Indonesia-Based Study of the Clinical and Cost-Saving Benefits of Subcutaneous Allergen Immunotherapy for Children with Allergic Rhinitis in Private Practice.

BACKGROUND: Until now, the cost of allergy treatment in the insured public health care system and the non-insured self-financing private health care system in Indonesia has not been well documented and published, as well as the cost of allergy treatment with subcutaneous immunotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical and cost benefits of allergic rhinitis treatment in children with subcutaneous immunotherapy in a non-insured self-financing private health care system. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study conducted from 2015 until 2020 that compared the clinical improvement and health care costs over 18 months in newly diagnosed AR children who received SCIT versus matched AR control subjects who did not receive SCIT, with each group consisting of 1098 subjects. RESULTS: A decrease in sp-HDM-IgE level (kU/mL) from 20.5 + 8.75 kU/mL to 12.1 + 3.07 kU/mL was observed in the SCIT group. To reduce the symptom score of allergic rhinitis by 1.0 with SCIT, it costs IDR 21,753,062.7 per child, and for non-SCIT, it costs IDR 104,147,878.0 per child. Meanwhile, to reduce the medication score (MS) by 1.0 with SCIT, it costs IDR 17,024,138.8, while with non-SCIT, it costs IDR 104,147,878.0. Meanwhile, to lower combination symptoms and medication score (CSMS) by 1.0, with SCIT, it costs IDR 9,550,126.6, while with non-SCIT, it costs IDR 52,073,938.9. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, this first Indonesia-based study demonstrates substantial health care cost savings associated with SCIT for children with AR in an uninsured private health care system and provides strong evidence for the clinical benefits and cost-savings benefits of AR treatment in children.

Pharmacoeconomics of allergy immunotherapy versus pharmacotherapy.

Introduction: The purpose of this review is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of allergy immunotherapy (AIT) in the treatment of allergic rhinitis, asthma, and other allergic conditions.Area covered: An extensive search of the PubMed and Medline database (January 1996 up to June of 2020) was conducted using the search terms allergy immunotherapy, pharmacoeconomics, cost-effectiveness, allergic rhinitis, and asthma. Studies were included if they included information on the economics of AIT in comparison to pharmacotherapy in the treatment of allergic rhinitis or asthma either as actual costs or based on theoretical models. Systematic reviews were included if they included information about the cost-effectiveness of AIT.Most clinical trials found significant cost-savings with AIT. The cost-effective time-point ranged from a few months to several years after treatment initiation.. Cost savings were demonstrated as early as 3 months after treatment initiation and were as great as 80% less than SDT in some studies.Expert opinion: There is strong evidence in the collective literature that AIT is cost-effective as compared to SDT alone. The magnitude of AIT's cost-effectiveness is likely underestimated because most of the studies considered during treatment costs and not AIT's long-term benefits or preventive/prophylactic effects or its impact on co-morbid conditions.

Biologics for the Treatment of Allergic Rhinitis, Chronic Rhinosinusitis, and Nasal Polyposis.

Allergic rhinitis (AR), most presentations of nasal polyposis (NP), and many presentations of chronic rhinosinusitis are type 2high disorders characterized by expression of interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-13. Neutralization of IgE with anti-IgE (omalizumab) has proven efficacy in AR. Similarly, in addition to anti-IgE, blockade of IL-5/IL-5 (mepolizumab, reslizumab, benralizumab) and dual blockade of IL-4 and IL-13 with anti-IL-4R (dupilumab) have demonstrated efficacy in NP. However, these agents are expensive and future studies are essential to evaluate cost effectiveness in comparison with current medical and surgical therapies. This article reviews biologics as potential interventions in AR, chronic rhinosinusitis, and NP.

Burden and socioeconomics of asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis and food allergy.

INTRODUCTION: Asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, and food allergy affect approximately 20% of the global population. Few studies describe the burden of the totality of these diseases and only a handful studies provide a comprehensive overview of the socioeconomic impact of these diseases. AREAS COVERED: For this narrative review, we searched Pubmed using selected keywords and inspected relevant references using a snowballing process. We provide an overview of the socioeconomic burden of allergic diseases (in particular, asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, and food allergy). The focus of this review is on their epidemiology (incidence, prevalence), burden (disability-adjusted life years, quality of life), and direct and indirect costs (absenteeism and presenteeism). We have put special emphasis on differences between countries. EXPERT COMMENTARY: Both the prevalence and the burden of allergic diseases are considerable with prevalence varying between 1% and 20%. We identified a plethora of studies on asthma, but studies were generally difficult to compare due to the heterogeneity in measures used. There were only few studies on the burden of food allergy; therefore, more studies on this allergy are required. For future studies, we recommend standardizing epidemiologic, socioeconomic impact, and quality of life measures of allergic diseases.

