advertisement
Abstract #12216 Published in IGR 7-2
Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of travoprost versus latanoprost and timolol in the treatment of advanced glaucoma in five European countries: Austria, France, Germany, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom
Le Pen C; Ligier M; Berdeaux GJournal of Medical Economics 2005; 8: 67-84
This study compares the cost and effectiveness of timolol, latanoprost and travoprost in Austria, France, Germany, The Netherlands and the UK in patients with advanced glaucoma. A Markov model was constructed to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Health states were stable and progressive patients. Transition probabilities were derived from daily intraocular pressure means and variances using two discriminant functions. Costs refer to a specific survey in France, to the General Practice Research Database in the UK, and to expert interviews in the other countries. Utilities were derived from a French survey and from the literature. The time horizon was 5 years (Stewart survey). A payer perspective was adopted. Time without a visual field defect (VFD) was 3.417 years with travoprost, 3.285 years with latanoprost and 2.812 years with timolol. Travoprost economically dominated latanoprost in Austria, Germany, the UK and The Netherlands. The incremental cost-utility ratio of travoprost against both latanoprost and timolol was always less than 50,000 Euro per quality-adjusted life-year. Travoprost is a cost-effective alternative to latanoprost and timolol. A larger prospective study should confirm these findings.
Dr. G. Berdeaux, Alcon France, 4 rue Henri Sainte-Claire Deville, F-92563 Rueil-Malmaison Cedex, France
Classification:
14 Costing studies; pharmacoeconomics
