Cost-effectiveness of gemifloxacin

Results from the GLOBE study

Michael Halpern, Cynthia S. Palmer, Marc Zodet, Jeff Kirsch

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The cost-effectiveness of treatment with oral gemifloxacin versus oral clarithromycin for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB) was evaluated. Economic outcomes were assessed for the Gemifloxacin Long-term Outcomes in Bronchitis Exacerbations study. This prospective double-blind, controlled, health outcomes study compared health, economic, and clinical outcomes after randomized treatment with either oral gemifloxacin or oral clarithromycin for AECB. Base case analysis was performed from the third-party payer's perspective and considered the costs of respiratory tract infection-related medical care. Analysis from the societal perspective also included costs of lost productivity. Treatment effectiveness was measured as the proportion of patients without recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment following resolution of the initial AECB. Data sources included the outcomes study itself and standard U.S. cost sources. Compared with clarithromycin, gemifloxacin treatment resulted in significantly more patients without AECB recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment after 26 weeks (73.8% versus 63.8%, p = 0.024). Fewer patients receiving gemifloxacin were hospitalized (5 of 214 patients versus 14 of 224 patients, p = 0.059), and they had less time off from usual activities (8.3 days versus 10.1 days). The mean direct cost per patient receiving gemifloxacin was $127 less than with clarithromycin ($247 versus $374, respectively); mean total costs (direct plus indirect) per patient were $329 less for patients receiving gemifloxacin ($1413 versus $1742). Gemifloxacin dominated clarithromycin in cost-effectiveness analysis. Bootstrap analysis indicated that the probability of gemifloxacin being both cost saving and more effective than clarithromycin is 88% from a payer's perspective and 84% from the societal perspective. Gemifloxacin was more cost-effective, improving AECB outcomes and producing substantial cost offsets compared with clarithromycin.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1357-1365
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Health-System Pharmacy
Volume59
Issue number14
StatePublished - Jul 15 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Clarithromycin
Chronic Bronchitis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Economics
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
gemifloxacin
Health Insurance Reimbursement
Therapeutics
Recurrence
Bronchitis
Information Storage and Retrieval
Health
Respiratory Tract Infections

Keywords

  • Bronchitis
  • Clarithromycin
  • Costs
  • Drug comparisons
  • Drugs, clinical effectiveness
  • Economics
  • Gemifloxacin
  • Macrolides
  • Outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmaceutical Science
  • Leadership and Management

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness of gemifloxacin : Results from the GLOBE study. / Halpern, Michael; Palmer, Cynthia S.; Zodet, Marc; Kirsch, Jeff.

In: American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, Vol. 59, No. 14, 15.07.2002, p. 1357-1365.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Halpern, M, Palmer, CS, Zodet, M & Kirsch, J 2002, 'Cost-effectiveness of gemifloxacin: Results from the GLOBE study', American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, vol. 59, no. 14, pp. 1357-1365.
Halpern, Michael ; Palmer, Cynthia S. ; Zodet, Marc ; Kirsch, Jeff. / Cost-effectiveness of gemifloxacin : Results from the GLOBE study. In: American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2002 ; Vol. 59, No. 14. pp. 1357-1365.
@article{e7268edaebd846c098bdcce05cd99f96,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of gemifloxacin: Results from the GLOBE study",
abstract = "The cost-effectiveness of treatment with oral gemifloxacin versus oral clarithromycin for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB) was evaluated. Economic outcomes were assessed for the Gemifloxacin Long-term Outcomes in Bronchitis Exacerbations study. This prospective double-blind, controlled, health outcomes study compared health, economic, and clinical outcomes after randomized treatment with either oral gemifloxacin or oral clarithromycin for AECB. Base case analysis was performed from the third-party payer's perspective and considered the costs of respiratory tract infection-related medical care. Analysis from the societal perspective also included costs of lost productivity. Treatment effectiveness was measured as the proportion of patients without recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment following resolution of the initial AECB. Data sources included the outcomes study itself and standard U.S. cost sources. Compared with clarithromycin, gemifloxacin treatment resulted in significantly more patients without AECB recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment after 26 weeks (73.8{\%} versus 63.8{\%}, p = 0.024). Fewer patients receiving gemifloxacin were hospitalized (5 of 214 patients versus 14 of 224 patients, p = 0.059), and they had less time off from usual activities (8.3 days versus 10.1 days). The mean direct cost per patient receiving gemifloxacin was $127 less than with clarithromycin ($247 versus $374, respectively); mean total costs (direct plus indirect) per patient were $329 less for patients receiving gemifloxacin ($1413 versus $1742). Gemifloxacin dominated clarithromycin in cost-effectiveness analysis. Bootstrap analysis indicated that the probability of gemifloxacin being both cost saving and more effective than clarithromycin is 88{\%} from a payer's perspective and 84{\%} from the societal perspective. Gemifloxacin was more cost-effective, improving AECB outcomes and producing substantial cost offsets compared with clarithromycin.",
keywords = "Bronchitis, Clarithromycin, Costs, Drug comparisons, Drugs, clinical effectiveness, Economics, Gemifloxacin, Macrolides, Outcomes",
author = "Michael Halpern and Palmer, {Cynthia S.} and Marc Zodet and Jeff Kirsch",
year = "2002",
month = "7",
day = "15",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "59",
pages = "1357--1365",
journal = "American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy",
issn = "1079-2082",
publisher = "American Society of Health-Systems Pharmacy",
number = "14",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of gemifloxacin

