OBJECTIVES : The aim of this study was to conduct cost minimization analysis and to estimate the budget impact in Turkey if all patients with deficiency in vitamin D supplementation and calcium received Zentius Fort ((calcium carbonate 1500 mg (600 mg calcium equivalence) cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) 1000 I.U. (0,025 mg equivalence)) instead of Calcimax D3 (calcium carbonate + vitamin D3) 1000 mg/880 IU effervescent tablet (30 tablet), Zentius D ((calcium carbonate + vitamin D3) 1000 mg/1000 IU (60 tablet)), Calciday D3 (calcium carbonate + vitamin D3) 1200 mg/800 IU 30 effervescent tablet (45 tablet) or Newcal D3 (calcium carbonate + vitamin D3) 1000 mg/880 IU effervescent tablet (45 tablet) in a year.

METHODS : A cost-minimization and budget impact analysis was performed based on local population and epidemiological data. Pharmacoeconomic assessment was calculated for 1-year period following standard methodology. We used real data of market consumption (IQVIA data, year 2018) to estimate the relative share of products used in the Turkey setting for the treatment of vitamin D and calcium deficiency. Market penetration of Zentius Fort was based on manufacturer’s assumptions. Unit costs were taken from Turkish standard sources. The model perspective was the third party payer (Sosyal Güvenlik Kurumu-SGK) in Turkey.

RESULTS : Treatment with Calciday D3 (223.62 TRY) or Newcal D3 (223.62 TRY) or Calcimax D3 (217.91 TRY), Zentius D (105 TRY) were less costly compared to Zentius Fort (239.36 TRY) in a year. According to budget impact analysis, usage of Zentius Fort will increase to only minimal amount (0,0033) of SGK budget. Zentius is not going to yield cost-minimization in the first year

CONCLUSIONS : This study covered both cost-minimization and budget impact analysis. The cost of Zentius could be a bit costly in reimbursement decisions.