Healthcare costs associated with allergic rhinitis, asthma allergy immunotherapy.

Summary: Allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma are chronic diseases in which the airways become inflamed in response to allergens. Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is recommended for those unable to manage symptoms using pharmacotherapy. This study estimated healthcare costs and utilisation for patients with AR and asthma. Mean annual outpatient visits, pharmaceutical costs and inpatient hospitalisations were calculated for 2010 and 2014, with pharmaceutical and inpatient costs stratified by AIT use. AR and asthma patients had a 35% higher mean number of physician visits and up to 90% higher mean pharmaceutical costs compared to controls. The cost of pharmaceuticals and inpatient hospitalisations were 54% lower in those prescribed AIT. Further research is recommended to understand the reasons for these cost differences.

The indirect costs of allergic diseases.

It is estimated that every third person living in Europe suffers from allergic diseases. Allergies are a growing health problem in Poland where 40% of the population have allergy symptoms, including 12% afflicted with asthma. The actual cost of allergic diseases is difficult to estimate due to the lack or incompleteness of the relevant data. The aim of this review is to present estimates of the indirect costs of allergic diseases in Poland and globally, using asthma, allergic rhinitis and atopic dermatitis as examples. The analysis also includes the impact of allergic diseases on the costs to the social welfare system and employers. The literature review of the indirect costs of allergic diseases shows that the indirect costs of a disease, which substantially exceed the direct costs, increase with the disease activity and severity. Interestingly, some studies have found that the indirect costs of lost productivity due to hours missed from work to take care of a sick child could be threefold higher than those of absence due to a worker's own illness. The indirect costs of a disease can be significantly reduced by early diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2019;32(3):281-90.

Utility elicitation in adults and children for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and associated health states.

PURPOSE: Allergic rhinitis and asthma symptoms are detrimental to health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Health technology appraisal agencies often require cost-utility analysis when assessing new interventions. Appropriate utility estimates, which quantify the value of different conditions in cost-utility analyses, are scarce for allergic rhinitis and asthma health states. This study aimed to generate utilities for allergic rhinitis and asthma health states from a European general population sample of adults and children. METHODS: Health state descriptions incorporating symptoms, impact of symptoms on daily life and symptom treatment were developed using clinical guidelines. Descriptions were amended with clinician and patient input, and incorporated into a survey in which each health state was followed by a standard gamble (adults) or visual analogue scale (children) item. The survey was distributed to samples of adults and children aged 8 to 11 from four European countries that were stratified to represent the general population within that country. RESULTS: 1454 adults and 1082 children completed the survey. Mean health utilities ranged from 0.635 to 0.880 and those elicited in children were lower (0.635 to 0.705) than those elicited in adults (0.812 to 0.880). Disutilities assessing the impact of increased allergic rhinitis severity and comorbidities were also greater in children than in adults. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms of allergic rhinitis and asthma were valued as having a clinically meaningful impact on HRQoL. Children valued health states as poorer than adults, and further research should investigate whether this reflects true preferential differences or results from methodological and/or comprehension differences between the two groups.

New scientific synergies to manage patients with severe Rhinitis: allergy diagnosis and treatment for ENT specialists.

INTRODUCTION: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a global health problem because of its steadily increasing incidence and prevalence that currently concerns about 30% of the world’s population. Although AR is not a disease that reduces the life expectancy, it is a disorder with a major impact on the quality of life of patients, resulting from an impaired social life, school performance and work productivity. Furthermore, AR produces significant costs for its treatment.

Health economic analysis of allergen immunotherapy for the management of allergic rhinitis, asthma, food allergy and venom allergy: A systematic overview.

