A systematic review assessing the economic impact of sildenafil citrate (Viagra) in the treatment of erectile dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: Sildenafil was the first oral phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitor introduced as primary therapy for erectile dysfunction (ED). In the 7 years following its market launch, sildenafil was prescribed by more than 750,000 physicians to more than 23 million men worldwide. To date, few studies have evaluated the economic impact of sildenafil in treating ED. AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and impact of sildenafil on health care costs for patients with ED in multiple countries. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Economic outcomes including cost, cost-effectiveness, cost of illness, cost consequence, resource use, productivity, work loss, and willingness to pay (WTP) were investigated. METHODS: Using keywords related to economic outcomes and sildenafil, we systematically searched literature published between July 2001 and July 2011 using MEDLINE and EMBASE. Included articles pertained to costs, WTP, and economic evaluations. RESULTS: In the last 10 years, 12 studies assessed economic outcomes associated with sildenafil for ED. Most studies were conducted in the United States and the United Kingdom, with one study identified in Canada and one from Mexico. Six studies evaluated cost of illness, cost consequence, or cost of care, and four studies evaluated WTP or drug pricing by country in the United States and the United Kingdom. In the United States and the United Kingdom, costs to health care systems have increased with demand for treatment. Cost analyses suggested that sildenafil would lower direct costs compared with other PDE5 inhibitors. U.S. and U.K. studies found that patients exhibited WTP for sildenafil. The two cost-effectiveness models we identified examined ED sub-groups, those with spinal cord injury and those with diabetes or hypertension. These models indicated favorable cost-effectiveness profiles for sildenafil compared with other active-treatment options in both Mexico and Canada. CONCLUSIONS: The relative value of sildenafil vs. surgically implanted prosthetic devices and other PDE5 inhibitors, is underscored by patients' WTP, and cost-effectiveness in ED patients with comorbidities.

Economic outcomes for celecoxib: a systematic review of pharmacoeconomic studies.

Osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis are conditions that are associated with significant clinical burden, and impact on patients' functional status and quality of life. Medical costs related to treating these common and disabling conditions place an economic strain on healthcare systems. This systematic review was conducted to investigate the impact of celecoxib on healthcare costs for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. In total, 24 studies examined economic outcomes associated with celecoxib in patients with these conditions. Six of these studies evaluated economic outcomes in developing regions, including Mexico, Asia and Turkey. Across all geographies, most studies were cost-effectiveness analyses comparing celecoxib with nonselective NSAIDs alone or in combination with gastroprotective agents. Overall, based on local standards, economic models indicated favorable cost-effectiveness profiles for celecoxib compared with nonselective NSAIDs and other active-treatment options. Cost analyses indicated that the use of celecoxib resulted in lower direct medical costs.

The economic burden of metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review of literature from developed countries.

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer, the most common malignant cancer among women in Western countries, has poor prognosis following metastasis. New therapies potentially extend survival, but their value is questioned when benefits are incremental and expensive. The objective of our study was to understand the economic impact of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and its treatment, and to evaluate the designs of these studies. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the MEDLINE-indexed, English-language literature, identifying 31 articles on the economic evaluation of MBC in 10 developed countries, including studies of per-patient costs, gross national costs, and cost-effectiveness models. We also included health technology assessments (HTAs) from government and regulatory agencies. RESULTS: Total per-patient costs of MBC are only available for Sweden ($17,301-$48,169 annually, depending on patient age (2005 USD)). Most economic analyses of per-patient direct costs originate from the US; across all countries, data indicate that this burden is substantial. Gross national costs of MBC are available only for the UK (cost of incident MBC cases is estimated to be $22 million annually (2002 GBP)). Many cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that a number of new and established treatments are cost-effective compared to standard care in various countries, but many offer small increments in survival. The cost-effectiveness of trastuzumab, capecitabine, and nab-paclitaxel has been evaluated in many recent studies. CONCLUSION: Most economic evaluations of MBC have utilized secondary rather than primary data, and have used scenarios and assumptions which may be inaccurate or outdated. The quality of evidence disseminated to decision-makers could be improved by adherence to best practices in cost-effectiveness analyses.

