OPTIMA MODEL-BASED COST-UTILITY ANALYSIS OF FIXED COMBINATION SALMETEROL/FLUTICASONE VERSUS NON-FIXED COMBINATION BUDESONIDE/FORMOTEROL IN ONE PACK FOR BRONCHIAL ASTHMA TREATMENT

Author(s)

Yagudina R1, Kulikov A1, Chuchalin AG2, Ogorodova LM3, Demko IV4, Lomakin A5, Shchurov D61I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia, 2SRI of Pulmonology, Moscow, Russia, 3Siberian State Medical University, Tomsk, Russia, 4Krasnoy

OBJECTIVES: To assess costs, utilities and cost-utility of fixed combination salmeterol/fluticasone (SAL/FP maintenance treatment) versus non-fixed combination budesonide + formoterol in one pack (BUD+FORM maintenance treatment) in the management of patients with bronchial asthma by means of an OPTIMA model. METHODS: In this analysis we used the following data: drug prices (from List of Maximum Permissible Manufacturer Prices for Vital and Essential Drugs) and drug dosage proportion (from MRC Pharmexpert, 4Q 2010); number of inhalations per day (from instructions); QOL and number of health care resources for controlled and uncontrolled asthma (from published sources); resource unit costs (from 2010 health care insurance program). Work-off day costs included tax deficiency, GDP underproduction and sick pay. Frequency of controlled asthma was obtained from ARROW study (Ogorodova et al., 2009) for SAL/FP (73%) and from FACET trial (O’Byrne et al. 2008) for BUD+FORM (62%). Conceptual formula of analysis was: cost of drugs + % controlled * cost of controlled + % uncontrolled * cost of uncontrolled. One-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the robustness of the results. RESULTS: Average monthly costs of drugs were 1,677 RUR/€42 and 2,023 RUR/€51 for SAL/FP and BUD+FORM respectively. Medical costs and QOL measures were 378 RUR/€9 and 0.75 for controlled asthma; 88,295/€2,207 RUR and 0.49 for uncontrolled asthma. Yearly total costs per patient were higher for BUD+FORM than for SAL/FP (58,057/€1,451 RUR vs. 44,244 RUR/€1,106). Compared to BUD+FORM, SAL/FP was associated to an expected increase of QALYs per patient (0.68 QALYs vs. 0.65 QALYs). The cost-utility analysis showed that SAL/FP was dominant (less costly and more effective in terms of QALYs gained). Results were sensitive to all the parameters varied in the sensitivity analysis, especially health care costs. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of patients with bronchial asthma with SAL/FP is a dominant strategy in comparison with non-fixed combination BUD+FORM in one pack.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2011-11, ISPOR Europe 2011, Madrid, Spain

Value in Health, Vol. 14, No. 7 (November 2011)

Code

PRS47

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis

Disease

Respiratory-Related Disorders

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×