T2 - Results from the GLOBE study

AU - Halpern, Michael

AU - Palmer, Cynthia S.

AU - Zodet, Marc

AU - Kirsch, Jeff

PY - 2002/7/15

Y1 - 2002/7/15

N2 - The cost-effectiveness of treatment with oral gemifloxacin versus oral clarithromycin for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB) was evaluated. Economic outcomes were assessed for the Gemifloxacin Long-term Outcomes in Bronchitis Exacerbations study. This prospective double-blind, controlled, health outcomes study compared health, economic, and clinical outcomes after randomized treatment with either oral gemifloxacin or oral clarithromycin for AECB. Base case analysis was performed from the third-party payer's perspective and considered the costs of respiratory tract infection-related medical care. Analysis from the societal perspective also included costs of lost productivity. Treatment effectiveness was measured as the proportion of patients without recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment following resolution of the initial AECB. Data sources included the outcomes study itself and standard U.S. cost sources. Compared with clarithromycin, gemifloxacin treatment resulted in significantly more patients without AECB recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment after 26 weeks (73.8% versus 63.8%, p = 0.024). Fewer patients receiving gemifloxacin were hospitalized (5 of 214 patients versus 14 of 224 patients, p = 0.059), and they had less time off from usual activities (8.3 days versus 10.1 days). The mean direct cost per patient receiving gemifloxacin was $127 less than with clarithromycin ($247 versus $374, respectively); mean total costs (direct plus indirect) per patient were $329 less for patients receiving gemifloxacin ($1413 versus $1742). Gemifloxacin dominated clarithromycin in cost-effectiveness analysis. Bootstrap analysis indicated that the probability of gemifloxacin being both cost saving and more effective than clarithromycin is 88% from a payer's perspective and 84% from the societal perspective. Gemifloxacin was more cost-effective, improving AECB outcomes and producing substantial cost offsets compared with clarithromycin.

AB - The cost-effectiveness of treatment with oral gemifloxacin versus oral clarithromycin for acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB) was evaluated. Economic outcomes were assessed for the Gemifloxacin Long-term Outcomes in Bronchitis Exacerbations study. This prospective double-blind, controlled, health outcomes study compared health, economic, and clinical outcomes after randomized treatment with either oral gemifloxacin or oral clarithromycin for AECB. Base case analysis was performed from the third-party payer's perspective and considered the costs of respiratory tract infection-related medical care. Analysis from the societal perspective also included costs of lost productivity. Treatment effectiveness was measured as the proportion of patients without recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment following resolution of the initial AECB. Data sources included the outcomes study itself and standard U.S. cost sources. Compared with clarithromycin, gemifloxacin treatment resulted in significantly more patients without AECB recurrence requiring antimicrobial treatment after 26 weeks (73.8% versus 63.8%, p = 0.024). Fewer patients receiving gemifloxacin were hospitalized (5 of 214 patients versus 14 of 224 patients, p = 0.059), and they had less time off from usual activities (8.3 days versus 10.1 days). The mean direct cost per patient receiving gemifloxacin was $127 less than with clarithromycin ($247 versus $374, respectively); mean total costs (direct plus indirect) per patient were $329 less for patients receiving gemifloxacin ($1413 versus $1742). Gemifloxacin dominated clarithromycin in cost-effectiveness analysis. Bootstrap analysis indicated that the probability of gemifloxacin being both cost saving and more effective than clarithromycin is 88% from a payer's perspective and 84% from the societal perspective. Gemifloxacin was more cost-effective, improving AECB outcomes and producing substantial cost offsets compared with clarithromycin.

KW - Bronchitis

KW - Clarithromycin

KW - Costs

KW - Drug comparisons

KW - Drugs, clinical effectiveness

KW - Economics

KW - Gemifloxacin

KW - Macrolides

KW - Outcomes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037100559&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037100559&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 59

SP - 1357

EP - 1365

JO - American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

JF - American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

SN - 1079-2082

IS - 14

ER -