Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of travoprost versus latanoprost and timolol in the treatment of advanced glaucoma in five European countries: Austria, France, Germany, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom

Journal of Medical Economics

Volumn 8, Issue 67-84, 2005, Pages 67-84

  Le Pen, Claude ^a,b   Ligier, Marie ^b   Berdeaux, Gilles ^c  

^a Aremis   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DAUPHINE   (France)

^c Alcon France ^*  (France)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; Glaucoma; Prostaglandin analogue

Indexed keywords

BETA ADRENERGIC RECEPTOR BLOCKING AGENT; LATANOPROST; PROSTAGLANDIN DERIVATIVE; TIMOLOL; TRAVOPROST;

AUSTRIA; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; EUROPE; FRANCE; GERMANY; GLAUCOMA; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; NETHERLANDS; PROBABILITY; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT;

EID: 17444428581     PISSN: 1369698X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Quigley HA. Number of people with glaucoma worldwide. British Journal of Opthalmology 1996; 80: 389-393.
2. Infeld D, O'Shea J. Glaucoma: diagnosis and management. Postgraduate Medicine 1998; 74: 709-715.
3. Hennis A, Wu SY, Nemesure B et al. Barbados Eye Studies Group. Hypertension, diabetes, and longitudinal changes in intraocular pressure. Ophthalmology 2003; 110: 908-914.
4. Dielemans I, de Jong PT, Stolk R et al. Primary open-angle glaucoma, intraocular pressure, and diabetes mellitus in the general elderly population. The Rotterdam Study. Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 1271-1275.
5. Hulsman CA, Houwing-Duistermaat JJ, Van Duijn CM et al. Family score as an indicator of genetic risk of primary open-angle glaucoma. Archives of Ophthalmology 2002; 120: 1726-1731.
6. Racette L, Wilson MR, Zangwill LM et al. Primary open-angle glaucoma in blacks: a review. Survey of Ophthalmology 2003; 48: 295-313.
7. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Archives of Ophthalmology 2002: 120: 714-720; discussion 829-830.
8. The AGIS Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 7. The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. American Journal of Ophthalmology 2000; 130: 429-440.
9. Rota-Bartelink AM, Pitt A, Story I. Influence of diurnal variation on the intraocular pressure measurement of treated primary open-angle glaucoma during office hours. Journal of Glaucoma 1996; 5: 410-415.
10. Mao LK, Stewart WC, Shields MB. Correlation between intraocular pressure control and progressive glaucomatous damage in primary open-angle glaucoma. American Journal of Ophthalmology 1991; 111: 51-55.
11. Kass MA, Kolker AE, Becker B. Prognostic factors in glaucomatous visual field loss. Archives of Ophthalmology 1976; 94: 1274-1276.
12. Asrani S, Zeimer R, Wilensky J et al. Large diurnal fluctuations in intraocular pressure are an independent risk factor in patients with glaucoma. Journal of Glaucoma 2000; 9: 134-142.
13. Gonzalez I, Pablo LE, Pueyo M et al. Assessment of diurnal tensional curve in early glaucoma damage. International Ophthalmology 1996-1997; 20: 113-115.
14. Zeimer RC, Wilensky JT, Gieser DK et al. Association between intra-ocular pressure peaks and progression of visual field loss. Ophthalmology 1991; 98: 64-69.
15. Stewart WC, Chorac RP, Hunt HH et al. Factors associated with visual loss in patients with advanced glaucomatous changes in the optic nerve head. American Journal of Ophthalmology 1993; 116: 176-181.
16. Odberg T, Jakobsen JE, Hultgren SJ et al. The impact of glaucoma on the quality of life of patients in Norway. II. Patient response correlated to objective data. Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavia 2001; 79: 121-124.
17. Odberg T, Jakobsen JE, Hultgren SJ et al. The impact of glaucoma on the quality of life of patients in Norway. I. Results from a self-administered questionnaire. Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavia 2001; 79: 116-120.
18. Weinstein MC. The cost of prevention. Journal of General Internal Medicine 1990; 5 (5 Suppl.): S89-92.
19. Oostenbrink JB, Rutten-van Molken MP, Sluyter-Opdenoordt TS. Resource use and costs of patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a one-year study based on retrospective chart review in the Netherlands. Journal of Glaucoma 2001; 10: 184-191.
20. Calissendorff BM. Costs of medical and surgical treatment of glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavia 2001; 79: 286-288.
21. Jonsson B, Krieglstein G. Primary Open-angle Glaucoma. Differences in international treatment patterns and costs. Oxford, UK: Isis Medical Media, 1999.
22. Coyle A, Drummond M. The economic burden of glaucoma in the UK - the need for a farsighted policy. PharmacoEconomics 1995; 7: 484-489.
23. Alward WL. Medical management of glaucoma. New England Journal of Medicine 1998; 339: 1298-1307.
24. Balfour AB, Adkins JC. Management of primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: the potential role of latanoprost. Manage Health Outcomes 1998; 4 (2): 101-112.
25. Medeiros FA, Pinheiro A, Moura FC et al. Intraocular pressure fluctuations in medical versus surgically treated glaucomatous patients. Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics 2002; 18: 489-498.
26. EMEA, http://www.emea.eu.int/humandocs/Humans/EPAR/travatan/travatan.htm. [Accessed 14 February 2005.]
27. Netland PA, Landry T, Sullivan K et al. The travoprost study group. Travoprost compared with latanoprost and timolol in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. American Journal of Ophthalmology 2001; 132: 472-484.
