COST AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF ONDANSETRON VERSUS METOCLOPRAMIDE REGIMENS - A HOSPITAL PERSPECTIVE FROM ITALY

被引:20
作者
BALLATORI, E [1 ]
ROILA, F [1 ]
BERTO, P [1 ]
DEANGELIS, V [1 ]
NERI, C [1 ]
OLIVIERI, A [1 ]
TONATO, M [1 ]
DELFAVERO, A [1 ]
机构
[1] POLICLIN HOSP,DIV MED ONCOL,I-06122 PERUGIA,ITALY
关键词
D O I
10.2165/00019053-199405030-00006
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
In a large double-blind study of antiemetic therapy conducted in Italy, 289 patients underwent 3 consecutive cycles of cisplatin chemotherapy. Antiemetic treatment with ondansetron plus dexamethasone was more efficacious and better tolerated, but also more expensive, than treatment with metoclopramide plus both dexamethasone and diphenhydramine. To evaluate the different costs of the 2 antiemetic regimens, we conducted a retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis from a hospital perspective. Direct costs of antiemetic therapy (acquisition cost of drugs, materials and time spent by nurses to prepare and administer therapies), cleanup after emesis, rescue medication and adverse events were evaluated. Antiemetic drug acquisition costs per patient were 5.23-fold higher for the ondansetron regimen than for the metoclopramide regimen. However, when the costs of materials and nursing time required to prepare and administer the antiemetic regimens were included, this ratio was 3.77. Furthermore, including the cost of emesis, rescue antiemetic treatments and medication used to treat adverse events, hospital costs per patient were 3.21-fold higher with the ondansetron regimen during the first cycle, 3.08-fold higher during second cycle and 2.89-fold higher during third cycle of chemotherapy. Complete protection from vomiting and from both vomiting and nausea with ondansetron occurred, respectively, in 78.7 and 69.1% of patients in the first cycle, 73.8 and 57.3% in the second cycle, and 74.2 and 58.1% in third cycle of chemotherapy. Corresponding figures for the metoclopramide regimen were 59.5 and 50.4%, 53.6 and 37.1%, and 46.8 and 27.3%, respectively. Thus, the cost per successfully treated (completely protected) patient was 2.43- and 2.34-fold higher, respectively, for ondansetron at the first cycle, 2.23- and 1.99-fold higher, respectively, at second cycle, and 1.82- and 1.36-fold higher, respectively, at third cycle. In conclusion, the study demonstrates that, while ondansetron has a greater acquisition cost than metoclopramide, the ondansetron regimen costs per successfully-treated patient substantially decrease when all direct hospital costs are taken into account.
引用
收藏
页码:227 / 237
页数:11
相关论文
共 12 条
  • [1] Beck T.M., Hesketh P.J., Madajewicz S., Navari R.M., Pendergrass K., Et al., Stratified, randomized, double-blind comparison of intravenous ondansetron administered as a multiple-dose regimen versus two single-dose regimens in the prevention of cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 10, pp. 1969-1975, (1992)
  • [2] Buxton M.J., O'Brien B.J., Economic evaluation of ondansetron: preliminary analysis using clinical data prior to price setting, British Journal of Cancer, 66, pp. 64-67, (1992)
  • [3] Cox F., Hirsch J., Ondansetron: a cost effective advance in antiemetic therapy, Oncology, 50, pp. 186-190, (1993)
  • [4] Cunningham D., Gore M., Davidson N., Miocevich M., Manchanda M., Et al., The real costs of emesis - an economic analysis of ondansetron vs metoclopramide in controlling emesis in patients receiving chemotherapy for cancer, European Journal of Cancer, 29 A, pp. 303-306, (1993)
  • [5] Drummond M., Davies L., Economic analysis alongside clinical trials: revisiting the methodological issues, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 7, pp. 561-573, (1991)
  • [6] Johnson N.E., Nash D.B., Carpenter C.E., Sistek C.J., Ondansetron: costs and resource utilisation in a US teaching hospital setting, PharmacoEconomics, 3, pp. 471-481, (1993)
  • [7] O'Brien B.J., Rusthoven J., Rocchi A., Latreille J., Fine S., Et al., Impact of chemotherapy-associated nausea and vomiting on patients’ functional status and on costs: survey of five Canadian centres, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 149, pp. 296-301, (1993)
  • [8] Plosker G.L., Milne R.J., Ondansetron: a pharmacoeconomic and quality-of-life evaluation of its antiemetic activity in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy, PharmacoEconomics, 2, pp. 285-304, (1992)
  • [9] Roila F., Tonato M., Ballatori E., Paes D., Del Favero A., Et al., Ondansetron + dexamethasone vs metoclopramide + dexamethasone + diphenhydramine in prevention of cisplatin-induced emesis, Lancet, 340, pp. 96-99, (1992)
  • [10] Roila F., Tonato M., Favalli G., Scarfone G., Cognetti F., Et al., Persistence of efficacy of ondansetron (OND) plus dexamethasone (DEX) vs metoclopramide (MTC) plus DEX and diphenhydramine (DIP) in acute emesis during three consecutive cycles of cisplatin (CDDP) chemotherapy (CT). Abstract no. 1490, Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 12, (1993)