Suppr超能文献

使用脂质类药物单药治疗青光眼和高眼压症的成本效益。

Cost-effectiveness of monotherapy treatment of glaucoma and ocular hypertension with the lipid class of medications.

作者信息

Noecker Robert J, Walt John G

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA.

出版信息

Am J Ophthalmol. 2006 Jan;141(1 Suppl):S15-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.06.030.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Cost-effectiveness evaluation of monotherapy with the newer lipid class of intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering medications in glaucoma and ocular hypertension.

DESIGN

Retrospective pharmacoeconomic analysis.

METHODS

Analysis included all published studies measuring IOP reduction from untreated baseline with once-daily bimatoprost (Lumigan), latanoprost (Xalatan), or travoprost (Travatan) monotherapy in patients with elevated IOP. Percentage IOP reduction at the final study visit was calculated using the early morning IOP measurement to control for diurnal variation in IOP. Patient-weighted average percentage IOP reductions were computed for each medication. Cost per 2.5-ml bottle was determined using PriceAlert 2005 (February). Cost-effectiveness was defined as monthly cost of medication per patient-weighted average 1% reduction in IOP.

RESULTS

Studies included 951 bimatoprost, 1598 latanoprost, and 765 travoprost patients. The AWP in February, 2005 for a 2.5-ml bottle was 62.10 dollars for bimatoprost, 61.29 dollars for latanoprost, and 62.19 dollars for travoprost. Patient-weighted average IOP reduction was 32.4% for bimatoprost, 29.6% for latanoprost, and 29.0% for travoprost. Calculated cost-effectiveness was 1.92 dollars for bimatoprost, 2.07 dollars for latanoprost, and 2.14 dollars for travoprost. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) analysis showed an incremental cost of 0.29 dollars for each additional 1% IOP reduction provided by bimatoprost over latanoprost. The rank order of the cost-effectiveness of the drugs (bimatoprost > latanoprost > travoprost) was robust in sensitivity analyses to cost and efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of AWP and patient-weighted average percentage IOP reduction in published studies, bimatoprost had the most favorable cost-effectiveness among the drugs compared. Cost-effectiveness should be considered along with traditional clinical safety and efficacy measures to make individual and group healthcare decisions.

摘要

目的

对青光眼和高眼压症患者使用新型降眼压类脂质药物进行单药治疗的成本效益评估。

设计

回顾性药物经济学分析。

方法

分析纳入了所有已发表的研究,这些研究测量了眼压升高患者使用每日一次的比马前列素(卢美根)、拉坦前列素(适利达)或曲伏前列素(苏为坦)单药治疗后相对于未治疗基线时眼压的降低情况。在研究的最后访视时,使用清晨眼压测量值来计算眼压降低的百分比,以控制眼压的昼夜变化。计算每种药物的患者加权平均眼压降低百分比。使用2005年2月的PriceAlert确定每2.5毫升瓶装药物的成本。成本效益定义为每位患者加权平均眼压降低1%时药物的每月成本。

结果

研究纳入了951例使用比马前列素、1598例使用拉坦前列素和765例使用曲伏前列素的患者。2005年2月,2.5毫升瓶装比马前列素的平均批发价(AWP)为62.10美元,拉坦前列素为61.29美元,曲伏前列素为62.19美元。比马前列素的患者加权平均眼压降低为32.4%,拉坦前列素为29.6%,曲伏前列素为29.0%。计算得出的成本效益比为:比马前列素1.92美元,拉坦前列素2.07美元,曲伏前列素2.14美元。增量成本效益比(ICER)分析显示,比马前列素相比拉坦前列素,每额外降低1%眼压的增量成本为0.29美元。在对成本和疗效的敏感性分析中,药物成本效益的排序(比马前列素>拉坦前列素>曲伏前列素)是稳健的。

结论

根据已发表研究中的平均批发价和患者加权平均眼压降低百分比,比马前列素在比较的药物中具有最有利的成本效益。在做出个体和群体医疗保健决策时,应将成本效益与传统的临床安全性和疗效指标一并考虑。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验