28. Goldberg I, Cunha-Vaz J, Jakobsen JE et al. The International Travoprost Study Group. Comparison of topical travoprost eye drops given once daily and timolol 0.5% given twice daily in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Journal of Glaucoma 2001; 10: 414-422.
29. Halpern MT, Covert D, Robin AL. Projected impact of Travoprost versus both Timolol and Latanoprost on visual field deficit progression and costs among black glaucoma subjects. Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society 2002; 100: 109-117.
30. Nordmann JP, LePen C, Lilliu H et al. Estimating the long-term visual field consequences of average daily intra-ocular pressure and variance: a clinical trial comparing timolol, latanoprost and travoprost. Clinical Drug Investigation 2003; 23: 431-438.
31. Hjelmgren J, Berggren F, Andersson D. Health economics guidelines - similarities, differences and some implications. Values in Health 2001; 4: 225-250.
32. Fiscella RG, Geller JL, Gryz LL et al. Cost considerations of medical therapy for glaucoma. American Journal of Ophthalmology 1999; 128: 426-433.
33. Denis P, Lafuma A, Berdeaux G. Medical predictive factors of glaucoma treatment costs. Journal of Glaucoma 2004; 13: 283-290.
34. Jonsson B, Krieglstein G. Primary Open-angle Glaucoma. Differences in international treatment patterns and costs. Oxford, UK: Isis Medical Media, 1999.
35. Kobelt G, Jonsson L. Modeling cost of treatment with new topical treatments for glaucoma. Results from France and the United Kingdom. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 1999; 15: 207-219.
36. Kobelt G, Jonsson L, Gerdtham U et al. Direct costs of glaucoma management following initiation of medical therapy. A simulation model based on an observational study of glaucoma treatment in Germany. Graefes Archives Clinical Experiment Ophthalmology 1998; 236: 811-821.
37. Kobelt-Nguyen G, Gerdtham UG, Alm A. Costs of treating primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a retrospective, observational two-year chart review of newly diagnosed patients in Sweden and the United States. Journal of Glaucoma 1998; 7: 95-104.
38. General Practice Research Database. http://www.gprd.com/. [Accessed 15 Febraury 2005.]
39. Deschaseaux-Voinet C, Lafuma A, Berdeaux G. Cost and effectiveness of brinzolamide versus dorzolamide in current practice: an analysis based on the UK-GPRD data base. Journal of Medical Economics 2003; 6: 69-78.
40. British National Formulary. http://www.bnf.org/. [Accessed 14 February 2005.]
41. Tarif für allgemeine Vertragsfachärzte, 1.1.2002, Wiener Gebietskrankenkasse. Vienna, Austria, http://www.wgkk.at. [Accessed 14 February 2005.]
42. Arzneitaxe, Oesterreichischer Apothekerverlag, 2003, Vienna, Austria. http://www.apoverlag.at. [Accessed 14 February 2005.]
43. Leistungsorientierte Krankenanstaltenfinanzierung -LKF-, Modell 2003, Bundesministerium für soziale Sicherheit und Generationen. Vienna, Austria. http://www.bmgf.gv.at. [Accessed 14 February 2005.]
44. Gebühren- Handbuch 2000. Kommentar für Ärzte. EBM. GOÄ. Maximilian G. Broglie, u. a, Inter Medical, Wiesbaden, Taschenbuch [3922264018].
45. Kassenärztlichen Vereinigungen, 2000.
46. Rote Liste. Editio Cantor Verlag fur Medizin und Naturwissenschaften GmbH, 2003.
47. 30-Z-Index, May 2003.
48. COTG (Centraal Orgaan Tarieven Gezondheidszorg), Tarieflijst Instellingen, 1999.
49. LINH (Landelijk Informatie Netwerk Huisatsenzorg) jaarrapport Kompas, 1998.
50. http://www.ctg-zaio.nl/.
51. Sharma S, Brown GC, Brown MM et al. Converting visual acuity to utilities. Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology 2000; 35: 267-272.
52. Brown MM, Brown GC, Sharma S et al. Utility values associated with blindness in an adult population. British Journal of Ophthalmology 2001; 85: 327-331.
53. Denis P, Lafuma A, Berdeaux G. Medical outcome of glaucoma therapy from a nationwide representative survey. Clinical Drug Investigation 2004; 24: 343-352.
54. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London, UK: NICE, 2004.
55. Collège des économistes de la santé. Rapport d'une commission d'experts présidée par le Pr Emile Lévy, sous l'égide du collège des économistes de la santé. Recommandations de bonnes pratiques des méthodes d'évaluation économique des stratégies thérapeutiques. Paris, 1997.
56. German recommendations for health care economic evaluation studies. Revised version of the Hannover consensus. Hannover consensus group. Medizinische Klinik 2000; 95: 52-55. [In German.]
57. The Health Insurance Council. Dutch guidelines for pharmacoeconomics research. CURE/cuo.228/2, 1999. Amstelveen.
58. The AGIS investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 12. Baseline risk factors for sustained loss of visual field and visual accuity in patients with advanced glaucoma. American Journal of Ophthalmology 2002; 134: 499-512.
59. Nordmann JP, Auzaneau N, Ricard S, Berdeaux G. Vision related quality of life and topical glaucoma treatment side effects. Health and Quality of Life Outcome 2003; 1: 1-9.
60. Denis P, Berdeaux G. Variations nycthémérales de la pression intra-oculaire et décisions thérapeutiques Interprétation des résultats d'essais cliniques a partir d'un modèle statistique [Circadian rhythm variations of intra-ocular pressure and therapeutic decisions: interpretation of clinical results based on statistical model]. Journal Français d'Ophtalmologie 2004; 27: 2S39-2S43.