Cost-utility of triple versus dual inhaler therapy in moderate to severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: An important proportion of asthma patients remain uncontrolled despite using inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. Clinical guidelines recommend, in these patients, using add-on long-acting muscarinic antagonists (triple therapy) to treatment with high doses of inhaled corticosteroids-long-acting beta2-agonist (dual therapy). The purpose of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of triple therapy versus dual therapy for patients with severe asthma. METHODS: A probabilistic Markov model was created to estimate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of patients with severe asthma in Colombia. Total costs and QALYS of dual and triple therapy were calculated over a lifetime horizon. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated at a willingness-to-pay value of $19,000. RESULTS: The model suggests a potential gain of 1.55 QALYs per patient per year on triple therapy with respect to dual therapy. We observed a difference of US$304 in discounted cost per person-year on triple therapy with respect to dual therapy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$196 in the probabilistic model. In the sensitivity analysis, our base-case results were robust to variations in all assumptions and parameters. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, triple therapy in patients with moderate-severe asthma was cost-effective. Using triple therapy emerges with our results as an alternative before using oral corticosteroids or biologics, especially in resource-limited settings.

Health economics perspective of fesoterodine, tolterodine or solifenacin as first-time therapy for overactive bladder syndrome in the primary care setting in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Overactive bladder (OAB) is associated with high healthcare costs, which may be partially driven by drug treatment. There is little comparative data on antimuscarinic drugs with respect to resource use and costs. This study was conducted to address this gap and the growing need for naturalistic studies comparing health economics outcomes in adult patients with OAB syndrome initiating treatment with different antimuscarinic drugs in a primary care setting in Spain. METHODS: Medical records from the databases of primary healthcare centres in three locations in Spain were assessed retrospectively. Men and women ≥18 years of age who initiated treatment with fesoterodine, tolterodine or solifenacin for OAB between 2008 and 2010 were followed for 52 weeks. Healthcare resource utilization and related costs in the Spanish National Health System were compared. Comparisons among drugs were made using multivariate general linear models adjusted for location, age, sex, time since diagnosis, Charlson comorbidity index, and medication possession ratio. RESULTS: A total of 1,971 medical records of patients (58.3% women; mean age, 70.1 [SD:10.6] years) initiating treatment with fesoterodine (n = 302), solifenacin (n = 952) or tolterodine (n = 717) were examined. Annual mean cost per patient was €1798 (95% CI: €1745; €1848). Adjusted mean (95% bootstrap CI) healthcare costs were significantly lower in patients receiving fesoterodine (€1639 [1542; 1725]) compared with solifenacin (€1780 [€1699; €1854], P = 0.022) or tolterodine (€1893 [€1815; €1969], P = 0.001). Cost differences occurred because of significantly fewer medical visits, and less use of absorbent products and OAB-related concomitant medication in the fesoterodine group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with solifenacin and tolterodine, fesoterodine was a cost-saving therapy for treatment of OAB in the primary care setting in Spain.

Daily cost of glaucoma medications in China.

PURPOSE: To determine and compare the daily cost of various glaucoma medications in China. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The majority of glaucoma medications commercially available in China were included in this research. The total number of drops in 1 bottle of each medication was counted drop by drop. The mean volume per bottle of each medication was calculated. The cost per drop, number of days for both eyes usage per bottle, and daily cost was calculated. RESULTS: (1) The volume per drop ranged from 0.03 mL (brinzolamide 1%, travoprost 0.004%, bimatoprost 0.03%, and latanoprost 0.005%) to 0.05 mL (timolol 0.5%-Chengrui and pilocarpine 0.5% and 2%-Zhenrui). (2) The cost per bottle ranged from $0.69 (US dollar) (timolol 0.5%-Malaisuan Saimaluo'er) to $40.78 (latanoprost 0.005%). (3) The number of days for both eyes usage per bottle ranged from 52 days (bimatoprost 0.03%) to 11 days (pilocarpine nitrate 0.5%-Zhenrui). (4) The daily cost for both eyes usage from expensive to cheap were latanoprost 0.005%-$0.91, travoprost 0.004%-$0.77, brimonidine 0.2%-$0.61, bimatoprost 0.03%-$0.46, D-timolol 1%-$0.36, brinzolamide 1%-$0.34, pilocarpine 2%-Zhenrui-$0.28, levobunolol 0.5%-$0.25, betaxolol 0.25%-$0.24, pilocarpine 0.5%-Zhenrui-$0.18, pilocarpine 2%-Huming-$0.16, carteolol 1%-Mikelan-$0.15, carteolol 2%-Mikelan-$0.15, pilocarpine 1%-Huming-$0.10, timolol 0.5%-Chengrui-$0.08, timolol 0.5%-Malaisuan Saimaluo'er-$0.03. CONCLUSIONS: The daily cost of glaucoma medications in China ranged much more wildly than developed countries. These data may be useful in selecting medications for glaucoma therapy. The ophthalmic solution of prostaglandins is powerful in reducing intraocular pressure. However, its high price should be considered when selecting glaucoma medications in China.

Daily cost of ophthalmic solutions for treating glaucoma in Japan.

PURPOSE: We conducted a study of the daily cost of various ophthalmic solutions used in Japan for treating glaucoma: beta-adrenergic blockers (11 products), epinephrine (3), cholinergics (3), prostaglandins (2), and carbonic anhydrase inhibitors (2). METHODS: The total number of drops in one bottle of each solution was counted drop by drop. The cost per drop was calculated by dividing the government-controlled standard prices by the total number of drops in one bottle. The daily cost of therapy was calculated by multiplying the cost per drop by the number of drops typically used per day. RESULTS: The average cost of each preparation was calculated based on the prices and the daily usage. The daily cost of the beta-adrenergic blockers studied ranged widely, from $0.43 to $1.04. CONCLUSIONS: These data may be useful in selecting ophthalmic products for glaucoma therapy in Japan.