PUK14 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Mirabegron Versus Tolterodine Extended Release in the Treatment of Patients With Overactive Bladder in the United States

jipan xie,z y zhou,c n bui,yongliang yan,g de,m c runken,eric q wu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.1452
IF: 5.156
2012-01-01
Value in Health
Abstract:To assess the cost-effectiveness associated with mirabegron versus tolterodine extended release (ER) for treating overactive bladder (OAB) from a third party payer perspective in the US. A Markov model was developed to follow a cohort of OAB patients treated with mirabegron versus tolterodine ER for a one-year period. Three health states were defined - normal: number of incontinence (I)=0 and number of micturitions (M)<8; mild-to-moderate: 06 and M≥16. Evidence from a 12-week clinical trial, comparing mirabegron 50 mg to tolterodine ER 4 mg, was used to estimate the initial health state distribution, transition probabilities, and discontinuation rates. Only direct costs were considered, including drug costs (2012 USD) and costs for OAB complications (2011 USD), with inputs from ReadyPrice® and published literature. Effectiveness was defined as the proportion of patients in normal state. Results were expressed as the incremental cost per patient in normal state at the end of one-year. A subgroup analysis was conducted for patients who discontinued prior antimuscarinic therapy due to insufficient efficacy at baseline. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. For a one-year horizon, the incremental cost per patient in normal state associated with mirabegron vs. tolterodine ER was $5,580 (total cost of $4,707 and $4,420 and effectiveness of 17.72% and 12.57% for mirabegron and tolterodine ER respectively) for the total population. For the subgroup, the incremental cost per patient in normal state was $2,734 (total cost of $4,664 and $4,451 and effectiveness of 12.76% and 4.96% for mirabegron and tolterodine ER respectively). Results were robust to the model assumptions and inputs, while drug cost was the main driver of the model. Mirabegron is expected to be a cost-effective option compared to tolterodine ER, particularly in patients who discontinued prior antimuscarinic therapy due to insufficient efficacy.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?