Cost-effectiveness of solifenacin compared with oral antimuscarinic agents for the treatment of patients with overactive bladder in the UK. Issue 1 (1st January 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hakimi, Zalmai; Kelleher, Con; Aballéa, Samuel; Maman, Khaled; Nazir, Jameel; Mankowski, Colette; Odeyemi, Isaac
• Is Part Of: Journal of market access & health policy. Volume 6:Issue 1(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-01-01
• Subjects: Cost utility -- incremental cost-effectiveness ratio -- Markov -- quality-adjusted life year -- mirabegron -- muscarinic agents; Medical policy -- Periodicals; Medical policy -- Economic aspects -- Periodicals; International trade -- Environmental aspects -- Periodicals; Health Policy -- economics; Technology Assessment, Biomedical; Marketing of Health Services; International trade -- Environmental aspects; Medical policy; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; Periodicals; 362.1
• DOI: 10.1080/20016689.2018.1438721
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2001-6689

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of solifenacin 5 mg/day versus other oral antimuscarinic agents used for overactive bladder (OAB) from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective.Study design: In a Markov model, hypothetical patients received solifenacin 5 mg/day or a comparator antimuscarinic, after which they could switch to an alternative antimuscarinic. The model estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) over a 5-year period.Results: Solifenacin 5 mg/day was the dominant treatment strategy (i.e., less costly and more effective) versus tolterodine extended-release (ER) 4 mg/day, fesoterodine 4 and 8 mg/day, oxybutynin ER 10 mg/day and solifenacin 10 mg/day, and was cost-effective (i.e., ICERs below the £30, 000 per QALY threshold generally applied in the NHS) versus oxybutynin immediate release (IR) 10 mg/day, tolterodine IR 4 mg/day and trospium chloride 60 mg/day. The probability of solifenacin 5 mg/day being dominant/cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30, 000 per QALY was 57–98%.Conclusions: Solifenacin 5 mg/day appears to be a cost-effective strategy for the treatment of OAB over a 5-year timeframe compared with other oral antimuscarinic agents in the UK. These findings are important for decision-makers considering the economic implications of selecting treatments for OAB.