Economic impact of using fesoterodine for the treatment of overactive bladder with urge urinary incontinence in a vulnerable elderly population in the United States.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the costs of treating overactive bladder (OAB) with fesoterodine compared to no OAB pharmacotherapy among vulnerable elderly from the US payer perspective.


METHODS
A decision analytic cost model was developed to estimate the 52-week costs of a cohort of vulnerable elderly with OAB initiating treatment with fesoterodine or no OAB pharmacotherapy. Vulnerable elderly OAB patients were defined as those aged ≥65 years with self-reported urge urinary incontinence (UUI) symptoms for ≥3 months, 2-15 UUI episodes/day, and at risk of deteriorating health by a score of ≥3 on the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES)-13. Patients were evaluated for fesoterodine treatment response (defined as no UUI episodes) and persistence at weeks 12, 26, and 52. The model included a hypothetical health plan with 100,000 elderly members. A total of 7096 vulnerable elderly subjects were identified as the model target population based on the percentage of vulnerable elderly and annual prevalence of OAB among vulnerable elderly. OAB-related costs included fesoterodine drug acquisition costs, healthcare resource use (inpatient hospitalization, outpatient visits, and physician office visits), and OAB-related co-morbidities (falls/fractures, urinary tract infections, depression, and nursing home admissions). All costs were inflated to 2013 US$ using the medical care component of the consumer price index (CPI).


RESULTS
When 7096 vulnerable elderly OAB patients were treated with fesoterodine, US healthcare payers could save $11,463,981 per year, or $1616 per patient vs no OAB pharmacotherapy. Univariate one-way sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of the findings and showed results were most sensitive to changes in fesoterodine efficacy followed by annual costs of inpatient hospitalization.


CONCLUSIONS
From a US payer perspective, treating vulnerable elderly OAB patients with fesoterodine was cost-saving compared to no OAB pharmacotherapy.
a a Pharmerit International , Bethesda , MD , USA.
Lei
L
Qin
b b Pfizer Inc , Groton , CT , USA.
Xuemei
X
Luo
c c Pfizer Inc , New York , NY , USA.
Kelly H
KH
Zou
a a Pharmerit International , Bethesda , MD , USA.
Sonya J
SJ
Snedecor
D000368:Aged; D001559:Benzhydryl Compounds / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D017046:Cost Savings; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D005260:Female; D015577:Geriatric Assessment; D006760:Hospitalization / Q000191:economics; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D014481:United States; D053201:Urinary Bladder, Overactive / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000191:economics*; D053202:Urinary Incontinence, Urge / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000191:economics*; D064804:Urological Agents / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D035862:Vulnerable Populations
D001559:Benzhydryl Compounds; D064804:Urological Agents; C526675:fesoterodine
Cost analysis; Fesoterodine; Overactive bladder; Urgency urinary incontinence