Cost-effectiveness of budesonide-formoterol in maintenance therapy of asthma patients.

María C Cano-Salas, José L Miguel-Reyes, Erika C López-Estrada, Jorge Salas-Hernández, Monserrat E Arroyo-Rojas, Mauricio Castañeda-Valdivia, Monserrat Escobar-Preciado, Homero Garcés-Flores, Silvia Guzmán-Vázquez, Sergio R García-García, Herman Soto-Molina
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of budesonide-formoterol in maintenance therapy of asthma patients.","authors":"María C Cano-Salas, José L Miguel-Reyes, Erika C López-Estrada, Jorge Salas-Hernández, Monserrat E Arroyo-Rojas, Mauricio Castañeda-Valdivia, Monserrat Escobar-Preciado, Homero Garcés-Flores, Silvia Guzmán-Vázquez, Sergio R García-García, Herman Soto-Molina","doi":"10.29262/ram.v71i4.1295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of asthma treatment with budesonide/formoterol against other treatment options used at Mexico's National Institute for Respiratory Diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A complete economic evaluation of cost-effectiveness from a public health perspective, comparing the use of budesonide/formoterol as maintenance therapy with fluticasone/vilanterol in 103 female asthma patients managed at INER between 2015 and 2021.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Average cost per patient was $743.23 USD, $733.36 USD for budesonide/formoterol and $767.24 USD for fluticasone/vilanterol. Pharmacological treatment represented over 70% of management costs for both groups, followed by follow-up visits and exacerbation management costs. LABA-ICS represented the highest proportion of pharmacologic management costs with a statistically significant difference amongst groups with an incremental cost of $80.17 USD for the fluticasone/vilanterol group. The budesonide/formoterol group showed an ICER of $613.31 USD for reducing the proportion of patients experiencing exacerbations during follow-up. Considering the willingness to pay threshold based on one GDP per capita ($10,902.98 USD in 2022), budesonide/formoterol represented a very cost-effective option.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The ICER favored budesonide/formoterol over fluticasone/vilanterol in terms of cost-effectiveness. A 5.5% reduction in patient exacerbations indicated decreased disease burden. While not statistically significant, fewer exacerbations per patient might still cut costs by lowering emergency visits and hospitalizations.</p>","PeriodicalId":101421,"journal":{"name":"Revista alergia Mexico (Tecamachalco, Puebla, Mexico : 1993)","volume":"71 4","pages":"218-228"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista alergia Mexico (Tecamachalco, Puebla, Mexico : 1993)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29262/ram.v71i4.1295","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of asthma treatment with budesonide/formoterol against other treatment options used at Mexico's National Institute for Respiratory Diseases.

Methods: A complete economic evaluation of cost-effectiveness from a public health perspective, comparing the use of budesonide/formoterol as maintenance therapy with fluticasone/vilanterol in 103 female asthma patients managed at INER between 2015 and 2021.

Results: Average cost per patient was $743.23 USD, $733.36 USD for budesonide/formoterol and $767.24 USD for fluticasone/vilanterol. Pharmacological treatment represented over 70% of management costs for both groups, followed by follow-up visits and exacerbation management costs. LABA-ICS represented the highest proportion of pharmacologic management costs with a statistically significant difference amongst groups with an incremental cost of $80.17 USD for the fluticasone/vilanterol group. The budesonide/formoterol group showed an ICER of $613.31 USD for reducing the proportion of patients experiencing exacerbations during follow-up. Considering the willingness to pay threshold based on one GDP per capita ($10,902.98 USD in 2022), budesonide/formoterol represented a very cost-effective option.

Conclusions: The ICER favored budesonide/formoterol over fluticasone/vilanterol in terms of cost-effectiveness. A 5.5% reduction in patient exacerbations indicated decreased disease burden. While not statistically significant, fewer exacerbations per patient might still cut costs by lowering emergency visits and hospitalizations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
布地奈德-福莫特罗在哮喘患者维持治疗中的成本-效果。
目的:对墨西哥国家呼吸疾病研究所使用的布地奈德/福莫特罗治疗哮喘与其他治疗方案进行成本效益分析。方法:从公共卫生角度对成本效益进行完整的经济评估,比较2015年至2021年期间在INER管理的103名女性哮喘患者使用布地奈德/福莫特罗作为维持治疗与氟替卡松/维兰特罗的比较。结果:患者平均费用为743.23美元,布地奈德/福莫特罗为733.36美元,氟替卡松/维兰特罗为767.24美元。药物治疗占两组管理费用的70%以上,其次是随访和恶化管理费用。LABA-ICS占药理学管理费用的比例最高,两组间差异有统计学意义,氟替卡松/维兰特罗组的增量费用为80.17美元。布地奈德/福莫特罗组在减少随访期间出现恶化的患者比例方面的ICER为613.31美元。考虑到基于人均GDP的支付意愿阈值(2022年为10,902.98美元),布地奈德/福莫特罗是一个非常具有成本效益的选择。结论:ICER在成本-效果方面更倾向于布地奈德/福莫特罗,而不是氟替卡松/维兰特罗。患者病情恶化减少5.5%表明疾病负担减轻。虽然没有统计学意义,但减少每位患者的病情恶化仍可能通过减少急诊和住院治疗来降低成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cost-effectiveness of budesonide-formoterol in maintenance therapy of asthma patients. Prevalence and factors associated with sensitivity to methylisothiazolinone in individuals with suspected allergic contact dermatitis: A cross-sectional study. [Congenital neutropenia and acute graft-versus-host disease in an infant. A case report]. [Consensus for the treatment of atopic dermatitis in primary care: resolving myths and legends based on evidence]. [DiGeorge syndrome with 22q11.2 deletion in a patient of Rarámuri ethnicity].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1