The cost of treating allergic rhinitis
- 144 Downloads
Allergic rhinitis is a high-cost, high-prevalence disease. In the year 2000, over $6 billion was spent on prescription medications to treat this illness. Although it is not associated with severe morbidity and mortality, allergic rhinitis has a major effect on the quality of life of the more than 50 million Americans with this illness. Intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) and nonsedating antihistamines (NSAH) are the most common prescription medications for this disease. INCS are recognized as the most effective treatment regimen for chronic symptoms. NSAH are perceived as important in the treatment of patients with mild disease, or as add-on therapy to INCS. When the literature is reviewed, the INCS produce the greatest decrease in total nasal symptom scores, the largest effect size, when compared with NSAH. Both classes of medications produce similar effects on concurrent allergic conjunctivitis. Further recent studies indicate that the INCS are also superior when used on an as-needed basis, and that there is little clinical benefit from the addition of loratadine to intranasal fluticasone. INCS have lower average wholesale prices as a class than the NSAH. Since the INCS are the dominant medication in efficacy studies and cost less, cost-effectiveness studies always favor intranasal corticosteroids.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References and Recommended Reading
- 3.Stempel DA, Thomas M: Treatment of allergic rhinitis: An evidence-based evaluation of nasal corticosteroids versus nonsedating antihistamines. Am J Man Care 1998, 4:89–96. This is a systematic review of controlled trials comparing NSAH with INCS. The results significantly favor the INCS for all symptom parameters.Google Scholar
- 5.Dykewicz MS, Fineman S: Executive summary of joint task force practice parameters on diagnosis and management of rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1998, 81:463–468. A detailed presentation of important therapeutic questions and answers of the clinically relevant management issues in the treatment of allergic rhinitis.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Ross RN: Hay fever: An expensive disease for American business. Am J Man Care 1996, 2:285–290.Google Scholar
- 16.Stempel DA, Thomas M: Treatment of allergic rhinitis: an evidence-based evaluation of nasal corticosteroids versus nonsedating antihistamines. Am J Man Care 1998, 4:89–96.Google Scholar
- 17.Weiner JM, Abramson MJ, Puy RM: Intranasal corticosteroids versus oral H1 receptor antagonists in allergic rhinitis: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1998, 17:1624–1629. This is a meta-analysis of the comparative literature assessing the treatment of allergic rhinitis with either NSAH or INCS. Although the criteria for inclusion vary from the study by Stempel and Thomas, the results are similar.Google Scholar
- 21.Ratner PH, van Baval JH, Martin BG, et al.: A comparison of the efficacy of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray and loratadine, alone and in combination, for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. J Fam Pract 1998, 47:118–125. This study addresses the clinical and economical question of whether there is a benefit from the addition of loratadine to fluticasone in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. This study makes the argument that no further clinical benefit is gained from the addition of this nonsedating antihistamine.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 23.Kaszuba SM, Baroody FM, deTineo M: Superiority of an intranasal corticosteroid compared with an oral antihistamine in the as-needed treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Arch Intern Med 2001, 161:2581–2587. This recent study compares treatment options for patients with mild allergic rhinitis and reflects how patients frequently treat their allergic rhinitis. In this study, as-needed therapy with fluticasone was clinically and significantly superior to as-needed treatment with loratadine.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar