HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password

This Article Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Article Archive Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (13) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Highland, K. B. Articles by Simpson, K. N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Highland, K. B. Articles by Simpson, K. N.

Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension^*

A Preliminary Decision Analysis

^* From the Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Allergy, and Clinical Immunology (Drs. Highland and Strange), College of Pharmacy Practice (Dr. Mazur), and College of Pharmacy (Dr. Simpson), Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.

Correspondence to: Kristin B. Highland, MD, Assistant Professor of Medicine Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Allergy, and Clinical Immunology, 96 Jonathan Lucas St, Suite 812 CSB, Charleston, SC 29425; e-mail: highlakb{at}musc.edu

Study objective: New therapies for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) improve functional status, quality of life (QOL), and survival. Clinicians must chose between very different therapies without the availability of comparison studies. We constructed a "virtual" clinical trial to help inform these treatment choices.

Design: We compare key outcomes related to survival, costs, and QOL using a Markov-type decision model to estimate the expected outcomes and costs for PAH patients treated for 1 year with bosentan and treprostinil compared to patients treated with epoprostenol, as well as patients treated with bosentan compared to those treated with treprostinil. The allowed transitions in the model were between World Health Organization functional class I to IV and death. Transition probabilities were based on observed transitions for bosentan. Treatment effect was estimated using 6-min walk data for treprostinil and epoprostenol. Utilities were calculated from estimated EuroQol health states. Cost was estimated from average wholesale price and Medicare reimbursement data. The effects of changing values of input variables on the key outcomes were calculated

Results: Treatment with bosentan compared to treatment with either epoprostenol or treprostinil was less costly and resulted in a greater gain in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Conversely, treprostinil was significantly more expensive than epoprostenol, without an appreciable gain in QALYs. These findings were not substantially affected by the reasonable adjustments of transition probabilities, utility values, or tachyphylaxis to epoprostenol.

Conclusion: Treatment with bosentan is more cost-effective than treatment with either treprostinil or epoprostenol. In addition, a net improvement in quality-adjusted survival may be expected.

Key Words: bosentan • decision analysis • epoprostenol • pulmonary arterial hypertension • treprostinil

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. E Baker and R. H. Hockman Inhaled Iloprost in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Ann. Pharmacother., July 1, 2005; 39(7): 1265 - 1274. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]