PharmacoEconomics

, Volume 24, Issue 8, pp 727–742 | Cite as

Cost Effectiveness of Leukotriene Modifiers in Adults with Asthma

Review Article

Abstract

Asthma is the most common chronic disorder in industrialised nations, with over 100 million people worldwide affected. Leukotrienes are chemical mediators released from mast cells, eosinophils and basophils. They cause bronchoconstriction, an increase in mucous secretions and activation of inflammatory cells. Leukotriene modifiers are a long-term controller medication used to treat asthma. They function by selectively competing for the leukotriene receptor sites, thereby blocking their action, or by inhibiting 5-lipoxygenase and thus preventing leukotriene formation. Both current US and Global Initiative for Asthma treatment guidelines have clarified the role of leukotriene modifiers in the management of asthma in adults and children. Leukotriene modifiers have two distinct roles: to replace inhaled corticosteroids in milder asthma and as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids in more severe asthma.

While efficacy is certainly an important issue, economic considerations are also important in a disease such as asthma where there are a variety of treatment options and the severity of the disease varies widely. This review examined published studies to better understand the cost effectiveness of leukotriene modifiers in adults with asthma. Fifteen articles were found that analysed the cost effectiveness of leukotriene modifiers, with almost all performed in the US. The vast majority of the studies were retrospective claims analyses, but three randomised controlled trials incorporating economic outcomes have been reported. The majority of the articles found that for both monotherapy in mild persistent asthma and add-on therapy in moderate persistent asthma, leukotriene modifiers were less cost effective than inhaled corticosteroids with or without a long-acting ß2-adrenoceptor agonist. However, these results must be viewed cautiously as in several studies there were methodological issues such as comparisons of unequal treatment groups or inappropriate use of leukotriene modifiers in stepwise treatment.

