Eliciting patient preferences for hormonal therapy options in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer.

Treatment choices for metastatic prostate cancer are complex and can involve men balancing survival versus quality of life. The present study aims to elicit patient preferences with respect to the attributes of treatments for metastatic prostate cancer through a discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire. Men with recently diagnosed localized prostate cancer were asked to envisage that they had metastatic disease when completing a survey. As expected, men with prostate cancer placed considerable importance on gains in survival; however, avoiding side effects of treatment was also clearly important. Survival gains should be considered alongside side effects when discussing treatment options in metastatic disease.

Economic impact of asthma therapy with fluticasone propionate, montelukast, or zafirlukast in a managed care population.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare asthma-related health care expenditures among patients newly prescribed fluticasone propionate 44 or 110 microg, montelukast 5 or 10 mg, or zafirlukast 20 mg. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis of medical and pharmacy claims. SETTING: University-affiliated health outcomes research center. PATIENTS: Seven hundred eighty-one patients (aged > or = 4 yrs) with asthma treated with controller therapy for 9 months (postindex period), with no claim for an inhaled corticosteroid or leukotriene modifier in the previous 9 months (preindex period). INTERVENTION: Asthma-related medical and pharmacy data from insurance claims of four managed care plans (two Northeastern, one Midwestern, and one Western) were tabulated over the pre- and postindex periods. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Numbers of patients identified were 284 beginning fluticasone propionate; 302, montelukast; and 195, zafirlukast. Fluticasone propionate treatment was associated with significantly (p<0.001) lower risk-adjusted asthma-related charges compared with montelukast and zafirlukast treatment: $528, $967, and $1359, respectively In this cohort, fluticasone propionate also was associated with fewer hospitalizations, less need for additional controller agents, and longer maintenance on the index drug compared with montelukast and zafirlukast. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these real-world data, as well as established national and international asthma guidelines, consideration should be given to inhaled corticosteroid therapy, particularly fluticasone propionate, for first-line, long-term effective management of asthma.

Cost-efficacy analysis of fluticasone propionate versus zafirlukast in patients with persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative value of an inhaled corticosteroid, fluticasone propionate 88 microg twice daily, versus an oral leukotriene receptor antagonist, zafirlukast 20 mg twice daily, in patients with persistent asthma currently receiving short acting beta2-agonists alone. STUDY DESIGN: A cost-efficacy analysis using resource utilisation and clinical data obtained prospectively from a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled 12-week clinical trial conducted in the US. PERSPECTIVE: Third-party payor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 451 corticosteroid-naive patients with persistent asthma were treated with either fluticasone propionate 88 microg twice daily or zafirlukast 20 mg twice daily. All patients were given salbutamol (albuterol) to be used as rescue medication. Data were examined using intent-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Mean daily per person cost-efficacy ratios using improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) [> or = 12% increase from baseline] were $US 3.47 for fluticasone propionate compared with $US 7.81 for zafirlukast (1999 values). The mean daily per person cost-efficacy ratios for symptom-free days obtained were $US 5.51 for fluticasone propionate compared with $US 14.98 for zafirlukast. These cost-efficacy ratios remained in favour of fluticasone propionate after a robust sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with fluticasone propionate 88 kg twice daily was the most cost effective treatment compared with zafirlukast 20 mg twice daily in this 12-week clinical trial. This analysis supports the use of fluticasone propionate 88 microg twice daily as first-line treatment in patients with persistent asthma previously treated with short-acting beta2-agonist alone.

Asthma outcome changes associated with use of the leukotriene-receptor antagonist zafirlukast.

A new class of asthma drugs modifying the leukotriene pathway was introduced in 1996. The authors investigated outcome changes associated with use of the leukotriene-receptor antagonist zafirlukast. The study group included patients with asthma (12-64 yr), most with mild-to-moderate, persistent asthma, who had at least two zafirlukast prescriptions within 90 days after the start of zafirlukast treatment. Zafirlukast treatment was associated with reductions in occurrence of outpatient visits, emergency department visits, inpatient stays, and prescriptions for short-acting beta-adrenergic agonists in the next six months (all P < .05). A 12-month pre- and post-zafirlukast treatment comparison in a smaller group of patients and a classification of patients into three mutually exclusive outcome groups (increase, decrease, or no change in outcome events) verified the majority of the findings. A cost analysis from a third-party perspective indicated that costs of zafirlukast treatment were more than offset by cost savings associated with the reductions in outcome events.

Zafirlukast. A review of its pharmacology and therapeutic potential in the management of asthma.

