A retrospective database study comparing treatment outcomes and cost associated with choice of fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-agonists for asthma maintenance treatment in Germany

A retrospective database study comparing treatment outcomes and cost associated with choice of fixed-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-agonists for asthma maintenance treatment in Germany

2008 Int J Clin Pract

Aballea, S. | Cure, S. | Vogelmeier, C. | Wiren, A. | Volume: 62, Issue: 12, Pages: 1870-9, Administration, Inhalation, Adolescent, Adrenal Cortex Hormones/*administration & dosage/economics, Adrenergic beta-Agonists/*administration & dosage/economics, Adult, Albuterol/administration & dosage/analogs & derivatives/economics, Androstadienes/administration & dosage/economics, Anti-Asthmatic Agents/*administration & dosage/economics, Asthma/*drug therapy/economics, Budesonide/administration & dosage/economics, Child, Drug Combinations, Drug Costs, Ethanolamines/administration & dosage/economics, Female, Fluticasone, Formoterol Fumarate, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Salmeterol Xinafoate, Young Adult,

AIMS: This retrospective, observational cohort study aimed to compare treatment outcomes and healthcare costs in the year after initiation of maintenance treatment with budesonide/formoterol or salmeterol/fluticasone in a German healthcare setting. METHODS: Data on German asthma patients initiating treatment with budesonide/formoterol or salmeterol/fluticasone between June 2001 and June 2005 were obtained from the IMS Disease Analyzer database. The primary outcome was the probability of treatment success, defined according to short-acting beta(2)-agonist prescriptions and switches or addition of controller medications, during the postindex year. A secondary definition of treatment success included hospitalisations and oral corticosteroid (OCS) prescriptions. Secondary outcomes included severe asthma exacerbations, defined as >or=1 OCS prescription, asthma-related hospitalisation and/or referral. The effect of treatment on costs was estimated using generalised linear models, adjusting for patient and physician characteristics. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the budesonide/formoterol (n = 1456) and salmeterol/fluticasone (n = 982) groups in disease severity markers in the pre-index year. Patients on budesonide/formoterol had a 44% greater probability of treatment success [odds ratio (OR): 1.44; p = 0.0003] according to the primary definition and a 26% greater probability (OR: 1.26; p = 0.0119) according to the secondary definition, fewer severe exacerbations (-33.4%; p = 0.0123) and fewer OCS prescriptions (-31.5%; p = 0.0082) compared with salmeterol/fluticasone, after controlling for baseline characteristics. Adjusting for covariates, budesonide/formoterol had a significant inverse relationship on asthma-related costs compared with salmeterol/fluticasone (-13.4%; p < 0.001). Total cost (asthma- and non-asthma-related costs) was 12.6% lower for budesonide/formoterol (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that for patients with chronic asthma in Germany, budesonide/formoterol rather than salmeterol/fluticasone had a higher likelihood of treatment success, and that budesonide/formoterol is the less costly option. Although the cohorts appeared to be well matched at baseline, the results should be interpreted with caution given the observational nature of the study.

https://www.doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01895.x