Back to Search
Start Over
Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus fluticasone propionate plus montelukast: a cost-effective comparison for asthma.
- Source :
-
Treatments in respiratory medicine [Treat Respir Med] 2005; Vol. 4 (2), pp. 129-38. - Publication Year :
- 2005
-
Abstract
- Introduction and Objective: Asthma, owing to its chronic nature, is associated with a substantial economic burden. Healthcare providers need to compare the cost effectiveness of alternative asthma treatment options to ensure that they obtain the best value for money from the resources they control. The objective of the current study was to compare the cost effectiveness of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate in combination with fluticasone propionate plus montelukast in patients with symptomatic asthma uncontrolled with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) monotherapy.<br />Study Design and Methods: Direct healthcare resource data were prospectively collected during a double-blind, randomized, 12-week clinical study of inhaled salmeterol/fluticasone propionate 50/100 microg twice daily (n = 356) and inhaled fluticasone propionate 100 microg twice daily plus oral montelukast 10mg daily (n = 369). Resources were costed in Dutch guilders (NLG) from the perspective of The Netherlands healthcare system using 1999/2000 prices, but have been presented in US dollars and euros. The primary effectiveness measure was the proportion of successfully treated weeks (based on mean morning PEF values). Secondary measures were episode-free days, symptom-free days, and symptom-free nights.<br />Results: Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was more effective than fluticasone propionate plus montelukast as measured by the proportion of successfully treated weeks mean 63.3% vs 39.0%; median difference 25%; p < 0.001). Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was also more effective than fluticasone propionate plus montelukast according to the secondary effectiveness measures. The mean total direct daily healthcare costs per patient were 16% higher with fluticasone propionate plus montelukast than with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate mainly due to higher drug costs in the former group (2.25 US dollars vs 1.94; 1.92 euro vs 1.66, respectively; the NLG was fixed against the euro at a rate of 1 euro = NLG2.2 on 31 December 1998; 1 US dollars = NLG1.883, June 2003; 1 US dollars= 0.848 euro, June 2003). Incremental cost-effectiveness analyses showed that salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was dominant over fluticasone propionate plus montelukast and sensitivity analyses showed these results to be robust.<br />Conclusion: Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate is a more cost-effective treatment option than fluticasone propionate plus montelukast for patients with symptomatic asthma uncontrolled by ICS.
- Subjects :
- Acetates therapeutic use
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Albuterol therapeutic use
Androstadienes therapeutic use
Anti-Asthmatic Agents therapeutic use
Asthma drug therapy
Bronchodilator Agents therapeutic use
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Cyclopropanes
Drug Combinations
Drug Therapy, Combination
Fluticasone
Fluticasone-Salmeterol Drug Combination
Humans
Middle Aged
Multicenter Studies as Topic
Netherlands
Quinolines therapeutic use
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Sulfides
Acetates economics
Albuterol analogs & derivatives
Albuterol economics
Androstadienes economics
Anti-Asthmatic Agents economics
Asthma economics
Bronchodilator Agents economics
Quinolines economics
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1176-3450
- Volume :
- 4
- Issue :
- 2
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Treatments in respiratory medicine
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 15813665
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.2165/00151829-200504020-00007