BACKGROUND: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is developing guidelines for allergen immunotherapy (AIT) for the management of allergic rhinitis, allergic asthma, IgE-mediated food allergy and venom allergy. To inform the development of clinical recommendations, we undertook systematic reviews to critically assess evidence on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of AIT for these conditions. This study focusses on synthesizing data and gaps in the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of AIT for these conditions. METHODS: We produced summaries of evidence in each domain, and then, synthesized findings on health economic data identified from four recent systematic reviews on allergic rhinitis, asthma, food allergy and venom allergy, respectively. The quality of these studies was independently assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool for health economic evaluations. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies satisfied our inclusion criteria. Of these, 19 studies investigated the cost-effectiveness of AIT in allergic rhinitis, of which seven were based on data from randomized controlled trials with economic evaluations conducted from a health system perspective. This body of evidence suggested that sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) would be considered cost-effective using the (English) National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY). However, the quality of the studies and the general lack of attention to characterizing uncertainty and handling missing data should be taken into account when interpreting these results. For asthma, there were three eligible studies, all of which had significant methodological limitations; these suggested that SLIT, when used in patients with both asthma and allergic rhinitis, may be cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £10 726 per QALY. We found one economic modelling study for venom allergy which, despite being based largely on expert opinion and plausible assumptions, suggested that AIT for bee and wasp venom allergy is only likely to be cost-effective for very high-risk groups who may be exposed to multiple exposures to venom/year (eg bee keepers). We found no eligible studies investigating the cost-effectiveness of AIT for food allergy. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the evidence to support the cost-effectiveness of AIT is limited and of low methodological quality, but suggests that AIT may be cost-effective for people with allergic rhinitis with or without asthma and in high-risk subgroups for venom allergy. We were unable to draw any conclusions on the cost-effectiveness of AIT for food allergy.

[Costs of allergic diseases and saving potential by allergen-specific immunotherapy : A personal assessment]. / Kosten allergischer Erkrankungen und Einsparpotenziale durch die allergenspezifische Immuntherapie : Eine persönliche Bewertung.

BACKGROUND: The burden of allergic diseases is of particular relevance for the economy and the social welfare and health insurance framework. Allergic rhinitis (AR) has a life-time prevalence of approximately 30% and is one of the most common chronic diseases with considerable socioeconomic impact thus leading to substantial direct, indirect and intangible costs. This article explores the common hypothesis that allergen-specific immunotherapy (ASIT) saves national economic expenses in the long term in comparison to other standard symptomatic treatment or no therapy. METHODS: We conducted a selective search and analysis of the literature in PubMed and Medline including otherwise listed publications in German. Using a predefined model and data extrapolation over 9 years for data from different sources and short-term clinical studies we further discuss the problems and difficulties in analyzing heterogeneous datasets. RESULTS: Using a health-economic model with currently available and accepted variables ASIT proves to be cost-effective in comparison to symptomatic treatment in allergic rhinitis; however, numerous parameters from other models have to be controlled, such as adherence to therapy and therapy discontinuation, heterogeneous costs for different treatment modalities, effect sizes with respect to symptoms including cross-influences with symptomatic rescue medication, duration of efficacy after treatment discontinuation and asthma protection. DISCUSSION: The personal appraisal of the authors demonstrates not only the current knowledge but also the problems in health economical evaluation of ASIT in allergic diseases.

Greater Real-Life Diagnostic Efficacy of Allergen Molecule-Based Diagnosis for Prescription of Immunotherapy in an Area with Multiple Pollen Exposure.

BACKGROUND: Allergen molecule-based diagnosis has been suggested to facilitate the identification of disease-causing allergen sources and the prescription of allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT). The aim of the current study was to compare allergen molecule-based IgE serology with allergen extract-based skin testing for the identification of the disease-causing allergen sources. The study was conducted in an area where patients are exposed to pollen from multiple sources (trees, grasses, and weeds) at the same time to compare the diagnostic efficiency of the 2 forms of diagnosis. METHODS: Patients from Astana, Kazakhstan, who suffered from pollen-induced allergy (n = 95) were subjected to skin prick testing (SPT) with a local panel of tree pollen, grass pollen, and weed pollen allergen extracts and IgE antibodies specific for marker allergen molecules (nArt v 1, nArt v 3, rAmb a 1, rPhl p 1, rPhl p 5, rBet v 1) were measured by ImmunoCAP. Direct and indirect costs for diagnosis based on SPT and marker allergen-based IgE serology as well as direct costs for immunotherapy depending on SPT and serological test results were calculated. RESULTS: The costs for SPT-based diagnosis per patient were lower than the costs for allergen molecule-based IgE serology. However, allergen molecule-based serology was more precise in detecting the disease-causing allergen sources. A lower number of immunotherapy treatments (n = 119) was needed according to molecular diagnosis as compared to extract-based diagnosis (n = 275), which considerably reduced the total costs for diagnosis and for a 3-year treatment from EUR 1,112.30 to 521.77 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this real-life study show that SPT is less expensive than allergen molecule-based diagnostic testing, but molecular diagnosis allowed more precise prescription of immunotherapy which substantially reduced treatment costs and combined costs for diagnosis and treatment.

