[Cost effectiveness of treatment with salmeterol/fluticasone compared to montelukast for the control of persistent asthma in children]. / Costo-efectividad del tratamiento de salmeterol/fluticasona en comparación con leucotrieno montelukast para el control del asma infantil.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness of SFC compared with MON for the control of persistent asthma in children. METHODS: We conducted an economic evaluation on a 12-week prospective randomized open-label parallel-group comparison of SFC versus MON in children with symptomatic asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroids and short-acting ß2-agonists. Asthma-related medication, unscheduled physician contacts and hospitalizations were collected prospectively. The main effectiveness measure was percentage of asthma-controlled week with no short-acting ß2-agonist use during the study period. The analysis was conducted from the Mexican healthcare perspective using 2010 unit cost prices, and only direct costs were considered, all costs are reported in US dollar. . The model was made fully probabilistic to reflect the joint uncertainty in the model parameters. RESULTS: Over the whole treatment period, the median percentages of asthma-controlled weeks were 83.3% in the SFC group and 66.7% in the MON group (SFC-MON difference, 16.7%; 95% CI, 8.3-16.7; P < 0.001 in favor of SFC). The mean total cost of the SFC regimen was $ 2,323 compared with $ 3,230 for the MON regimen. The SFC was the dominant strategy (both more effective and less expensive) using the SFC was associated with an incremental cost per additional asthma-controlled of $ (5,467). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis tested numerous assumptions about the model cost and efficacy parameters and found that the results were robust to most changes. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that, compared with MON, SFC may be cost saving from the Mexican health care perspective for the treatment of pediatric patients with asthma. SFC provided a reduction in the number of severe exacerbations, frequent asthma symptoms and rescue medication use. Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis indicated the dominance of SFC because of both lower costs and greater efficacy.

Cost-effectiveness and healthcare budget impact in Italy of inhaled corticosteroids and bronchodilators for severe and very severe COPD patients.

Current practice guidelines for the treatment of COPD recommend the use of combined inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting bronchodilators in severe and very severe patients (GOLD stages III and IV). The aim of this study was to evaluate, through a simulation model, the economic consequences of this recommendation in Italy. We developed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) on five alternative therapeutic strategies (salmeterol/fluticasone, SF; formoterol! budesonide, FB; salmeterol alone, S; fluticasone alone, F; control, C). Published data on the Italian COPD population and efficacy data from international reference trials were fitted in a disease progression model based on a Markov chain representing severity stages and death. The yearly total direct costs of treating COPD patients in Italy was estimated at approximately Euro 7 billion, with a mean cost per patient per year of around Euro 2450. Mean survival of the cohort is 11.5 years. The C and F strategies were dominated (ie, are associated with worse outcomes and higher costs) by all alternatives. SF and FB were the most effective strategies, with a slight clinical superiority of SF, but they were also marginally more expensive than S. Incremental cost-effectiveness of SF vs S was Euro 679.5 per avoided exacerbation and Euro 3.3 per symptom-free day. Compared with current practice, the recommended use of combined inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting bronchodilators for severe and very severe COPD patients has the potential for improving clinical outcomes without increasing healthcare costs.

Cost-effectiveness of fluticasone propionate administered via metered-dose inhaler plus babyhaler spacer in the treatment of asthma in preschool-aged children.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) in children aged 12 to 47 months with asthma symptoms. DESIGN: A retrospective economic analysis conducted from the perspective of the Danish health-care system, based on clinical data from a 12-week study. SETTING: Thirty-three outpatient centers in nine countries. PATIENTS: Two hundred thirty-seven children aged 12 to 47 months with documented history of recurrent wheeze or asthma symptoms. INTERVENTIONS: Two dosages of FP, 100 microg/d and 200 microg/d, and placebo administered in two divided doses via a metered-dose inhaler and a Babyhaler (Glaxo Wellcome; Middlesex, UK) spacer device. MEASUREMENTS: Effectiveness in terms of asthma exacerbations, control of cough and wheeze symptoms, symptom-free days, overall direct costs of asthma management in Danish kroner at 1999 prices, and mean and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS: FP, 200 microg/d, was significantly more effective than placebo treatment in terms of the proportion of exacerbation-free patients (73.7% vs 59.8%; p = 0.025) and patients experiencing a > or = 25% improvement in cough symptoms (57.9% vs 39.0%; p = 0.018). The costs per exacerbation-free patient, per patient with a > or = 25% improvement in cough and wheeze symptoms from baseline, and per symptom-free day were lower in the FP groups than in the placebo group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for these end points indicated that the additional benefits of FP, 200 microg/d, were achieved at a lower overall cost compared with placebo treatment. CONCLUSIONS: From the perspective of the Danish health-care system, FP, 100 microg bid, administered via the Babyhaler inhalation device was cost-effective relative to standard therapy with bronchodilators alone.

A comparison of the cost effectiveness of alternative prophylactic therapies in childhood asthma.

An economic analysis was conducted comparing the cost effectiveness of fluticasone propionate with that of sodium cromoglycate (cromolyn sodium) in a group of children aged 4 to 12 years old with asthma, who required inhaled prophylactic therapy. Over an 8-week study period, 115 patients received sodium cromoglycate 20mg 4 times daily, via the spin operated dry powder inhaler, and 110 patients received fluticasone propionate 50 micrograms twice daily, via the Diskhaler (trademark held by the Glaxo Wellcome Group of Companies). Patient healthcare resource use was examined in terms of study medication, the use of rescue medication [salbutamol (albuterol) 200 micrograms] and the number of hospitalisations. The effectiveness of both treatments was examined over a range of success and failure criteria embracing peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) improvement, symptom control and the level of adverse events related to the study medication. Results indicate that, for each UK pound spent, fluticasone propionate was associated with twice as many successfully treated patients as sodium cromoglycate, using a range of outcomes based on the goals of treatment defined in the British Thoracic Society's asthma guidelines. It is concluded that fluticasone propionate was more cost effective than sodium cromoglycate in improving PEFR and symptom control in this group of children with asthma who had a clinical requirement for prophylactic therapy.