Keywords

Fluticasone Fluticasone Propionate Salmeterol Montelukast Zafirlukast 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author received no funding for the preparation of this article and has no relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. 1.
    Rochester C, Noble S. Choosing treatment options for patients with asthma. Drug Topics 1997; 141: 74–83Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma. Bethesda (MD): National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 1997 July. NIH publication no.: 97-4051Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma: update on selected topics 2002. Bethesda (MD): National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; 2002 Jun. NIH publication no.: 02-5075Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    O’Byrne P. Global Initiative for Asthma. Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ginasthma.com/Guidelineitem.asp??l1=2&12=1&intId=37 [Accessed 2006 Apr]Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Asthma prevalence, health care use and mortality, 2002. US Department of Health and Human Services. New asthma estimates: tracking prevalence, health care, and mortality [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/hestats/asthma/asthma.htm [Accessed 2002 Jul 16]Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Weiss KB, Sullivan SD. The health economics of asthma and rhinitis. I: assessing the economic impact. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001; 107: 3–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pappas G, Hadden W, Kozak L, et al. Potentially avoidable hospitalizations: inequalities in rates between US socioeconomic groups. Am J Public Health 1997; 87: 811–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Global initiative for asthma. Bethesda (MD): NIH, 1995 Jul. pPublication no.: 95-3659Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Podell R. National guidelines for the management of asthma in adults. Am Fam Physician 1992; 46: 1189–96PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Doerschug KC, Peterson MW, Dayton CS, et al. Asthma guidelines: an assessment of physician understanding and practice. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999; 159: 1735–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Critical Therapeutics. Home page [online]. Available from URL: http://www.criticaltherapeutics.com [Accessed 2006 Apr 25]Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fish JE, Kemp JP, Lockey RF, et al. Zafirlukast for symptomatic mild-to-moderate asthma: a 13-week multiticenter study. The Zafirlukast Trialists Group. Clin Ther 1997; 19: 675–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nathan RA, Bernstein JA, Bielory L, et al. Zafirlukast improves asthma symptoms and quality of life in patients with moderate reversible airflow obstruction. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998; 102: 935–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Adkins JC, Brogden RN. Zafirlukast: a review ofits pharmacology and therapeutic potential in the management of asthma. Drugs 1998; 55: 121–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Suissa S, Dennis R, Ernst P, et al. Effectiveness of the leukotriene receptor antagonist zafirlukast for mild-to-moderate asthma: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1997; 126: 177–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Edelman JM, Turpin JA, Bronsky EA, et al. Oral montelukast compared with inhaled salmeterol to prevent exercise-induced bronchoconstriction: a randomised, double-blind trial. Ann Int Med 2000; 132: 99–104Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Malmstrom K, Rodriguez-Gomez G, Guerra J, et al. Oral montelukast, inhaled beclometasone, and placebo for chronic asthma: a randomized, controlled trial. Montelukast/Beclometasone Study Group. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130: 487–95PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bleecker ER, Welch MJ, Weinstein SF, et al. Low-dose inhaled fluticasone propionate versus oral zafirlukast in the treatment of persistent asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2000; 105: 1123–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Laviolette M, Malmstrom K, Lu S, et al. Montelukast added to inhaled beclometasone in treatment of asthma. Montelukas/Beclometasone Additivity Group. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999; 160: 1862–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fish JE, Israel E, Murray JJ, et al. Salmeterol powder provides significantly better benefit than montelukast in asthmatic patients receiving concomitant inhaled corticosteroid therapy. Chest 2001; 120: 423–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim KT, Ginchansky EJ, Friedman BF, et al. Fluticasone propionate versus zafirlukast: effect in patients previously receiving inhaled corticosteroid therapy. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2000; 85: 398–406PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stempel DA, Pinto L, Stanford RH. The risk of hospitalization in patients with asthma switched from an inhaled corticosteroid to a leukotriene receptor antagonist. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2002; 110: 39–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lofdahl CG, Reiss TF, Leff JA, et al. Randomised, placebo controlled trial of effect of a leukotriene receptor antagonist, montelukast, on tapering inhaled corticosteroids in asthmatic patients. BMJ 1999; 319: 87–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ducharme F, Schwartz Z, Hicks G, et al. Addition of anti-leukotriene agents to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004; (2): CD003133Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Busse W, Nelson H, Wolfe J, et al. Comparison of inhaled salmeterol and oral zafirlukast in patients with asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999; 103: 1075–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ram F, Cates C, Ducharme F. Long-acting 132-agonists versus anti-leukotrienes as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005; (1): CD003137Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sterk PJ, Buist SA, Woolcock AJ. The message from the world asthma meeting. Eur Respir J 1999; 14: 1435–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Menendez R, Stanford RH, Edwards L, et al. Cost-efficacy analysis of fluticasone propionate versus zafirlukast in patients with persistent asthma. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19: 865–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    O’Connor RD, Nelson H, Borker R, et al. Cost effectiveness of fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol versus fluticasone propionate plus montelukast in the treatment of persistent asthma. