title: Cost-effectiveness analysis of antimuscarinics in the treatment of patients with overactive bladder in Spain: a decision-tree model.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Fesoterodine, a new once daily antimuscarinic, has proven to be an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment in patients with overactive bladder (OAB). To date, no analysis has evaluated the economic costs and benefits associated with fesoterodine, compared to antimuscarinics in Spain. The purpose of this analysis was to assess the economic value of OAB treatment with fesoterodine relative to extended release tolterodine and solifenacin, from the societal perspective.
  
  
  METHODS
  The economic model was based on data from two 12-week, randomized, double-blind, and multicenter trials comparing fesoterodine and tolterodine extended released (ER). Treatment response rates for solifenacin were extracted from the published literature. Discontinuation and efficacy were based on the results of a 12-week multinational randomized clinical trial extrapolated to 52 weeks. Changes in health related quality of life were assessed with the King's Health Questionnaire, which was transformed into preference-based utility values. Medical costs included (expressed in € 2010) were antimuscarinics, physician visits, laboratory tests, incontinence pads and the costs of OAB-related comorbidities, fractures, skin infections, urinary tract infections, depression, and nursing home admissions associated with incontinence. Time lost from work was also considered. Univariate sensitivity analyses were also performed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  At week 12, continents accounted for 50.6%, 40.6% and 47.2% of patients in the fesoterodine, tolterodine, and solifenacin groups, respectively. By week 52, the projected proportions of patients remaining on therapy were 33.1%, 26.5% and 30.8%, respectively. The projected quality- adjusted life years (QALY) gain (compared to baseline) over the 52-week simulation period were 0.01014, 0.00846 and 0.00957, respectively. The overall treatment cost was estimated at €1,937, €2,089 and €1,960 for fesoterodine, tolterodine and solifenacin, respectively. Therefore, treatment with fesoterodine resulted in similar overall costs and greater QALY gain than treatment with either tolterodine or solifenacin. Sensitivity analysis showed that these results were robust to all changes performed.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results of this economic analysis suggest that fesoterodine is a cost-effective alternative to tolterodine and solifenacin for the treatment of patients with OAB in Spain. Fesoterodine provides additional health benefits while maintain a similar level of costs being a cost-effective treatment strategy from a societal perspective.
authors: Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario La Fe, Valencia, Spain. arlandissal@gva.es
authors: Salvador
authors: S
authors: Arlandis-Guzman
authors: Carlos
authors: C
authors: Errando-Smet
authors: Jeffrey
authors: J
authors: Trocio
authors: Daniel
authors: D
authors: Arumi
authors: Javier
authors: J
authors: Rejas
references: Eur Urol. 2002 Jun;41(6):588-95
references: 12074774
references: Psychosomatics. 2006 Mar-Apr;47(2):147-51
references: 16508027
references: Actas Urol Esp. 2009 Feb;33(2):159-66
references: 19418840
references: Clin Ther. 2004 Mar;26(3):431-8
references: 15110136
references: Age Ageing. 1997 Sep;26(5):367-74
references: 9351481
references: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006 Sep;17(5):512-9
references: 16625311
references: Eur Urol. 2006 Dec;50(6):1306-14; discussion 1314-5
references: 17049716
references: BJU Int. 2001 Jun;87(9):760-6
references: 11412210
references: Value Health. 2004 Jul-Aug;7(4):455-63
references: 15449637
references: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2009;88(6):693-9
references: 19384673
references: Urology. 2004 Dec;64(6 Suppl 1):2-6
references: 15621220
references: Curr Med Res Opin. 2008 Aug;24(8):2173-9
references: 18565239
references: Eur Urol. 2008 Sep;54(3):543-62
references: 18599186
references: Int J Urol. 2005 May;12(5):456-64
references: 15948744
references: J Urol. 2007 Dec;178(6):2488-94
references: 17937959
references: Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997 Dec;104(12):1374-9
references: 9422015
references: BJU Int. 2006 Jan;97(1):96-100
references: 16336336
references: BJU Int. 2003 Feb;91(3):190-5
references: 12581002
references: Eur Urol. 2007 Oct;52(4):1204-12
references: 17651893
references: Health Technol Assess. 2002;6(29):1-146
references: 12654239
references: Eur Urol. 2005 Mar;47(3):376-84
references: 15716204
references: Br J Health Psychol. 2008 May;13(Pt 2):343-59
references: 17535499
references: Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2006 Mar;4(1):14-24
references: 16730617
references: Gac Sanit. 2010 Jan-Feb;24(1):13-9
references: 19646795
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Dec;104(6):1327-34
references: 15572498
references: Med Clin (Barc). 1989 May 20;92(19):721-3
references: 2755250
references: Arch Esp Urol. 2005 Mar;58(2):131-8
references: 15847270
references: BJU Int. 2008 Jul;102(1):56-61
references: 18564231
references: Gac Sanit. 2002 Jul-Aug;16(4):334-43
references: 12113733
references: Gac Sanit. 2010 Mar-Apr;24(2):154-70
references: 19959258
references: Eur Urol. 2006 Nov;50(5):1050-7
references: 16753252
references: Am J Manag Care. 2000 Jul;6(11 Suppl):S574-9
references: 11183900
references: Urology. 2003 Jan;61(1):37-49
references: 12559262
references: BJU Int. 2010 May;105(9):1276-82
references: 19912188
references: Med Care. 2004 Sep;42(9):851-9
references: 15319610
references: Am J Manag Care. 2002 Dec;8(19 Suppl):S598-607
references: 12516954
references: Am J Manag Care. 2000 Jul;6(11 Suppl):S580-90
references: 11183901
references: World J Urol. 2003 May;20(6):327-36
references: 12811491
references: Pharmacotherapy. 2006 Dec;26(12):1694-702
references: 17125433
references: Eur Urol. 2005 Sep;48(3):483-7
references: 16005564
references: Int J Clin Pract. 2005 Aug;59(8):931-7
references: 16033615
references: BJU Int. 2010 Aug;106(4):506-14
references: 20132203
references: Pharmacotherapy. 2005 Apr;25(4):511-9
references: 15977912
references: Med Decis Making. 2008 Jan-Feb;28(1):113-26
references: 17641139
references: Neurourol Urodyn. 1998;17(6):599-611
references: 9829424
references: Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Jan;22(1):41-8
references: 16393429