BACKGROUND: Information is lacking on the relative effectiveness and cost effectiveness--in a primary-care setting--of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) as an alternative to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for initial asthma controller therapy. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost effectiveness of LTRAs versus ICS for patients initiating asthma controller therapy. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 2-year, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial set in 53 primary-care practices in the UK. Patients aged 12-80 years with asthma and symptoms requiring regular anti-inflammatory therapy (n = 326) were randomly assigned to LTRAs (n = 162) or ICS (n = 164). The main outcome measures were the incremental costs per point improvement in the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, per point improvement in the Asthma Control Questionnaire and per QALY gained from the UK NHS and societal perspectives. RESULTS: Over 2 years, resource use was similar between the two treatment groups, but the cost to society per patient was significantly higher for the LTRA group, at pounds sterling 711 versus pounds sterling 433 for the ICS group (adjusted difference pounds sterling 204; 95% CI 74, 308) [year 2005 values]. Cost differences were driven primarily by differences in prescription drug costs, particularly study drug costs. There was a nonsignificant (imputed, adjusted) difference between treatment groups, favouring ICS, in QALYs gained at 2 years of -0.073 (95% CI -0.143, 0.010). Therapy with LTRAs was, on average, a dominated strategy, and, at a threshold for willingness to pay of pounds sterling 30,000 per QALY gained, the probability of LTRAs being cost effective compared with ICS was approximately 3% from both societal and NHS perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: There is a very low probability of LTRAs being cost effective in the UK, at 2005 values, compared with ICS for initial asthma controller therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UK National Research Register N0547145240; Controlled Clinical Trials ISRCTN99132811.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Information is lacking on the relative effectiveness and cost effectiveness--in a primary-care setting--of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) as an alternative to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for initial asthma controller therapy. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost effectiveness of LTRAs versus ICS for patients initiating asthma controller therapy. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 2-year, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial set in 53 primary-care practices in the UK. Patients aged 12-80 years with asthma and symptoms requiring regular anti-inflammatory therapy (n = 326) were randomly assigned to LTRAs (n = 162) or ICS (n = 164). The main outcome measures were the incremental costs per point improvement in the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire, per point improvement in the Asthma Control Questionnaire and per QALY gained from the UK NHS and societal perspectives. RESULTS: Over 2 years, resource use was similar between the two treatment groups, but the cost to society per patient was significantly higher for the LTRA group, at pounds sterling 711 versus pounds sterling 433 for the ICS group (adjusted difference pounds sterling 204; 95% CI 74, 308) [year 2005 values]. Cost differences were driven primarily by differences in prescription drug costs, particularly study drug costs. There was a nonsignificant (imputed, adjusted) difference between treatment groups, favouring ICS, in QALYs gained at 2 years of -0.073 (95% CI -0.143, 0.010). Therapy with LTRAs was, on average, a dominated strategy, and, at a threshold for willingness to pay of pounds sterling 30,000 per QALY gained, the probability of LTRAs being cost effective compared with ICS was approximately 3% from both societal and NHS perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: There is a very low probability of LTRAs being cost effective in the UK, at 2005 values, compared with ICS for initial asthma controller therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UK National Research Register N0547145240; Controlled Clinical Trials ISRCTN99132811.
Authors: D Price; S Musgrave; E Wilson; E Sims; L Shepstone; A Blyth; J Murdoch; M Mugford; E Juniper; J Ayres; S Wolfe; D Freeman; A Lipp; R Gilbert; I Harvey Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: R A Baumgartner; G Martinez; J M Edelman; G G Rodriguez Gomez; M Bernstein; S Bird; R Angner; A Polis; S B Dass; S Lu; T F Reiss Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Gene L Colice; Andrew P Yu; Jasmina I Ivanova; Matthew Hsieh; Howard G Birnbaum; Maureen J Lage; Corrine Brewster Journal: J Asthma Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.515
Authors: Richard J Martin; David Price; Nicolas Roche; Elliot Israel; Willem M C van Aalderen; Jonathan Grigg; Dirkje S Postma; Theresa W Guilbert; Elizabeth V Hillyer; Anne Burden; Julie von Ziegenweidt; Gene Colice Journal: NPJ Prim Care Respir Med Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 2.871