Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Biol Pharm Bull ; 42(5): 680-684, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31061310

RESUMO

Daiokanzoto (DKT) and lubiprostone (LPS) are drugs used for constipation, but few studies have compared them. This study examined the effectiveness, adverse events, and medical economic efficiency of DKT and LPS for constipation. Patients who received DKT (DKT group) and those who received LPS (LPS group) during admission to Ogaki Municipal Hospital between November 2012 and May 2016 were enrolled. Drug efficacy was evaluated based on the median value of bowel movement frequency over 1 week before and after drug administration, and their safety was evaluated by the presence or absence of diarrhea, abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. To assess medical economic efficiency, drug costs for constipation per week were calculated. The median values (quartile ranges) of bowel movement frequency at 1 week after drug administration were 8.5 (6.0-12.0) in the DKT group and 5 (3.0-7.0) in the LPS group, which was significantly different (p < 0.01). Diarrhea occurred significantly less often in the DKT group (4 cases) than in the LPS group (17 cases) (p < 0.01). The median cost of drugs administered for constipation for 1 week was significantly lower in the DKT group (631 [quartile range, 513-653] yen) than in the LPS group (1431 [1135-2344] yen) (p < 0.01). DKT had a higher immediate effect on constipation and was associated with more frequent bowel movement and fewer adverse events of diarrhea than LPS, suggesting that it may be effective and safe for treating constipation, and DKT is inexpensive.


Assuntos
Constipação Intestinal/tratamento farmacológico , Laxantes/uso terapêutico , Lubiprostona/uso terapêutico , Extratos Vegetais/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Constipação Intestinal/economia , Custos de Medicamentos , Feminino , Glycyrrhiza uralensis , Humanos , Laxantes/economia , Lubiprostona/economia , Masculino , Extratos Vegetais/economia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Rhus , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
J Med Econ ; 18(4): 283-94, 2015 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25333331

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To use techniques of decision-analytic modeling to evaluate the effectiveness and costs of linaclotide vs lubiprostone in the treatment of adult patients with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). METHODS: Using model inputs derived from published literature, linaclotide Phase III trial data and a physician survey, a decision-tree model was constructed. Response to therapy was defined as (1) a ≥ 14-point increase from baseline in IBS-Quality-of-Life (IBS-QoL) questionnaire overall score at week 12 or (2) one of the top two responses (moderately/significantly relieved) on a 7-point IBS symptom relief question in ≥ 2 of 3 months. Patients who do not respond to therapy are assumed to fail therapy and accrue costs associated with a treatment failure. Model time horizon is aligned with clinical trial duration of 12 weeks. Model outputs include number of responders, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and total costs (including direct and indirect). Both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Treatment for IBS-C with linaclotide produced more responders than lubiprostone for both response definitions (19.3% vs 13.0% and 61.8% vs 57.2% for IBS-QoL and symptom relief, respectively), lower per-patient costs ($803 vs $911 and $977 vs $1056), and higher QALYs (0.1921 vs 0.1917 and 0.1909 vs 0.1894) over the 12-week time horizon. Results were similar for most one-way sensitivity analyses. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the majority of simulations resulted in linaclotide having higher treatment response rates and lower per-patient costs. LIMITATIONS: There are no available head-to-head trials that compare linaclotide with lubiprostone; therefore, placebo-adjusted estimates of relative efficacy were derived for model inputs. The time horizon for this model is relatively short, as it was limited to the duration of available clinical trial data. CONCLUSIONS: Linaclotide was found to be a less costly option vs lubiprostone for the treatment of adult patients with IBS-C.


Assuntos
Constipação Intestinal/economia , Síndrome do Intestino Irritável/economia , Lubiprostona/economia , Peptídeos/economia , Qualidade de Vida , Adulto , Agonistas dos Canais de Cloreto/economia , Agonistas dos Canais de Cloreto/uso terapêutico , Constipação Intestinal/tratamento farmacológico , Constipação Intestinal/etiologia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Árvores de Decisões , Feminino , Fármacos Gastrointestinais/economia , Fármacos Gastrointestinais/uso terapêutico , Gastos em Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Síndrome do Intestino Irritável/complicações , Síndrome do Intestino Irritável/tratamento farmacológico , Lubiprostona/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Modelos Econômicos , Peptídeos/uso terapêutico , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...