Lloyd A, Holman A, Evers T
Fourth Hurdle Consulting Ltd, London, UK.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2008 May;24(5):1279-84. doi: 10.1185/030079908x280400. Epub 2008 Mar 20.
This study presents a cost-minimisation analysis of moxifloxacin compared to combination treatment with levofloxacin and ceftriaxone in patients hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in Germany.
In the MOTIV study, 738 adult patients with CAP requiring hospitalisation and initial parenteral antibiotic therapy were randomised to sequential IV/oral therapy with either moxifloxacin (n = 368), or levofloxacin and ceftriaxone (n = 365). The primary effectiveness endpoint was the proportion of patients demonstrating clinical improvement 5-7 days after the completion of study treatment. Subgroup analysis considered patients with severe CAP according to pneumonia severity index (PSI) risk class IV and V, microbiologically proven infection, a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and a history of cardiovascular disease. The analysis included the cost of study medication, hospital stay, readmission and inpatient procedures and diagnostics. Event frequency in the study was multiplied by German unit costs to estimate per-patient expenditure. The analysis was conducted from a hospital perspective. Sensitivity analysis investigated the effect of costing from an insurer perspective.
No significant difference was found in the percentage of successfully treated patients. Average per patient cost was euro 2190 for the moxifloxacin group, and euro 2619 for the levofloxacin + ceftriaxone group (difference -euro 430, 95% CI: -euro 138, -euro 740; p < 0.05). Variability in total costs was wide, with some patients accruing up to euro 18,000. Medication cost was significantly lower with moxifloxacin than levofloxacin + ceftriaxone (-euro 470, 95% CI: -euro 522, -euro 421), and accounted for between 15 and 30% of total costs.
In this analysis of patients hospitalised with CAP in Germany, treatment with moxifloxacin was significantly less costly than treatment with levofloxacin and ceftriaxone.
本研究对德国社区获得性肺炎(CAP)住院患者中莫西沙星与左氧氟沙星联合头孢曲松治疗进行成本最小化分析。
在MOTIV研究中,738例需要住院及初始静脉抗生素治疗的成年CAP患者被随机分为接受莫西沙星序贯静脉/口服治疗组(n = 368)或左氧氟沙星联合头孢曲松治疗组(n = 365)。主要有效性终点是研究治疗结束后5 - 7天显示临床改善的患者比例。亚组分析考虑了根据肺炎严重指数(PSI)风险等级IV和V划分的重症CAP患者、微生物学证实感染的患者、慢性阻塞性肺疾病病史患者以及心血管疾病病史患者。分析包括研究用药成本、住院时间、再入院情况以及住院程序和诊断费用。研究中的事件发生率乘以德国单位成本以估算每位患者的支出。分析是从医院角度进行的。敏感性分析研究了从保险公司角度进行成本核算的影响。
成功治疗患者的百分比无显著差异。莫西沙星组每位患者的平均成本为2190欧元,左氧氟沙星 + 头孢曲松组为2619欧元(差值 - 430欧元,95% CI: - 138欧元, - 740欧元;p < 0.05)。总成本的变异性很大,一些患者的费用高达18,000欧元。莫西沙星的用药成本显著低于左氧氟沙星 + 头孢曲松( - 470欧元,95% CI: - 522欧元, - 421欧元),且占总成本的15%至30%。
在对德国CAP住院患者的这项分析中,莫西沙星治疗的成本显著低于左氧氟沙星联合头孢曲松治疗。