Suppr超能文献

用于治疗趾甲皮肤癣菌病的口服抗真菌疗法的药物经济学分析。美国的一项分析。

Pharmacoeconomic analysis of oral antifungal therapies used to treat dermatophyte onychomycosis of the toenails. A US analysis.

作者信息

Gupta A K

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Science Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Pharmacoeconomics. 1998 Feb;13(2):243-56. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199813020-00007.

Abstract

Until a few years ago, griseofulvin and ketoconazole were the only 2 oral agents available for the treatment of dermatophyte onychomycosis of the toenails. With the availability of the newer antifungal agents, such as itraconazole, terbinafine and fluconazole, the armamentarium of drugs available to treat onychomycosis has expanded. The objective of this study was to determine the relative cost effectiveness of the most commonly used oral antifungal agents in the US for the treatment of dermatophyte onychomycosis of the toenails from the perspective of a third-party payer. The time horizon was 3 years. A 5-step approach was used in this pharmacoeconomic analysis. First, the purpose of the study, the comparator drugs and their dosage regimens were defined. In step II, the medical practice and resource-consumption patterns associated with the treatment of onychomycosis were identified. In step III, a meta-analysis was performed on all studies meeting prespecified criteria, and the mycological cure rates of the comparator drugs were determined. In step IV, the treatment algorithm for the management of onychomycosis was constructed for each drug. The cost-of-regimen analysis for each comparator incorporated the drug acquisition cost, medical-management cost and cost of managing adverse drug reactions. The expected cost per patient, number of symptom-free days (SFDs), cost per SFD and the relative cost effectiveness for the comparator drugs were calculated. In step V, a sensitivity analysis was performed. The drug comparators for this study were griseofulvin, itraconazole (continuous and pulse), terbinafine and fluconazole. The mycological cure rates [mean +/- standard error (SE)] from the meta-analysis were griseofulvin 24.5 +/- 6.7%, itraconazole (continuous) 66.4 +/- 6.1%, itraconazole (pulse) 76 +/- 9.3%, terbinafine 74 +/- 7% and fluconazole 59%. The cost per mycological cure was griseofulvin $US8089, itraconazole (continuous) $US1877, itraconazole (pulse) $US991, terbinafine $US1125 and fluconazole $US1506. The corresponding cost per SFD was griseofulvin $US7.05, itraconazole (continuous) $US2.18, itraconazole (pulse) $US1.26, terbinafine $US1.28 and fluconazole $US2.12. The resulting ratios of cost per SFD relative to itraconazole (pulse) [1.00] were terbinafine 1.02, itraconazole (continuous) 1:73, fluconazole 1.69 and griseofulvin 5.62. In conclusion, in this analysis, itraconazole (pulse) and terbinafine were the most cost-effective therapies for dermatophyte onychomycosis of the toenails, both being substantially more cost effective than griseofulvin.

摘要

直到几年前,灰黄霉素和酮康唑还是仅有的两种可用于治疗趾甲皮肤癣菌甲真菌病的口服药物。随着新型抗真菌药物如伊曲康唑、特比萘芬和氟康唑的出现,可用于治疗甲真菌病的药物种类有所增加。本研究的目的是从第三方支付方的角度,确定美国最常用的口服抗真菌药物治疗趾甲皮肤癣菌甲真菌病的相对成本效益。时间跨度为3年。本药物经济学分析采用了五步方法。首先,明确研究目的、对照药物及其给药方案。在第二步中,确定与甲真菌病治疗相关的医疗实践和资源消耗模式。在第三步中,对所有符合预定标准的研究进行荟萃分析,确定对照药物的真菌学治愈率。在第四步中,为每种药物构建甲真菌病治疗算法。每种对照药物的治疗方案成本分析包括药物采购成本、医疗管理成本和药物不良反应管理成本。计算每位患者的预期成本、无症状天数(SFD)、每SFD成本以及对照药物的相对成本效益。在第五步中,进行敏感性分析。本研究的药物对照为灰黄霉素、伊曲康唑(连续给药和冲击给药)、特比萘芬和氟康唑。荟萃分析得出的真菌学治愈率[均值±标准误(SE)]为:灰黄霉素24.5±6.7%,伊曲康唑(连续给药)66.4±6.1%,伊曲康唑(冲击给药)76±9.3%,特比萘芬74±7%,氟康唑59%。每例真菌学治愈的成本分别为:灰黄霉素8089美元,伊曲康唑(连续给药)1877美元,伊曲康唑(冲击给药)991美元,特比萘芬1125美元,氟康唑1506美元。相应的每SFD成本分别为:灰黄霉素7.05美元,伊曲康唑(连续给药)2.18美元,伊曲康唑(冲击给药)1.26美元,特比萘芬1.28美元,氟康唑2.12美元。相对于伊曲康唑(冲击给药)[1.00],每SFD成本的比值分别为:特比萘芬1.02,伊曲康唑(连续给药)1.7。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验