INTRODUCTION: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is common in men 50 years old and older. The main treatment options are alpha-blockers (such as tamsulosin), which reduce symptoms, and 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (such as dutasteride), which reduce symptoms and slow disease progression. Clinical studies have demonstrated that dutasteride-tamsulosin combination therapy is more effective than either monotherapy to treat symptomatic BPH. We studied the cost-effectiveness in Canada of the dutasteride (0.5 mg/day) and tamsulosin (0.4 mg/day) combination compared with tamsulosin or dutasteride monotherapy. METHODS: A Markov model was developed which follows a cohort of male BPH patients ≥50 with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The model estimates costs to the Canadian health care system and outcomes (in terms of quality adjusted life years [QALYs]) at 10 years and over a patient's lifetime. The dutasteride-tamsulosin combination was compared to each of tamsulosin monotherapy and dutasteride monotherapy. RESULTS: Compared with tamsulosin, the combination was more costly and produced better patient outcomes. Over a lifetime, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was CAN$25 437 per QALY gained. At a willingness to pay CAN$50 000 per QALY, the probability of combination therapy being cost-effective was 99.6%. Compared with dutasteride, the combination therapy was the dominant option from year 2, offering improved patient outcomes at lower cost. The probability that combination therapy is more cost-effective than dutasteride was 99.8%. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy offers important clinical benefits for patients with symptomatic BPH, and there is a high probability that it is cost-effective in the Canadian health care system relative to either monotherapy.
INTRODUCTION:Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is common in men 50 years old and older. The main treatment options are alpha-blockers (such as tamsulosin), which reduce symptoms, and 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (such as dutasteride), which reduce symptoms and slow disease progression. Clinical studies have demonstrated that dutasteride-tamsulosin combination therapy is more effective than either monotherapy to treat symptomatic BPH. We studied the cost-effectiveness in Canada of the dutasteride (0.5 mg/day) and tamsulosin (0.4 mg/day) combination compared with tamsulosin or dutasteride monotherapy. METHODS: A Markov model was developed which follows a cohort of male BPH patients ≥50 with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The model estimates costs to the Canadian health care system and outcomes (in terms of quality adjusted life years [QALYs]) at 10 years and over a patient's lifetime. The dutasteride-tamsulosin combination was compared to each of tamsulosin monotherapy and dutasteride monotherapy. RESULTS: Compared with tamsulosin, the combination was more costly and produced better patient outcomes. Over a lifetime, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was CAN$25 437 per QALY gained. At a willingness to pay CAN$50 000 per QALY, the probability of combination therapy being cost-effective was 99.6%. Compared with dutasteride, the combination therapy was the dominant option from year 2, offering improved patient outcomes at lower cost. The probability that combination therapy is more cost-effective than dutasteride was 99.8%. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy offers important clinical benefits for patients with symptomatic BPH, and there is a high probability that it is cost-effective in the Canadian health care system relative to either monotherapy.
Authors: J J de la Rosette; G Alivizatos; S Madersbacher; M Perachino; D Thomas; F Desgrandchamps; M de Wildt Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: J Curtis Nickel; Carlos E Méndez-Probst; Thomas F Whelan; Ryan F Paterson; Hassan Razvi Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: W M Garraway; E B Russell; R J Lee; G N Collins; G B McKelvie; M Hehir; A C Rogers; R J Simpson Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 1993-08 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: T Lourenco; N Armstrong; J N'Dow; G Nabi; M Deverill; R Pickard; L Vale; G MacLennan; C Fraser; S McClinton; S Wong; A Coutts; G Mowatt; A Grant Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: K M C Verhamme; J P Dieleman; G S Bleumink; J van der Lei; M C J M Sturkenboom; W Artibani; B Begaud; R Berges; A Borkowski; C R Chappel; A Costello; P Dobronski; R D T Farmer; F Jiménez Cruz; U Jonas; K MacRae; L Pientka; F F H Rutten; C P van Schayck; M J Speakman; M C Sturkenboom; P Tiellac; A Tubaro; G Vallencien; R Vela Navarrete Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 20.096