Queen Joanna H, Feldman Robert M, Lee David A
Ruiz Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth) McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas; Robert Cizik Eye Clinic, Houston, Texas.
Ruiz Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth) McGovern Medical School, Houston, Texas; Robert Cizik Eye Clinic, Houston, Texas.
Am J Ophthalmol. 2016 Mar;163:70-74.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.11.021. Epub 2015 Nov 18.
To evaluate discrepancies in doses per bottle, bottle fill volume, and cost among branded and generic formulations of latanoprost.
Comparative economic analysis.
This study was conducted at the Ruiz Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (UTHealth). Four regionally available latanoprost formulations were measured. Number of drops per bottle and actual bottle fill volume were measured for a calculated sample size (10 bottles). Annual cost (using average wholesale price), days use per bottle, drops per milliliter, and number of bottles used per year were calculated. Data were summarized using mean and standard deviation; 1-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey's studentized range test were used for comparing means among manufacturers.
Pfizer's branded lantanoprost, Xalatan (New York, New York, USA), had the largest fill volume (P < .001). Pfizer had the highest yearly cost at $1198 (P < .001), whereas Akorn (Lake Forest, Illinois, USA) and Bausch & Lomb (Rochester, New York, USA) had the lowest ($184 and $201, respectively). Pfizer and Bausch & Lomb had the most drops per bottle (87.3 and 88.7, respectively), which was statistically more (P < .001) than either Akorn or Sandoz (Princeton, New Jersey, USA) (77.6 and 76.6, respectively), but there was no statistical difference among the standard deviation of drops per bottle (Levene 0.14).
Annual cost and number of doses per bottle, factors important to patients, vary significantly depending on the manufacturer of latanoprost. Practitioners can better advise patients by being aware of these differences.
评估拉坦前列素品牌制剂和仿制药在每瓶剂量、瓶装量以及成本方面的差异。
比较经济学分析。
本研究在休斯顿德克萨斯大学健康科学中心鲁伊斯眼科与视觉科学系进行。测量了四种在当地可获得的拉坦前列素制剂。针对计算得出的样本量(10瓶)测量每瓶的滴数和实际瓶装量。计算年成本(使用平均批发价)、每瓶使用天数、每毫升滴数以及每年使用的瓶数。数据以均值和标准差进行汇总;采用单因素方差分析和事后 Tukey 学生化极差检验比较各制造商之间的均值。
辉瑞公司的品牌拉坦前列素 Xalatan(美国纽约)瓶装量最大(P <.001)。辉瑞公司的年成本最高,为1198美元(P <.001),而 Akorn(美国伊利诺伊州莱克福里斯特)和博士伦(美国纽约州罗切斯特)成本最低(分别为184美元和201美元)。辉瑞公司和博士伦公司每瓶的滴数最多(分别为87.3滴和88.7滴),在统计学上显著多于 Akorn 公司或山德士公司(美国新泽西州普林斯顿)(分别为77.6滴和76.6滴)(P <.001),但每瓶滴数的标准差之间无统计学差异(Levene 检验值为0.14)。
年成本和每瓶剂量数这两个对患者很重要的因素,因拉坦前列素的制造商不同而有显著差异。从业者了解这些差异后能够更好地为患者提供建议。