Daily Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Glaucoma Fixed Combinations in China

Background. The aim of this study was to compare the daily costs and cost effectiveness of fixed combination glaucoma drugs in China. Methods. This study included the following fixed combination drugs: brinzolamide 1% and timolol 0.5% (Azarga; Alcon, Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA), travoprost 0.004% and...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chenjia Xu, Ruru Guo, Dandan Huang, Jian Ji, Wei Liu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2020-01-01
Series:Journal of Ophthalmology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2406783
id doaj-e7ca523a694142fab265ec2169632a67
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e7ca523a694142fab265ec2169632a672020-11-25T03:42:44ZengHindawi LimitedJournal of Ophthalmology2090-004X2090-00582020-01-01202010.1155/2020/24067832406783Daily Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Glaucoma Fixed Combinations in ChinaChenjia Xu0Ruru Guo1Dandan Huang2Jian Ji3Wei Liu4Tianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin International Joint Research and Development Centre of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin 300384, ChinaTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin International Joint Research and Development Centre of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin 300384, ChinaTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin International Joint Research and Development Centre of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin 300384, ChinaTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin International Joint Research and Development Centre of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin 300384, ChinaTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin International Joint Research and Development Centre of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin 300384, ChinaBackground. The aim of this study was to compare the daily costs and cost effectiveness of fixed combination glaucoma drugs in China. Methods. This study included the following fixed combination drugs: brinzolamide 1% and timolol 0.5% (Azarga; Alcon, Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA), travoprost 0.004% and timolol 0.5% (DuoTrav; Alcon, Inc.), bimatoprost 0.03% and timolol 0.5% (Ganfort; Allergan, Inc., Dublin, Ireland), and latanoprost 0.005% and timolol 0.5% (Xalacom; Pfizer, Inc., New York, NY, USA). Five bottles of each drug were measured. The mean actual volume, mean actual number of drops, volume per drop, daily cost, yearly cost, and per mmHg reduction cost for each drug were calculated. Results. The volumes per drop ranged from 32.61 ± 2.90 μl (DuoTrav) to 24.38 ± 0.23 μl (Ganfort). The number of usage days per bottle varied from 36 days (DuoTrav) to 61 days (Ganfort). Azarga had the lowest daily cost ($0.23) and yearly cost ($84.72), while DuoTrav had the highest daily cost ($0.79) and yearly cost ($287.02). Azarga costed $2.17–$3.30 per mmHg intraocular pressure reduction, which was lower than the other three drugs. For the prostaglandin and ß-adrenergic blocker FCs, Ganfort had the lowest daily cost ($0.35) and per mmHg reduction cost (from $3.40 to $4.04). Conclusions. The daily costs of these drugs were significantly different, with Azarga having the lowest daily cost and best cost effectiveness. For the prostaglandin and β-adrenergic blocker fixed combinations, Ganfort was the most economical choice with its lower daily cost and per mmHg reduction cost. The results of this study could provide drug selection guidance from an economic perspective, but various factors should be considered when making a decision.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2406783
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Chenjia Xu
Ruru Guo
Dandan Huang
Jian Ji
Wei Liu
spellingShingle Chenjia Xu
Ruru Guo
Dandan Huang
Jian Ji
Wei Liu
Daily Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Glaucoma Fixed Combinations in China
Journal of Ophthalmology
author_facet Chenjia Xu
Ruru Guo
Dandan Huang
Jian Ji
Wei Liu
author_sort Chenjia Xu
title Daily Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Glaucoma Fixed Combinations in China
title_short Daily Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Glaucoma Fixed Combinations in China
title_full Daily Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Glaucoma Fixed Combinations in China
title_fullStr Daily Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Glaucoma Fixed Combinations in China
title_full_unstemmed Daily Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Glaucoma Fixed Combinations in China
title_sort daily costs and cost effectiveness of glaucoma fixed combinations in china
publisher Hindawi Limited
series Journal of Ophthalmology
issn 2090-004X
2090-0058
publishDate 2020-01-01
description Background. The aim of this study was to compare the daily costs and cost effectiveness of fixed combination glaucoma drugs in China. Methods. This study included the following fixed combination drugs: brinzolamide 1% and timolol 0.5% (Azarga; Alcon, Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA), travoprost 0.004% and timolol 0.5% (DuoTrav; Alcon, Inc.), bimatoprost 0.03% and timolol 0.5% (Ganfort; Allergan, Inc., Dublin, Ireland), and latanoprost 0.005% and timolol 0.5% (Xalacom; Pfizer, Inc., New York, NY, USA). Five bottles of each drug were measured. The mean actual volume, mean actual number of drops, volume per drop, daily cost, yearly cost, and per mmHg reduction cost for each drug were calculated. Results. The volumes per drop ranged from 32.61 ± 2.90 μl (DuoTrav) to 24.38 ± 0.23 μl (Ganfort). The number of usage days per bottle varied from 36 days (DuoTrav) to 61 days (Ganfort). Azarga had the lowest daily cost ($0.23) and yearly cost ($84.72), while DuoTrav had the highest daily cost ($0.79) and yearly cost ($287.02). Azarga costed $2.17–$3.30 per mmHg intraocular pressure reduction, which was lower than the other three drugs. For the prostaglandin and ß-adrenergic blocker FCs, Ganfort had the lowest daily cost ($0.35) and per mmHg reduction cost (from $3.40 to $4.04). Conclusions. The daily costs of these drugs were significantly different, with Azarga having the lowest daily cost and best cost effectiveness. For the prostaglandin and β-adrenergic blocker fixed combinations, Ganfort was the most economical choice with its lower daily cost and per mmHg reduction cost. The results of this study could provide drug selection guidance from an economic perspective, but various factors should be considered when making a decision.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2406783
work_keys_str_mv AT chenjiaxu dailycostsandcosteffectivenessofglaucomafixedcombinationsinchina
AT ruruguo dailycostsandcosteffectivenessofglaucomafixedcombinationsinchina
AT dandanhuang dailycostsandcosteffectivenessofglaucomafixedcombinationsinchina
AT jianji dailycostsandcosteffectivenessofglaucomafixedcombinationsinchina
AT weiliu dailycostsandcosteffectivenessofglaucomafixedcombinationsinchina
_version_ 1715138288398893056