Cost effectiveness of travoprost versus a fixed combination of latanoprost/timolol in patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma: analysis based on the UK general practitioner research database.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the cost effectiveness of travoprost versus a fixed combination of latanoprost/timolol as first-line therapies for ocular hypertension or glaucoma.
METHODS: Patient charts were extracted from the UK General Practitioner Research Database. Patients with ocular hypertension or glaucoma who received first-line treatment with either travoprost or latanoprost/timolol and were followed up for >6 months were included. Treatment failure was defined as a treatment change or a glaucoma intervention (laser therapy or surgery). Time to treatment failure was compared using a Cox model and adjusted by the propensity score method.
RESULTS: Eligible patients received either travoprost (n=639) or latanoprost/timolol (n=176). Their mean age was 70 years at diagnosis and 48.2% of patients were male. Patient characteristics did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Treatment failure rates at 1 year were 31.3% (travoprost) and 39.4% (latanoprost/timolol) and yielded a hazard ratio for failure in favour of travoprost (0.75; p<0.04) after adjusting for age, sex, co-morbidities and duration of follow-up. Adjusted annual costs of glaucoma management were significantly (p<0.001) less with travoprost (pound215.86) than with latanoprost/timolol (pound327.83).
CONCLUSIONS: In everyday practice, travoprost was maintained longer than latanoprost/timolol as first-line therapy for glaucoma. The mean daily costs of travoprost were 50.8% less per patient than those of latanoprost/timolol. Despite adjustments, these results might be confounded, at least partially, by disease severity.