Open AccessCost‐effectiveness analysis of solifenacin flexible dosing in patients with overactive bladder symptoms in four Nordic countries
Author(s) -
MILSOM IAN,
AXELSEN SUSANNE,
KULSENGHANSEN SIGURD,
MATTIASSON ANDERS,
NILSSON CARL GUSTAF,
WICKSTRØM JANNIE
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
acta obstetricia et gynecologica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.401
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1600-0412
pISSN - 0001-6349
DOI - 10.1080/00016340902849738
Subject(s) - tolterodine , solifenacin , overactive bladder , medicine , dosing , urology , placebo , urinary incontinence , cost effectiveness , randomized controlled trial , risk analysis (engineering) , alternative medicine , pathology
Objective . The purpose of the present analysis was to analyze and compare the cost‐effectiveness of solifenacin flexible dosing (5–10 mg) with tolterodine 4 mg sustained release (SR) or placebo (assumed to be comparable to no treatment) for patients with overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms. Design . A decision‐analytic model was constructed. Methods . Costs and effects were evaluated for the three treatment options in a one‐year timeframe. Costs included were treatment costs, cost of pad use, and patients productivity loss based on data from the Nordic countries. Sample . Results from two randomized controlled trials were used as input data in the cost‐effectiveness analysis. Main outcome measures . Quality adjusted life years and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio. Results . Solifenacin flexible dosing was more effective with respect to reducing OAB symptoms compared to both placebo and tolterodine 4 mg. Treatment with both solifenacin and tolterodine was more costly compared to placebo, but treatment with solifenacin was a less costly alternative compared to tolterodine 4 mg SR. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the conclusions were robust. Conclusion . Solifenacin flexible dosing was a cost‐effective treatment alternative compared to tolterodine 4 mg SR.