "Practical Guideline for the Management of Allergic Rhinitis in Japan". RESULTS: 146 responses (response rate: 51.0%) were collected. Utility weights by the four levels of severity were found to be 0.96, 0.94, 0.89 and 0.83, from mild to severest symptoms, respectively. These values were found to be statistically independent from the respondent's characteristics such as sex, age, existence of current nasal symptoms or history of allergic rhinitis. CONCLUSIONS: The authors consider that the elicited utility weights are reliable. The results of this study could facilitate economic evaluations regarding allergic rhinitis in various contexts, contributing to better management of the disease.