Positioning the principles of precision medicine in care pathways for allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis - A EUFOREA-ARIA-EPOS-AIRWAYS ICP statement.

Precision medicine (PM) is increasingly recognized as the way forward for optimizing patient care. Introduced in the field of oncology, it is now considered of major interest in other medical domains like allergy and chronic airway diseases, which face an urgent need to improve the level of disease control, enhance patient satisfaction and increase effectiveness of preventive interventions. The combination of personalized care, prediction of treatment success, prevention of disease and patient participation in the elaboration of the treatment plan is expected to substantially improve the therapeutic approach for individuals suffering from chronic disabling conditions. Given the emerging data on the impact of patient stratification on treatment outcomes, European and American regulatory bodies support the principles of PM and its potential advantage over current treatment strategies. The aim of the current document was to propose a consensus on the position and gradual implementation of the principles of PM within existing adult treatment algorithms for allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). At the time of diagnosis, prediction of success of the initiated treatment and patient participation in the decision of the treatment plan can be implemented. The second-level approach ideally involves strategies to prevent progression of disease, in addition to prediction of success of therapy, and patient participation in the long-term therapeutic strategy. Endotype-driven treatment is part of a personalized approach and should be positioned at the tertiary level of care, given the efforts needed for its implementation and the high cost of molecular diagnosis and biological treatment.

Estimate of the total costs of allergic rhinitis in specialized care based on real-world data: the FERIN Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the socioeconomic importance of allergic rhinitis (AR), very few prospective studies have been performed under conditions of clinical practice and with a sufficiently long observation period outside the clinical trial scenario. We prospectively estimated the direct and indirect costs of AR in patients attending specialized clinics in Spain. METHODS: Patients were recruited at random from allergy outpatient clinics in 101 health centers throughout Spain over 12 months. We performed a multicenter, observational, prospective study under conditions of clinical practice. We analyzed direct costs from a funder perspective (healthcare costs) and from a societal perspective (healthcare and non-healthcare costs). Indirect costs (absenteeism and presenteeism [productivity lost in the workplace]) were also calculated. The cost of treating conjunctivitis was evaluated alongside that of AR. RESULTS: The total mean cost of AR per patient-year (n = 498) was €2326.70 (direct, €553.80; indirect, €1772.90). Direct costs were significantly higher in women (€600.34 vs €484.46, P = 0.02). Total costs for intermittent AR were significantly lower than for persistent AR (€1484.98 vs €2655.86, P < 0.001). Total indirect costs reached €1772.90 (presenteeism, €1682.71; absenteeism, €90.19). The direct costs of AR in patients with intermittent asthma (€507.35) were lower than in patients with mild-persistent asthma (€719.07) and moderate-persistent asthma (€798.71) (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The total cost of AR for society is considerable. Greater frequency of symptoms and more severe AR are associated with higher costs. Indirect costs are almost threefold direct costs, especially in presenteeism. A reduction in presenteeism would generate considerable savings for society.

A Comparison of Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs for Patients with Allergic Rhinitis on Single-Product or Free-Combination Therapy of Intranasal Steroids and Intranasal Antihistamines.

