{"title":"Mirabegron与索利那新治疗伊朗膀胱过动症(OAB)的成本-效用分析","authors":"Zahra Karimi Majd, Ghader Mohammadnezhad, Saeed Taheri, Nazila Yousefi","doi":"10.5812/ijpr-136447","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Overactive bladder (OAB) is a symptomatic condition characterized by urinary urgency with or without incontinence, usually associated with frequent daytime urination, enuresis, and nocturia. Objectives: This economic evaluation was aimed at assessing the cost-effectiveness of mirabegron versus solifenacin in the treatment of OAB patients from a payer’s perspective in Iran. Methods: A Markov model with a 5-year time horizon was used. The model consisted of five health states, and OAB patients with an average age of 60 years entered the cycle from the persistent state. Transition probabilities were based on published trials, clinical judgments, and expert opinions. Resource use and costs, including those for medications and adverse events, were extracted from the literature and tariff book, and all costs are presented in 2019 US dollars with a 5% discount rate for the costs and utilities. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were computed for medications, and sensitivity analyses were used to test the robustness of the results. Results: Average per-patient treatment costs were $24,720.7 and $24,668.6 for mirabegron and solifenacin, respectively. Mirabegron was expected to produce higher QALYs than solifenacin (3.20 vs. 3.19). Mirabegron had an ICER of $531.3 over solifenacin, lower than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. The probabilistic analysis showed mirabegron cost-effectiveness in 80% of simulations at the WTP of $2709/QALY. Conclusions: Compared to solifenacin, mirabegron was more cost-effective in OAB patients in the Iranian healthcare system.","PeriodicalId":14595,"journal":{"name":"Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research","volume":"24 17","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Utility Analysis of Mirabegron Compared to Solifenacin in the Treatment of Overactive Bladder (OAB) in Iran\",\"authors\":\"Zahra Karimi Majd, Ghader Mohammadnezhad, Saeed Taheri, Nazila Yousefi\",\"doi\":\"10.5812/ijpr-136447\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Overactive bladder (OAB) is a symptomatic condition characterized by urinary urgency with or without incontinence, usually associated with frequent daytime urination, enuresis, and nocturia. Objectives: This economic evaluation was aimed at assessing the cost-effectiveness of mirabegron versus solifenacin in the treatment of OAB patients from a payer’s perspective in Iran. Methods: A Markov model with a 5-year time horizon was used. The model consisted of five health states, and OAB patients with an average age of 60 years entered the cycle from the persistent state. Transition probabilities were based on published trials, clinical judgments, and expert opinions. Resource use and costs, including those for medications and adverse events, were extracted from the literature and tariff book, and all costs are presented in 2019 US dollars with a 5% discount rate for the costs and utilities. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were computed for medications, and sensitivity analyses were used to test the robustness of the results. Results: Average per-patient treatment costs were $24,720.7 and $24,668.6 for mirabegron and solifenacin, respectively. Mirabegron was expected to produce higher QALYs than solifenacin (3.20 vs. 3.19). Mirabegron had an ICER of $531.3 over solifenacin, lower than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. The probabilistic analysis showed mirabegron cost-effectiveness in 80% of simulations at the WTP of $2709/QALY. Conclusions: Compared to solifenacin, mirabegron was more cost-effective in OAB patients in the Iranian healthcare system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research\",\"volume\":\"24 17\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5812/ijpr-136447\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/ijpr-136447","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:膀胱过动症(OAB)是一种以尿急伴或不伴尿失禁为特征的症状性疾病,通常伴有频繁的日间排尿、遗尿和夜尿症。目的:本经济评价旨在从伊朗支付方的角度评估mirabegron与solifenacin治疗OAB患者的成本效益。方法:采用5年时间跨度的马尔可夫模型。模型由5种健康状态组成,平均年龄为60岁的OAB患者从持续状态进入周期。转移概率基于已发表的试验、临床判断和专家意见。资源使用和成本,包括药物和不良事件的成本,摘自文献和关税手册,所有成本均以2019年美元表示,成本和公用事业的折扣率为5%。计算药物的增量成本-效果比(ICER)和质量调整生命年(QALYs),并采用敏感性分析来检验结果的稳健性。结果:mirabegron和solifenacin的平均每位患者治疗费用分别为24,720.7美元和24,668.6美元。Mirabegron预期比索利那新产生更高的QALYs (3.20 vs 3.19)。Mirabegron的ICER比solifenacin的ICER为531.3美元,低于支付意愿(WTP)阈值。概率分析显示,在WTP为2709美元/QALY时,mirabegron在80%的模拟中具有成本效益。结论:与索利那新相比,mirabegron在伊朗医疗系统中对OAB患者更具成本效益。
Cost-Utility Analysis of Mirabegron Compared to Solifenacin in the Treatment of Overactive Bladder (OAB) in Iran
Background: Overactive bladder (OAB) is a symptomatic condition characterized by urinary urgency with or without incontinence, usually associated with frequent daytime urination, enuresis, and nocturia. Objectives: This economic evaluation was aimed at assessing the cost-effectiveness of mirabegron versus solifenacin in the treatment of OAB patients from a payer’s perspective in Iran. Methods: A Markov model with a 5-year time horizon was used. The model consisted of five health states, and OAB patients with an average age of 60 years entered the cycle from the persistent state. Transition probabilities were based on published trials, clinical judgments, and expert opinions. Resource use and costs, including those for medications and adverse events, were extracted from the literature and tariff book, and all costs are presented in 2019 US dollars with a 5% discount rate for the costs and utilities. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were computed for medications, and sensitivity analyses were used to test the robustness of the results. Results: Average per-patient treatment costs were $24,720.7 and $24,668.6 for mirabegron and solifenacin, respectively. Mirabegron was expected to produce higher QALYs than solifenacin (3.20 vs. 3.19). Mirabegron had an ICER of $531.3 over solifenacin, lower than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. The probabilistic analysis showed mirabegron cost-effectiveness in 80% of simulations at the WTP of $2709/QALY. Conclusions: Compared to solifenacin, mirabegron was more cost-effective in OAB patients in the Iranian healthcare system.
期刊介绍:
The Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research (IJPR) is a peer-reviewed multi-disciplinary pharmaceutical publication, scheduled to appear quarterly and serve as a means for scientific information exchange in the international pharmaceutical forum. Specific scientific topics of interest to the journal include, but are not limited to: pharmaceutics, industrial pharmacy, pharmacognosy, toxicology, medicinal chemistry, novel analytical methods for drug characterization, computational and modeling approaches to drug design, bio-medical experience, clinical investigation, rational drug prescribing, pharmacoeconomics, biotechnology, nanotechnology, biopharmaceutics and physical pharmacy.