Huang Tao, Bai Lin, Wushouer Haishaerjiang, Wang Zhiyuan, Yang Mingchun, Lin Hongbo, Shen Peng, Guan Xiaodong, Shi Luwen
Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
International Research Center for Medicinal Administration, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Front Pharmacol. 2022 Feb 22;13:757398. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.757398. eCollection 2022.
The substitution of generic drugs can effectively alleviate the rapid growth of drug costs; however, the clinical effectiveness and medical costs of originator products and generics were barely studied in China. To compare the effectiveness of antihypertensive drugs and hypertension-related medical costs between originator and generic initiators in Yinzhou, China. We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using the Chinese Electronic Health Records Research in Yinzhou (CHERRY), from July 1, 2011, to December 31, 2018. Hypertension patients initiating with originator products were compared with patients initiating with generic counterparts. We used 1:1 propensity score matching to pair the two groups based on sociodemographic, clinical, and health service utilization variables. Cox proportional regression was adopted to compare the rate of hospitalization for hypertension-related cardiovascular disease between matched originator and generic initiators. Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test was used to compare annual hypertension-related medical costs. Matched pairs (10,535) of patients were included in the comparative study of originator products and generics, corresponding to seven antihypertensive drugs including amlodipine, felodipine, nifedipine, irbesartan, losartan, valsartan, and metoprolol. The average age of patients included in the analysis was around 60 years (originator . generics initiators: from 59.0 . 59.1 years in losartan to 62.9 . 63.6 years in nifedipine). Higher hospitalization rates among originator initiators were observed for three calcium channel blockers (hazard ratio[95% CI]: amlodipine, 3.18[1.43, 7.11]; felodipine, 3.60[1.63, 7.98]; and nifedipine, 3.86[1.26, 11.81]; respectively). The remaining four out of seven drugs of the clinical endpoint estimates showed comparable outcomes between originator products and generics (hazard ratio[95% CI]: irbesartan, 1.19[0.50, 2.84]; losartan, 1.84[0.84, 4.07]; valsartan, 2.04[0.72, 5.78]; and metoprolol, 1.25[0.56, 2.80]; respectively). Higher median annual hypertension-related medical costs were observed in originator initiators (all < 0.001), except for metoprolol ( = 0.646). We observed comparable or even better clinical outcomes and less medical cost associated with the use of antihypertensive generics compared to originator counterparts. This could help increase patient and provider confidence in the efficacy of generic medicines to manage hypertension diseases.
使用仿制药替代能够有效缓解药费的快速增长;然而,在中国,原研产品和仿制药的临床疗效及医疗费用鲜有研究。为比较中国宁波地区原研药和仿制药起始使用者的降压药疗效及高血压相关医疗费用。我们利用宁波地区的中国电子健康记录研究(CHERRY)进行了一项基于人群的回顾性队列研究,研究时间为2011年7月1日至2018年12月31日。将起始使用原研产品的高血压患者与起始使用仿制药的患者进行比较。我们基于社会人口统计学、临床和卫生服务利用变量,采用1:1倾向评分匹配法对两组进行配对。采用Cox比例回归比较匹配后的原研药和仿制药起始使用者中高血压相关心血管疾病的住院率。采用Wilcoxon配对符号秩检验比较年度高血压相关医疗费用。10535对患者被纳入原研产品和仿制药的对比研究,对应七种降压药,包括氨氯地平、非洛地平、硝苯地平、厄贝沙坦、氯沙坦、缬沙坦和美托洛尔。纳入分析的患者平均年龄约为60岁(原研药起始使用者.仿制药起始使用者:氯沙坦为59.0.59.1岁,硝苯地平为62.9.63.6岁)。观察到三种钙通道阻滞剂原研药起始使用者的住院率较高(风险比[95%置信区间]:氨氯地平,3.18[1.43, 7.11];非洛地平,3.60[1.63, 7.98];硝苯地平,3.86[1.26, 11.81])。七种药物中其余四种临床终点评估显示原研产品和仿制药的结果相当(风险比[95%置信区间]:厄贝沙坦,1.19[0.50, 2.84];氯沙坦,1.84[0.84, 4.07];缬沙坦,2.04[0.72, 5.78];美托洛尔,1.25[0.56, 2.80])。除美托洛尔(P = 0.646)外,原研药起始使用者的年度高血压相关医疗费用中位数较高(均P < 0.001)。我们观察到,与原研药相比,使用降压仿制药具有相当甚至更好的临床疗效,且医疗费用更低。这有助于增强患者和医疗服务提供者对仿制药治疗高血压疾病疗效的信心。