BACKGROUND: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common condition that can be treated with a number of different therapies. Treatments such as intranasal antihistamines (INAs) and intranasal steroids (INSs) are widely used by AR patients. For some allergy sufferers, a combination of therapies, specifically an INA and an INS, is required to address their symptoms. A new treatment, the formulation of azelastine hydrochloride and fluticasone pro-pionate used as a single spray (MP-AzeFlu), has become available for AR patients who need both types of treatment. In this regard, the comparison with the alternative concomitant use of INAs and INSs is of interest. The current study examines the health care resource utilization and costs for each cohort. OBJECTIVE: To examine the resource utilization and costs associated with AR for patients treated with MP-AzeFlu or concurrent therapy with single-ingredient INA and INS sprays (free-combination therapy). METHODS: A retrospective administrative claims study for commercially insured patients from a large U.S. health plan was performed. Patients with an AR diagnosis and a prescription claim for MP-AzeFlu or free-combination therapy between September 1, 2012, and September 30, 2013, were identified. Patients were aged at least 12 years at index date (first prescription fill for intranasal therapy) and were required to have 12 months pre-index and 6 months post-index of continuous enrollment. Health care resource utilization and costs were assessed for the post-index period. The cohorts were adjusted on baseline demographic and clinical characteristics using inverse propensity treatment weights. Other covariates, prescriber specialty, product switching during the post-index period, and pre-index total costs were included in the regression models measuring outcomes. One clinical characteristic of interest was the presence of asthma as comorbidity. A subset analysis of AR patients with asthma was also performed. RESULTS: All-cause-related pharmacy fills as well as pharmacy, medical, and total costs were significantly reduced by using MP-AzeFlu (N = 810) instead of the free combination of drugs (N = 726). For AR-related health care resource utilization, the MP-AzeFlu cohort had significantly fewer pharmacy fills than the free-combination cohort (1.01 and 1.17, respectively; P < 0.001) with no significant difference in outpatient services and specialist visits (P = 0.139 and P = 0.117, respectively). Six-month AR-related pharmacy and total costs were significantly lower (P < 0.001 and P = 0.001) for the MP-AzeFlu cohort ($128 and $334, respectively) than the free-combination cohort ($268 and $458, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in AR-related medical costs between the 2 cohorts (P = 0.454). For the subcohort of AR patients with asthma, the MP-AzeFlu cohort had lower 6-month asthma resource utilization and costs than the free-combination cohort. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that, for AR patients needing INAs and INSs, the single-spray formulation MP-AzeFlu had better economic outcomes than for patients who rely on the free combination of these agents. MP-AzeFlu also appears to keep asthma-related utilization and costs down for those AR patients who also suffer from asthma. Potential explanations for these findings are explored. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Meda Pharmaceuticals. Authors were either employed by Meda Pharmaceuticals or received consulting fees from Meda Pharmaceuticals. Comprehensive Health Insights and Sedaghat received funding from Meda Pharmaceuticals as a consultant to participate in this study. Dufour and Caldwell-Tarr are employees of Comprehensive Health Insights. Harrow is currently employed by TESARO. This study was conceived by Harrow, Dufour, and Caldwell-Tarr. All authors contributed to the design of the study. Dufour took the lead in data collection, along with Caldwell-Tarr, and data interpretion was performed by Harrow, along with the other authors. Analyses were performed by Dufour. The manuscript was written and revised by all authors.

Valuing the Economic Costs of Allergic Rhinitis, Acute Bronchitis, and Asthma from Exposure to Indoor Dampness and Mold in the US.

Two foundational methods for estimating the total economic burden of disease are cost of illness (COI) and willingness to pay (WTP). WTP measures the full cost to society, but WTP estimates are difficult to compute and rarely available. COI methods are more often used but less likely to reflect full costs. This paper attempts to estimate the full economic cost (2014$) of illnesses resulting from exposure to dampness and mold using COI methods and WTP where the data is available. A limited sensitivity analysis of alternative methods and assumptions demonstrates a wide potential range of estimates. In the final estimates, the total annual cost to society attributable to dampness and mold is estimated to be $3.7 (2.3-4.7) billion for allergic rhinitis, $1.9 (1.1-2.3) billion for acute bronchitis, $15.1 (9.4-20.6) billion for asthma morbidity, and $1.7 (0.4-4.5) billion for asthma mortality. The corresponding costs from all causes, not limited to dampness and mold, using the same approach would be $24.8 billion for allergic rhinitis, $13.5 billion for acute bronchitis, $94.5 billion for asthma morbidity, and $10.8 billion for asthma mortality.

Allergic Rhinitis: Burden of Illness, Quality of Life, Comorbidities, and Control.

Allergic rhinitis is a highly prevalent and costly condition. The disease burden suffered by patients includes the morbidity of the nasal symptoms, the impairment of multiple domains of quality of life, and numerous comorbidities. The goal of therapy is long-term good control.

TOTALL: high cost of allergic rhinitis-a national Swedish population-based questionnaire study.

Allergic rhinitis is a global illness with a well-recognised impact on quality of life and work performance. Comparatively little is known about the extent of its economic impact on society. The TOTALL study estimates the total cost of allergic rhinitis using a sample representing the entire Swedish population of working age. A questionnaire focused on allergic rhinitis was mailed out to a random population of Swedish residents, aged 18-65 years. Health-care contacts, medications, absenteeism (absence from work) and presenteeism (reduced working capacity at work) were assessed, and the direct and indirect costs of allergic rhinitis were calculated. Medication use was evaluated in relation to the ARIA guidelines. In all, 3,501 of 8,001 (44%) answered the questionnaire, and 855 (24%) of these reported allergic rhinitis. The mean annual direct and indirect costs because of allergic rhinitis were €210.3 and €750.8, respectively, resulting in a total cost of €961.1 per individual/year. Presenteeism represented 70% of the total cost. Antihistamines appear to be used in excess in relation to topical steroids, and the use of nasal decongestants was alarmingly high. The total cost of allergic rhinitis in Sweden, with a population of 9.5 million, was estimated at €1.3 billion annually. These unexpectedly high costs could be related to the high prevalence of disease, in combination with the previously often underestimated indirect costs. Improved adherence to guidelines might ease the economic burden on society.

