OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether Budesonide Easyhaler is a cost – effective treatment option in the Russian Federation, compared to Pulmicort Turbuhaler. METHODS: Information search was conducted in the public domain. Pharmacoeconomic analysis method "cost – effectiveness analysis" and direct cost analysis were performed. RESULTS: The information search performed in the course of this study yielded outcomes of the Budesonide Easyhaler and Pulmicort Turbuhaler therapies in the treatment of asthma that used two effectiveness criteria: improvement in lung function (peak expiratory flow – PEF) and decline the number of asthma exacerbations. These results are described in the publication of T. Vanto 2004. Then was calculated the direct cost of the various medications per patient. Cost analysis was conducted on the cost of basic pharmacotherapy (daily dose – 0,4mg), compensation costs for treatment of exacerbations, compensation costs for side effects and adverse reactions. The study had a time frame of one year. The total cost per one patient with asthma amounted to 4 727,79$ to the Budesonide Easyhaler group and 5 507,92$ to the Pulmicort Turbuhaler group. In the last stage, effectiveness parameters were obtained. They made 36 283,87$ and 47 116,55$ for improvement in lung function criterion, 1 477,43$ and 3 059,96$ for decline the number of asthma exacerbations criterion to the Easyhaler and Turbuhaler groups respectively. CONCLUSIONS: As a result of the cost – effectiveness analysis was demonstrated that Budesonide Easyhaler therapy was the dominant treatment option, being associated with lower cost per effectiveness unit when improvement in lung function and decline the number of asthma exacerbations were utilized as the effectiveness criterion.