A cost-minimisation analysis comparing moxifloxacin with levofloxacin plus ceftriaxone for the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia in Germany: Results from the MOTIV trial

Current Medical Research and Opinion

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1279-1284

  Lloyd, Adam ^a   Holman, A ^a   Evers, T ^b  

^a Fourth Hurdle Consulting Ltd   (United Kingdom)

^b BAYER PHARMA AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Ceftriaxone; Community acquired infections; Costs and cost analysis; Levofloxacin; Moxifloxacin; Pneumonia

Indexed keywords

CEFTRIAXONE; LEVOFLOXACIN; MOXIFLOXACIN;

ADULT; AGED; ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE LUNG DISEASE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMMUNITY ACQUIRED PNEUMONIA; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST MINIMIZATION ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; GERMANY; HOSPITAL COST; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

ADMINISTRATION, ORAL; AZA COMPOUNDS; CEFTRIAXONE; COMMUNITY-ACQUIRED INFECTIONS; COST OF ILLNESS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; DRUG ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE; DRUG THERAPY, COMBINATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMANS; INFUSIONS, INTRAVENOUS; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; OFLOXACIN; PNEUMONIA, BACTERIAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUINOLINES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 44349120547     PISSN: 03007995     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1185/030079908X280400     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Niederman MS, McCombs JS, Unger AN, et al. The cost of treating community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Ther 1998;20:820-37
2. Bartlett JG, Mundy LM. Community-acquired pneumonia. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1618-24
3. Bauer TT, Welte T, Ernen C, et al. Cost analyses of community-acquired pneumonia from the hospital perspective. Chest 2005;128:2238-46
4. Koch H, Landen H, Stauch K. Once-daily moxifloxacin therapy for community-acquired pneumonia in general practice: evidence from a post-marketing surveillance study of 1467 patients. Clin Drug Investig 2004;24:441-8
5. Finch R, Schurmann D, Collins O. Randomised controlled trial of sequential intravenous (i.v.) and oral moxifloxacin compared with sequential i.v. and oral co-amoxiclav with or without clarithromycin in patients with community-acquired pneumonia requiring initial parenteral treatment. Chemotherapy 2002;46:1746-54
6. Katz E, Larsen LS, Fogarty CM, et al. Safety and efficacy of sequential i.v. to p.o. moxifloxacin versus conventional combination therapies for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in patients requiring initial i.v. therapy. J Emerg Med 2004;27:395-405
7. Welte T, Petermann W, Schurmann D, et al. Treatment with sequential intravenous or oral moxifloxacin was associated with faster clinical improvement than was standard therapy for hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia who received initial parenteral therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:1697-705
8. Morganroth J, Dimarco JP, Anzueto A, et al. A randomized trial comparing the cardiac rhythm safety of moxifloxacin vs levofloxacin in elderly patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia. Chest 2005;128:3398-406
9. Anzueto A, Niederman MS, Pearle J, et al. Community-Acquired Pneumonia Recovery in the Elderly (CAPRIE): efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin therapy versus that of levofloxacin therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2006;42:73-81
10. Barth J, Stauch K, Landen H. Efficacy and tolerability of sequential intravenous/oral moxifloxacin therapy in pneumonia: results of the first post-marketing surveillance study within travenous moxifloxacin in hospital practice. Clin Drug Investig 2005;25:691-700
11. Read RC, Torres A, Lode H. Clinical cure rates and infection types in the Moxifloxacin Treatment IV (MOTIV) study in hospitalised patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Clin Infect Dis 2008; in press
12. Fine MJ, Auble TE, Yealy DM, et al. A prediction rule to identify low-risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia. N Engl J Med 1997;336:243-50
13. Rote Liste service GmbH. Rote Liste. Available from http://www.rote- liste.de/ [Last accessed Oct 7 2007]
14. Wirtz C. Harmonised Indices of Consumer Prices: November 2006. Statistics in Focus: Economy and Finance. Eurostat, 2006
15. DGK-NT 2005 Full Costs (German Hospital Federation fee scale), 2005
16. Briggs AH, Wonderling DE, Mooney CZ. Pulling cost-effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health Econ 1997;6:327-40
17. Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products. Points to consider on switching between superiority and non-inferiority. London, United Kingdom: European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products; 2000. Report No.: CPMP/EWP/482/99
18. Drummond MF, Becker DL, Hux M, et al. An economic evaluation of sequential i.v./po moxifloxacin therapy compared to i.v./po co-amoxiclav with or without clarithromycin in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. Chest 2003,124:526-35
19. Martin M, Quilici S, File T, et al. Cost-effectiveness of empirical prescribing of antimicrobials in community-acquired pneumonia in three countries in the presence of resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother 2007;59:977-89
20. Woodhead M, Blasi F, Ewig S, et al. Guidelines for the management of adult lower respiratory tract infections. Eur Respir J 2005;26:1138-80
21. Fallpauschalen-Katalog G-DRG Version 2006, 2006