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22: 815–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sheth K, Borker R, Emmett A, et al. Cost-effectiveness comparison of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus montelukast in the treatment of adults with persistent asthma. Pharmacoeconomics 2002; 20: 909–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Armstrong EP, Malone DC. Auticasoneis associated with lower asthma-related costs than leukotriene modifiers in a real-world analysis. Pharmacotherapy 2002; 22: 1117–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bukstein DA, Henk HJ, Luskin AT. A comparison of asthma-related expenditures for patients started on montelukast versus fluticasone propionate as monotherapy. Clin Ther 2001; 23: 1589–600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Klingman D, Bielory L, Wang Y, et al. Asthma outcome changes associated with use of the leukotriene-receptor antagonist zafirlukast. Manag Care Interface 2001; 14: 62–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    O’Connor RD, O’Donnell JC, Pinto LA, et al. Two-year retrospective economic evaluation of three dual-controller therapies used in the treatment of asthma. Chest 2002; 121: 1028–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    O’Connor RD, Stanford R, Crim C, et al. Effect of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol in a single device, fluticasone propionate, and montelukast on overall asthma control, exacerbations, and costs. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2004; 93: 581–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Orsini L, Limpa-Amara S, Crown WH, et al. Asthma hospitalization risk and costs for patients treated with fluticasone propionate vs rnontelukast. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2004; 92: 523–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pathak DS, Davis EA, Stanford RH. Economic impact of asthma therapy with fluticasone propionate, montelukast, or zafirlukast in a managed care population. Pharmacotherapy 2002; 22: 166–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Price DB, Ben-Joseph RH, Zhang Q. Changes in asthma drug therapy costs for patients receiving chronic montelukast therapy in the UK. Respir Med 2001; 95: 83–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stempel DA, Mauskopf J, McLaughlin T, et al. Comparison of asthma costs in patients starting fluticasone propionate compared to patients starting montelukast. Respir Med 2001; 95: 227–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Stempel DA, Meyer JW, Stanford RH, et al. One-year claims analysis comparing inhaled fluticasone propionate with zafirlukast for the treatment of asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2001; 107: 94–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Stempel DA, O’Donnell JC, Meyer JW. Inhaled corticosteroids plus salmeterol or montelukast: effects on resource utilization and costs. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2002; 109: 433–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Halpern MT, Khan ZM, Stanford RH, et al. Asthma: resource use and costs for inhaled corticosteroid vs leukotriene modifier treatment: a meta-analysis. J Fam Pract 2003; 52: 382–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hill SR, Mitchell AS, Henry DA. Problems with the interpretation of pharmacoeconomic analyses: a review of submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. JAMA 2000; 283: 2116–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Snyder L, Blanc PD, Katz PP, et al. Leukotriene modifier use and asthma severity: how is a new medication being used by adults with asthma? Arch Intern Med 2004; 164: 617–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Drazen JM, Boccuzzi SJ, Wogan J, et al. Adherence to prescribed treatment for asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000 161: A402Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Stoloff SW, Stempel DA, Meyer J, et al. Improved refill persistence with fluticasone propionate and salmeterol in a single inhaler compared with other controller therapies. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004; 113: 245–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Reinus JF, Persky S, Burkiewicz JS, et al. Severe liver injury after treatment with the leukotriene receptor antagonist zafirlukast. Ann Intern Med 2000; 133: 964–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wechsler ME, Pauwels R, Drazen JM. Leukotriene modifiers and Churg-Strauss syndrome: adverse effect or response to corticosteroid withdrawal? Drug Saf 1999; 21: 241–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Sivri A, Coplu L. Effect of the long-term use of inhaled corticosteroids on bone mineral density in asthmatic women. Respirology 2001; 6: 1314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Israel E, Banerjee TR, Fitzmaurice GM, et al. Effects of inhaled glucocorticoids on bone density in premenopausal women. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 941–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tug T, Kamanli A, Tug E. Effects of long-term inhaled steroid use on bone mineral density in asthma patients. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 2001; 11: 300–2PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Elmstahl S, Ekstrom H, Galvard H, et al. Is there an association between inhaled corticosteroids and bone density in postmenopausal women? J Allergy Clin Immunol 2003; 111: 91–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Halpern MT, Schmier JK, Van Kerkhove MD, et al. Impact of long-term inhaled corticosteroid therapy on bone mineral density: results of a meta-analysis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2004; 92: 201–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Stempel DA. Economic analysis of asthma practices. Am J Manag Care 2000; 6: S930–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Hendeles L, Segal R. Pharmacoeconomic studies of asthma controller drugs: marketing gimmick or icing on the cake? Pharmacotherapy 2002; 22: 131–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Chen Y, Dales R, Tang M, et al. Obesity may increase the incidence of asthma in women but not in men: longitudinal observations from the Canadian National Population Health Surveys. Am J Epidemiol 2002; 155: 198–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Guerra S, Sherrill DL, Bobadilla A, et al. The relation of body mass index to asthma, chronic bronchitis, and emphysema. Chest 2002; 122: 1256–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Shaheen SO, Sterne JA, Montgomery SM, et al. Birth weight, body mass index and asthma in young adults. Thorax 1999; 54: 396–402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kuo A, Craig TJ. A retrospective study of risk factors for repeated admissions for asthma in a rural/suburban university hospital. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2001; 101 Suppl. 5: 14–7Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hessel P A, Mitchell I, Tough S, et al. Risk factors for death from asthma. Prairie Provinces Asthma Study Group. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1999; 83: 362–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Pharmacy Practice, College of PharmacyUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations