TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effectiveness analysis of tacrolimus ointment versus high-potency topical corticosteroids in adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis
AU - Ellis, Charles N.
AU - Drake, Lynn A.
AU - Prendergast, Mary M.
AU - Abramovits, William
AU - Boguniewicz, Mark
AU - Daniel, C. Ralph
AU - Lebwohl, Mark
AU - Paller, Amy
AU - Stevens, Seth R.
AU - Whitaker-Worth, Diane L.
AU - Tong, Kuo B.
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported by Fujisawa Healthcare Inc.
Funding Information:
Disclosure: All physician authors were compensated for their time serving on the advisory board for this work. Ms Prendergast is an employee of Fujisawa Healthcare Inc. Dr Ellis and Mr Tong are consultants to Fujisawa Healthcare Inc. Drs Ellis, Drake, Abramovits, Boguniewicz, Daniel, Lebwohl, and Whitaker-Worth have been investigators for clinical trials sponsored by Fujisawa Healthcare Inc. Drs Drake, Abramovits, Boguniewicz, Stevens, and Whitaker-Worth have been compensated by Fujisawa Healthcare Inc for speaking engagements. Dr Stevens has received a research grant from Fujisawa Pharmaceutical Co Ltd.
Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2003/4/1
Y1 - 2003/4/1
N2 - Background: Few cost-effectiveness analyses have been conducted on topical therapies for atopic dermatitis. Objective: We sought to compare cost-effectiveness of high-potency topical corticosteroids (HPTCs) and tacrolimus ointment for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis for patients who are not responsive to or not well controlled with mid-potency topical corticosteroids. Methods: A Markov model represented the cyclic nature of atopic dermatitis. Clinical outcomes were derived from published literature. "Efficacy" was defined as disease-controlled days on which patients experienced a greater than 75% improvement in their disease. Resource use and changes in management were on the basis of opinions of a physician panel; secondary treatment was an oral antibiotic with topical corticosteroids. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for all variables. Results: The model was sensitive to duration of continuous treatment with HPTCs. HPTCs, when limited to 2-week treatment cycles, were associated with the highest total costs ($1682 per year) and the least efficacy (185 disease-controlled days). HPTCs in 4-week treatment intervals and tacrolimus ointment were similar in total costs and efficacy ($1317 vs $1323 for 194 vs 190 disease-controlled days, respectively). Although primary drug costs were higher for patients treated with tacrolimus ointment, patients treated with regimens of HPTCs incurred higher secondary drug costs. Conclusion: In the base case analyses, tacrolimus ointment was more cost-effective than HPTCs administered in 2-week treatment cycles, and similar in cost-effectiveness to 4-week cycles of HPTCs.
AB - Background: Few cost-effectiveness analyses have been conducted on topical therapies for atopic dermatitis. Objective: We sought to compare cost-effectiveness of high-potency topical corticosteroids (HPTCs) and tacrolimus ointment for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis for patients who are not responsive to or not well controlled with mid-potency topical corticosteroids. Methods: A Markov model represented the cyclic nature of atopic dermatitis. Clinical outcomes were derived from published literature. "Efficacy" was defined as disease-controlled days on which patients experienced a greater than 75% improvement in their disease. Resource use and changes in management were on the basis of opinions of a physician panel; secondary treatment was an oral antibiotic with topical corticosteroids. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for all variables. Results: The model was sensitive to duration of continuous treatment with HPTCs. HPTCs, when limited to 2-week treatment cycles, were associated with the highest total costs ($1682 per year) and the least efficacy (185 disease-controlled days). HPTCs in 4-week treatment intervals and tacrolimus ointment were similar in total costs and efficacy ($1317 vs $1323 for 194 vs 190 disease-controlled days, respectively). Although primary drug costs were higher for patients treated with tacrolimus ointment, patients treated with regimens of HPTCs incurred higher secondary drug costs. Conclusion: In the base case analyses, tacrolimus ointment was more cost-effective than HPTCs administered in 2-week treatment cycles, and similar in cost-effectiveness to 4-week cycles of HPTCs.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037382842&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037382842&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1067/mjd.2003.240
DO - 10.1067/mjd.2003.240
M3 - Article
C2 - 12664019
AN - SCOPUS:0037382842
SN - 0190-9622
VL - 48
SP - 553
EP - 563
JO - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
JF - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
IS - 4
ER -