Comparison of efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of montelukast-levocetirizine and montelukast-fexofenadine in patients of allergic rhinitis: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a global health problem. Almost 10%-25% of population worldwide is affected by AR. Oral/intranasal H1-antihistamine, decongestants, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and intranasal corticosteroids are the pillars in the management of AR. The combination therapy of montelukast with antihistaminic provides enhancing and complimentary effects, thereby reducing the symptoms effectively, but there are scanty data regarding the comparisons of combinations. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of montelukast-levocetirizine and montelukast-fexofenadine combination in patients of AR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy patients with AR participated in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel, active-controlled, comparative 4-week trial. The patients between the age group of 18-65 years of either gender having moderate-severe intermittent or mild persistent AR were included in the study. The study inclusion criteria required the patients with total nasal symptom score (TNSS) of 5 or higher. The patients were randomly divided into two treatment groups with montelukast-levocetirizine (10 mg and 5 mg) in one group and montelukast-fexofenadine (10 mg and 120 mg) in another group. TNSS parameter was the main effectiveness parameter. RESULTS: Evaluation of TNSS revealed significant difference (P < 0.05) when compared from baseline to 4th week in both groups. The mean change of TNSS, i.e., 9.46 was significant (P < 0.05) in montelukast-fexofenadine group. The cost-effectiveness ratio was less in montelukast-levocetirizine group than in montelukast-fexofenadine group. CONCLUSION: The decrease in TNSS was more in montelukast-fexofenadine group, but the cost-effectiveness is more with montelukast-levocetirizine combination.

[Direct and indirect costs associated with respiratory allergic diseases in Italy. A probabilistic cost of illness study]. / Costi diretti e indiretti associati a malattie allergiche respiratorie in Italia. Uno studio probabilistico di cost of illness.

BACKGROUND: The respiratory allergies, including allergic rhinitis and allergic asthma, represent a substantial medical and economic burden worldwide. Despite their dimension and huge economic-social burden, no data are available on the costs associated with the management of respiratory allergic diseases in Italy. The objective of this study was to estimate the average annual cost incurred by the National Health Service (NHS), as well as society, due to respiratory allergies and their main co-morbidities in Italy. METHODS: A probabilistic prevalence-based cost of illness model was developed to estimate an aggregate measure of the economic burden associated with respiratory allergies and their main co-morbidities in terms of direct and indirect costs. A systematic literature review was performed in order to identify both the cost per case (expressed in present value) and the number of affected patients, by applying an incidence-based estimation method. Direct costs were estimated multiplying the hospitalization, drugs and management costs derived by the literature with the Italian epidemiological data. Indirect costs were calculated based on lost productivity according to the human capital approach. Furthermore, a one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 5,000 Monte Carlo simulations were performed, in order to test the robustness of the results and define the proper 95% Confidence Interval (CI). RESULTS: Overall, the total economic burden associated with respiratory allergies and their main co-morbidities was € 7.33 billion (95% CI: € 5.99-€ 8.82). A percentage of 27.5% was associated with indirect costs (€ 2.02; 95% CI: € 1.72-€ 2.34 billion) and 72.5% with direct costs (€ 5.32; 95% CI: € 4.04-€ 6.77 billion). In allergic asthma, allergic rhinitis, combined allergic rhinitis and asthma, turbinate hypertrophy and allergic conjunctivitis, the model estimate an average annual economic burden of € 1,35 (95% CI: € 1,14-€ 1,58) billion, € 1,72 (95% CI: € 1,14-€ 2,43) billion, € 1,62 billion (€ 0,91-€ 2,53) billion, € 0,12 (€ 0,07-€ 0,17) billion, € 0,46 (€ 0,16-€ 0,92) billion respectively. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study in which direct costs (incurred by NHS) and indirect ones (incurred by the society) were taken into account to estimate the overall burden associated with respiratory allergies and their main co-morbidities in our Country. In conclusion, this work may be considered an efficient tool for public decision-makers to correctly understand the economic aspects involved by the management and treatment of respiratory allergies-induced diseases in Italy.