Impact of comorbid depression or anxiety on patterns of treatment and economic outcomes among patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this retrospective analysis was to assess the correlation of comorbid depression and/or anxiety to patterns of treatment, healthcare utilization, and associated costs among diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) patients, employing a large US administrative claims database. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients under age 65 with commercial insurance and patients aged 65 and older with employer-sponsored Medicare supplemental insurance were selected for the study if they had at least one diagnosis of DPNP in 2005. The first observed DPNP claim was considered the 'index date.' All individuals had a 12-month pre-index and 12-month follow-up period. For both populations, two subgroups were constructed for individuals with depression and/or anxiety (DPNP-DA cohort) or without these disorders (DPNP-only cohort). Patients' demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and medication use were compared over the pre-index period. Healthcare expenditures and resource utilization were measured for the post-index period. Two-part models were used to examine the impact of comorbid depression and/or anxiety on healthcare utilization and costs, controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: The study identified 11,854 DPNP-only and 1512 DPNP-DA patients in the Medicare supplemental cohort, and 11,685 and 2728 in the commercially insured cohort. Compared to DPNP-only patients over the follow-up period, a significantly higher percentage of DPNP-DA patients were dispensed pain and DPNP-related medication. All components of healthcare utilization, except home healthcare visits and physician office visits, were more likely to be provided to DPNP-DA patients versus the DPNP-only cohort (all p < 0.01). Controlling for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics, DPNP-DA patients had significantly higher total costs than those of DPNP-only patients for Medicare ($9134, p < 0.01) and commercially insured patients ($11,085, p < 0.01). LIMITATIONS: Due to the use of a retrospective administrative claims database, limitations of this study include the potential for selection bias between study cohorts, mis-identification of DPNP and/or depression, and inability to assess indirect costs as well as use and cost of over-the-counter medications. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the healthcare costs were significantly higher for DPNP patients comorbid with depression and/or anxiety relative to those without such disorders.

Impact of a hypertension management/health promotion program on commercial driver's license employees of a self-insured utility company.

OBJECTIVE: Federal regulations governing transportation safety disqualify commercial drivers with persistent uncontrolled hypertension. We sought to determine whether a hypertension management and health promotion program designed for commercial drivers improved blood pressure (BP) outcomes among drivers employed by a self-insured utility company. METHODS: This retrospective study examined the employment-related medical examinations of 501 randomly selected commercial drivers for measurements of BP, height, and weight taken before and after the intervention. RESULTS: After the program, significantly fewer employees had uncontrolled hypertension according to the Department of Transportation hypertension guidelines (17.2% vs 26.1%, P < 0.01). This improvement was consistent across subgroups defined by diabetes, obesity, and use of antihypertensive medication. CONCLUSIONS: An education program improved control of BP among commercial drivers, improving their health and safety, and reducing the number at high risk of medical disqualification.

Assessment of the economic burden of COPD in the U.S.: a review and synthesis of the literature.

The costs of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) pose a major economic burden to the United States. Studies evaluating COPD costs have generated widely variable estimates; we summarized and critically compared recent estimates of the annual national and per-patient costs of COPD in the U.S. Thirteen articles reporting comprehensive estimates of the direct costs of COPD (costs related to the provision of medical goods and services) were identified from searches of relevant primary literature published since 1995. Few papers reported indirect costs of COPD (lost work and productivity). The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) provides the single current estimate of the total (direct plus indirect) annual cost of COPD to the U.S., $38.8 billion in 2005 dollars. More than half of this cost ($21.8 billion) was direct, aligning with the $20-26 billion range reported by two other recent analyses of large national datasets. For per-patient direct costs (in $US 2005), studies using recent data yield attributable cost estimates (costs deemed to be related to COPD) in the range of $2,700-$5,900 annually, and excess cost estimates (total costs incurred by COPD patients minus total costs incurred by non-COPD patients) in the range of $6,100-$6,600 annually. Studies of both national and per-patient costs that use data approximately 8-10 years old or older have produced estimates that tend to deviate from these ranges. Cost-of-illness studies using recent data underscore the substantial current cost burden of COPD in the U.S.