The Cost-Effectiveness of Budesonide/Formoterol Maintenance and Reliever Therapy Versus Salmeterol/Fluticasone Plus As-Needed Salbutamol Among Asthma Patients ≥12 Years in China
Author(s)
Zhou K1, Xie X2, Zuo C3, Jiang Y4, Xuan J5
1Shanghai Centennial Scientific, Shanghai, 31, China, 2Shanghai Centennial Scientific, Shanghai, China, 3Shanghai Centennial Scientific, Guangzhou, 44, China, 4Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 44, China, 5Health Economics Institute, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol combination therapy plus as need compared with salmeterol/fluticasone plus salbutamol as reliever therapy for asthma patients ≥12 years from the societal perspective.
METHODS: A Markov model was developed with three health states (i.e. non-exacerbation, exacerbation, and death) with a lifetime horizon. The exacerbation state was defined as asthma deterioration requiring for usage of oral corticosteroids for ≥ 3 days; or hospitalization/emergency room therapy; or hospitalization in combination with systemic corticosteroid use ≥ 3 days. The exacerbation rates were obtained from a prospective cohort study conducted among Chinese asthma patients. Healthcare resources utilization data were collected from the authoritative diagnosis and treatment guideline and had been validated by experienced clinical experts. Asthma-related mortality, cost inputs and utility values were derived from public database and the literature. Model robustness was assessed via one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS: Compared with salmeterol/fluticasone plus salbutamol, budesonide/formoterol led to fewer exacerbation events (9.64 vs 11.26), with an additional ¥742.49 total cost, less ¥3027.52 cost of exacerbation management, quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gains of 0.0077 over a lifetime horizon. The base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was ¥37,123.50 per QALY gained. Key drivers were the price of budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone, treatment adherence, and exacerbation rates. At a willingness-to-pay of ¥85,698/QALY (1 times of GDP-per-capita in China), the probability of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy being cost-effective versus salmeterol/fluticasone plus as-needed salbutamol was 48.95%.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, from the societal perspective, budesonide/formoterol is likely to be a cost-effective option compared with salmeterol/fluticasone plus as-needed salbutamol for Chinese asthma patients ≥12 years. Meanwhile, inclusion of broader evidence on treatment adherence and exacerbation from real-world studies among Chinese population is suggested, which could solidate the economic evidence and further improve the use of budesonide/formoterol.
Conference/Value in Health Info
Value in Health, Volume 26, Issue 11, S2 (December 2023)
Code
EE558
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis, Work & Home Productivity - Indirect Costs
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, Respiratory-Related Disorders (Allergy, Asthma, Smoking, Other Respiratory)