title: Ondansetron: a cost-effective advance in anti-emetic therapy.
abstract: A cost-effectiveness analysis is one form of full economic evaluation where drug acquisition costs and the costs that are incurred as a result of using a particular treatment are assessed together with clinical efficacy. This paper reviews two such studies. One of the studies was a prospective randomised cost-effectiveness study which compared ondansetron (8 mg i.v. 0, 4 and 8 h following chemotherapy) with metoclopramide (3 mg/kg i.v. followed by an infusion of 0.5 mg/kg/h for 8 h) over the first 24 h following chemotherapy in hospitalised patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. This study showed that the cost per successfully treated patient (defined in this study as having < or = 1 emetic episode and no adverse events) for these 2 treatments were approximately equal: ondansetron pounds 95 and metoclopramide pounds 92. The second study was an economic evaluation based on data collected over a 5-day period following cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy given on an outpatient basis for the treatment of breast cancer. Patients received an intravenous dose of 16 mg dexamethasone with either 8 mg ondansetron or 60 mg metoclopramide intravenously before chemotherapy followed by oral dosing with 8 mg ondansetron or 20 mg metoclopramide 3 times daily for 5 days. The costs per successfully treated patient (defined in this study as no vomiting or retching episodes and no anti-emetic-related adverse events during the 5-day period) were comparable: ondansetron pounds 184 and metoclopramide pounds 160. A recent study has established that ondansetron (8 mg) given orally twice daily is as effective as the same dose given 3 times a day. A sensitivity analysis using the cost of an ondansetron twice daily regimen showed that ondansetron is more cost-effective than metoclopramide (pounds 133 vs. pounds 160). These cost effectiveness studies have shown that ondansetron is at least as cost-effective as metoclopramide and simplified ondansetron dosing schedules render ondansetron more cost-effective. These full economic evaluations illustrate that drug acquisition costs can be a misleading guide to the economic impact of antiemetics.
authors.affiliation: Glaxo Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Cox
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Hirsch
mesh_terms: D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000188:drug therapy*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003520:Cyclophosphamide / Q000009:adverse effects; D003907:Dexamethasone / Q000008:administration & dosage; D004334:Drug Administration Schedule; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008787:Metoclopramide / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics*; D017294:Ondansetron / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics*; D010865:Pilot Projects; D011292:Premedication; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011788:Quality of Life; D014839:Vomiting / Q000191:economics / Q000517:prevention & control*
chemical_list: D017294:Ondansetron; D003907:Dexamethasone; D003520:Cyclophosphamide; D008787:Metoclopramide