Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen SCIT compared with SLIT and symptomatic treatment

BACKGROUND: Whereas specific immunotherapy (SIT) has already been shown to be cost-effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis compared with symptomatic treatment, only a small number of investigations have compared sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous (SCIT) immunotherapeutic approaches. This ana...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reinhold, Thomas, Brüggenjürgen, Bernd
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Medizin 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5288417/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28217432
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40629-016-0002-y
_version_ 1782504323487367168
author Reinhold, Thomas
Brüggenjürgen, Bernd
author_facet Reinhold, Thomas
Brüggenjürgen, Bernd
author_sort Reinhold, Thomas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Whereas specific immunotherapy (SIT) has already been shown to be cost-effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis compared with symptomatic treatment, only a small number of investigations have compared sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous (SCIT) immunotherapeutic approaches. This analysis discusses the cost-effectiveness of SCIT compared with SLIT and a symptomatic treatment modality. At the same time, particular attention is paid to preparation-specific characteristics. METHODS: The investigation is based on a previously published health economic model calculation. A Markov model, with predefined disease stages and a time period of 9 years, formed the basis of the analysis. The data on specific SCIT (Allergovit®) and SLIT (Oralair®) preparations required for the calculation were adjusted for the present analysis. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) based on symptom scores were calculated as the endpoint for effectiveness. Furthermore, the total costs and cost effectiveness of SCIT were determined. Model uncertainties were estimated by means of additional sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: With regard to effectiveness, both the SCIT and SLIT preparations proved superior compared to symptomatic treatment. Although more expensive, SIT seem to be cost-effective. A direct comparison of SCIT (Allergovit®) and SLIT (Oralair®) showed lower total costs for SCIT treatment over the study period (SCIT 1159 € versus SLIT 1322 €) and improved effectiveness (SCIT 7.112 QALYs versus SLIT 7.060 QALYs). DISCUSSION: SIT represents a cost-effective treatment option for patients with allergic rhinitis compared with symptomatic treatment. The comparison of SCIT (Allergovit®) and SLIT (Oralair®) showed SCIT to be predominant and cost-effective, due in particular to somewhat greater patient compliance and lower drug costs. It also became evident that, as far as possible, product-specific model variables are required for an economic evaluation of SIT treatment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5288417
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Medizin
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52884172017-02-16 Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen SCIT compared with SLIT and symptomatic treatment Reinhold, Thomas Brüggenjürgen, Bernd Allergo J Int Original Article BACKGROUND: Whereas specific immunotherapy (SIT) has already been shown to be cost-effective in the treatment of allergic rhinitis compared with symptomatic treatment, only a small number of investigations have compared sublingual (SLIT) and subcutaneous (SCIT) immunotherapeutic approaches. This analysis discusses the cost-effectiveness of SCIT compared with SLIT and a symptomatic treatment modality. At the same time, particular attention is paid to preparation-specific characteristics. METHODS: The investigation is based on a previously published health economic model calculation. A Markov model, with predefined disease stages and a time period of 9 years, formed the basis of the analysis. The data on specific SCIT (Allergovit®) and SLIT (Oralair®) preparations required for the calculation were adjusted for the present analysis. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) based on symptom scores were calculated as the endpoint for effectiveness. Furthermore, the total costs and cost effectiveness of SCIT were determined. Model uncertainties were estimated by means of additional sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: With regard to effectiveness, both the SCIT and SLIT preparations proved superior compared to symptomatic treatment. Although more expensive, SIT seem to be cost-effective. A direct comparison of SCIT (Allergovit®) and SLIT (Oralair®) showed lower total costs for SCIT treatment over the study period (SCIT 1159 € versus SLIT 1322 €) and improved effectiveness (SCIT 7.112 QALYs versus SLIT 7.060 QALYs). DISCUSSION: SIT represents a cost-effective treatment option for patients with allergic rhinitis compared with symptomatic treatment. The comparison of SCIT (Allergovit®) and SLIT (Oralair®) showed SCIT to be predominant and cost-effective, due in particular to somewhat greater patient compliance and lower drug costs. It also became evident that, as far as possible, product-specific model variables are required for an economic evaluation of SIT treatment. Springer Medizin 2016-11-21 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5288417/ /pubmed/28217432 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40629-016-0002-y Text en © The Author(s) 2016
spellingShingle Original Article
Reinhold, Thomas
Brüggenjürgen, Bernd
Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen SCIT compared with SLIT and symptomatic treatment
title Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen SCIT compared with SLIT and symptomatic treatment
title_full Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen SCIT compared with SLIT and symptomatic treatment
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen SCIT compared with SLIT and symptomatic treatment
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen SCIT compared with SLIT and symptomatic treatment
title_short Cost-effectiveness of grass pollen SCIT compared with SLIT and symptomatic treatment
title_sort cost-effectiveness of grass pollen scit compared with slit and symptomatic treatment
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5288417/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28217432
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40629-016-0002-y
work_keys_str_mv AT reinholdthomas costeffectivenessofgrasspollenscitcomparedwithslitandsymptomatictreatment
AT bruggenjurgenbernd costeffectivenessofgrasspollenscitcomparedwithslitandsymptomatictreatment