OnabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of overactive bladder: a cost-effectiveness analysis versus best supportive care in England and Wales

Nick Freemantle (), Kristin Khalaf, Clara Loveman, Sanja Stanisic, Dmitry Gultyaev, Johanna Lister and Marcus Drake
Additional contact information
Nick Freemantle: UCL Medical School
Kristin Khalaf: Allergan Inc.
Clara Loveman: Allergan Holdings Ltd., Marlow International
Sanja Stanisic: LA-SER ANALYTICA
Dmitry Gultyaev: LA-SER ANALYTICA
Johanna Lister: LA-SER ANALYTICA
Marcus Drake: University of Bristol

The European Journal of Health Economics, 2016, vol. 17, issue 7, No 12, 921 pages

Abstract: Abstract The cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX®) 100 U + best supportive care (BSC) was compared with BSC alone in the management of idiopathic overactive bladder in adult patients who are not adequately managed with anticholinergics. BSC included incontinence pads and, for a proportion of patients, anticholinergics and/or occasional clean intermittent catheterisation. A five-state Markov model was used to estimate total costs and outcomes over a 10-year period. The cohort was based on data from two placebo-controlled trials and a long-term extension study of onabotulinumtoxinA. After discontinuation of initial treatment, a proportion of patients progressed to downstream sacral nerve stimulation (SNS). Cost and resource use was estimated from a National Health Service perspective in England and Wales using relevant reference sources for 2012 or 2013. Results showed that onabotulinumtoxinA was associated with lower costs and greater health benefits than BSC in the base case, with probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicating an 89 % probability that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio would fall below £20,000. OnabotulinumtoxinA remained dominant over BSC in all but two scenarios tested; it was also economically dominant when compared directly with SNS therapy. In conclusion, onabotulinumtoxinA appears to be a cost-effective treatment for overactive bladder compared with BSC alone.

Keywords: Overactive bladder; OnabotulinumtoxinA; Incontinence; Cost-effectiveness (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I11 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-015-0737-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:17:y:2016:i:7:d:10.1007_s10198-015-0737-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10198/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10198-015-0737-2

Access Statistics for this article

The European Journal of Health Economics is currently edited by J.-M.G.v.d. Schulenburg

More articles in The European Journal of Health Economics from Springer, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().