Cost-effectiveness of Fesoterodine for Overactive Bladder in Spain
Author Information
Author(s): Arlandis-Guzman Salvador, Errando-Smet Carlos, Trocio Jeffrey, Arumi Daniel, Rejas Javier
Primary Institution: Hospital Universitario La Fe, Valencia, Spain
Hypothesis
Is fesoterodine a cost-effective treatment for overactive bladder compared to other antimuscarinics in Spain?
Conclusion
Fesoterodine is a cost-effective alternative to tolterodine and solifenacin for treating overactive bladder in Spain.
Supporting Evidence
- Fesoterodine showed a higher proportion of patients remaining continent at week 12 and 52 compared to tolterodine and solifenacin.
- The overall treatment costs were similar among fesoterodine, tolterodine, and solifenacin.
- Fesoterodine provided a greater QALY gain than the other treatments evaluated.
Takeaway
Fesoterodine helps people with bladder issues and costs about the same as other treatments, but works better.
Methodology
A decision-tree model was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of fesoterodine compared to tolterodine and solifenacin based on clinical trial data.
Potential Biases
Potential bias in the data for solifenacin as it was not included in the clinical trials.
Limitations
The analysis did not include out-of-pocket expenses and was based on deterministic modeling without statistical comparisons.
Participant Demographics
Participants included both men and women aged 18 and older with overactive bladder symptoms.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website