Zafirlukast is a competitive and selective leukotriene receptor antagonist indicated for the prophylaxis and treatment of chronic asthma. The rationale for the development of leukotriene antagonists was based on in vitro and in vivo data demonstrating the extensive role of the cysteinyl leukotrienes C4 (LTC4), D4 (LTD4) and E4 (LTE4) in the pathogenesis of asthma. Initial data have demonstrated an improvement in pulmonary function and symptom control and a reduction in the use of short-acting inhaled beta 2-adrenoceptor agonist therapy in patients with mild to moderate asthma treated with oral zafirlukast at the recommended dosage of 20 mg twice daily. Available data also suggest that zafirlukast may significantly reduce the incidence of asthma exacerbations. Data on the comparative efficacy of zafirlukast and existing antiasthma medications are limited. Results from 2 double-blind randomised studies comparing zafirlukast 20 mg twice daily with sodium cromoglycate aerosol or dry powder inhalation reported similar efficacy for both drugs. In a comparison with inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate (0.2 to 0.25 mg twice daily), improvements in morning peak expiratory flow rate, forced expiratory volume in 1 second and daytime symptom score were significantly less with zafirlukast 20 mg twice daily for 6 weeks. However, available data suggest that patient compliance and patient preference may be greater with oral zafirlukast 20 mg twice daily than with twice-daily inhaled corticosteroid therapy. Confounding results from 2 studies preclude any clear conclusions regarding the potential steroid-sparing effect of zafirlukast at the recommended dosage of 20 mg twice daily. Furthermore, Churg-Strauss syndrome has been reported in 6 patients who were being withdrawn from oral corticosteroid therapy while receiving treatment with oral zafirlukast. It is, therefore, recommended that zafirlukast-treated patients who require a reduction in their oral corticosteroid therapy are closely monitored. Zafirlukast is generally well tolerated. Reports of elevated liver enzymes in patients receiving high dosages of zafirlukast (80 mg twice daily) preclude the use of dosages exceeding 40 mg twice daily. Careful monitoring is necessary in zafirlukast-treated patients receiving concomitant therapy with drugs such as warfarin, terfenadine and erythromycin because of the potential for drug interactions. Thus, zafirlukast is a potentially useful addition to current antiasthma therapies in patients with mild to moderate asthma. Because zafirlukast is administered orally, it may be particularly beneficial in patients poorly compliant with asthma therapy as a result of poor inhaler technique. Further investigation of the efficacy of zafirlukast is expected to more clearly define its position in the management of asthma.

Effectiveness of the leukotriene receptor antagonist zafirlukast for mild-to-moderate asthma. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The increasing costs of managing asthma are due in part to the introduction of new medications, such as leukotriene receptor antagonists. These antagonists interfere with the action of leukotrienes, which are implicated in bronchoconstriction and the formation of airway edema in patients with asthma. Leukotriene receptor antagonists must be shown to be clinically and economically effective for their clinical use to be justified. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical and economic effectiveness of zafirlukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, in patients with mild-to-moderate asthma who might benefit from regular anti-inflammatory therapy. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: 28 outpatient clinics. PATIENTS: 146 patients with mild-to-moderate asthma who were 12 years of age or older, had not smoked cigarettes in the previous 6 months, had a smoking history of less than 10 pack-years, had an FEV1 at least 55% of the predicted value with no upper limit, had demonstrated bronchial hyperresponsiveness, and were symptomatic during the 7-day run-in period. All patients were seen every 2 to 3 weeks for 13 weeks. INTERVENTION: 103 patients received zafirlukast (20 mg twice daily), and 43 patients received placebo (twice daily). All patients received inhaled beta-agonists as needed. MEASUREMENTS: Data were obtained from medical examinations, patient questionnaires, and daily diaries. The clinical effectiveness outcomes were days per month without asthma symptoms, limitation of activity, use of beta-agonists, sleep disturbance, and episodes of asthma (the latter was a composite measure made up of the first four outcomes plus the occurrence of adverse events). The economic effectiveness outcomes were frequency and type of unscheduled health care contacts, use of beta-agonist inhalers, consumption of nonasthma medications, and days of absence from work or school. RESULTS: The zafirlukast group had 89% more days without symptoms (adjusted rates, 7.0 compared with 3.7 days per month; P = 0.03), 89% more days without use of beta-agonists (adjusted rates, 11.3 compared with 6.0 days per month; P = 0.001), and 98% more days without episodes of asthma (adjusted rates, 10.1 compared with 5.1 days per month; P = 0.003). They also had 55% (95% CI, 19% to 74%) fewer health care contacts (18.5 compared with 40.7 per 100 per month; P = 0.007) and 55% (CI, 3% to 79%) fewer days of absence from work or school (15.6 compared with 35.0 per 100 per month; P = 0.04). They used 17% fewer canisters of inhaled beta-agonists (P = 0.17) and 19% less nonasthma medication (P < 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: A daily regimen of zafirlukast added to as-needed inhaled beta-agonists is more effective than beta-agonists alone in treating mild-to-moderate asthma. The clinical and economic effectiveness of zafirlukast, a potential alternative to inhaled corticosteroids, provides further impetus to use regular "preventive" therapy in patients with mild-to-moderate asthma.