OBJECTIVES

The therapeutic benefit of specific immunotherapy (SIT) in allergic rhinitis and asthma has been endorsed by expert consensus. This study compared the cost/efficacy (C/E) of SIT with current symptomatic treatments (CST) for allergic rhinitis and asthma.

METHODS

A C/E analysis was performed using a decision tree model. The decision tree and medical and economic hypotheses were defined by a panel of experts. The perspective adopted was that of the French Social Security. The costs and efficacy of SIT and CST were compared for dust-mite and pollen allergies, in adults and children. Direct medical costs included diagnosis and follow-up, consultations, CST and SIT. End-point economic criteria were cost per stabilised patient and cost per asthma case avoided. A sensitivity analysis was performed for each model.

RESULTS

In adults, the incremental costs per asthma case avoided with injectable SIT were 393 Euro and 1327 Euro for dust-mite and pollen allergy, respectively, over a 6-year period. For sublingual SIT, the costs per asthma case avoided were 3158 Euro and 1708 Euro, respectively. In children, over a 7-year period, the incremental costs per asthma case avoided with injectable SIT were 583 Euro and 597 Euro for dust-mite and pollen allergy, respectively. For sublingual SIT the incremental costs were 3938 Euro and 824 Euro.

CONCLUSION

Compared to CST, SIT is a cost-effective treatment in pollen and dust-mite-induced allergic rhinitis and asthma. Sublingual SIT is an attractive option in pollen-induced rhinitis, particularly in children. SIT appears to be an economically relevant strategy compared to CST.