IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i8p4816-d794741.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Evaluation of Nemonoxacin, Moxifloxacin and Levofloxacin in the Treatment of Early Community-Acquired Pneumonia with Possible Pulmonary Tuberculosis

Author

Listed:
  • Mingye Zhao

    (School of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China
    Center for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China
    These authors have contributed equally to this work.)

  • Zhuoyuan Chi

    (School of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China
    Center for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China
    These authors have contributed equally to this work.)

  • Xingming Pan

    (School of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China
    Center for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China)

  • Yue Yin

    (School of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China
    Center for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China)

  • Wenxi Tang

    (School of International Pharmaceutical Business, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China
    Center for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing 211198, China)

Abstract

The Chinese community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) Diagnosis and Treatment Guideline 2020 recommends quinolone antibiotics as the initial empirical treatment options for CAP. However, patients with pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) are often misdiagnosed with CAP because of the similarity of symptoms. Moxifloxacin and levofloxacin have inhibitory effects on mycobacterium tuberculosis as compared with nemonoxacin, resulting in delayed diagnosis of PTB. Hence, the aim of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of nemonoxacin, moxifloxacin and levofloxacin in the treatment of CAP and to determine the value of these treatments in the differential diagnosis of PTB. Primary efficacy data were collected from phase II-III randomized, double-blind, multi-center clinical trials comparing nemonoxacin to moxifloxacin (CTR20130195) and nemonoxacin to levofloxacin (CTR20140439) for the treatment of Chinese CAP patients. A decision tree was constructed to compare the cost-utility among three groups under the perspective of healthcare system. The threshold for willingness to pay (WTP) is 1–3 times GDP per capita ($11,174–33,521). Scenarios including efficacy and cost for CAP patients with a total of 6% undifferentiated PTB. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to test the robustness of basic analysis. The costs of nemonoxacin, moxifloxacin, and levofloxacin were $903.72, $1053.59, and $1212.06 and the outcomes were 188.7, 188.8, and 188.5 quality-adjusted life days (QALD), respectively. Nemonoxacin and moxifloxacin were dominant compared with levofloxacin, and the ICER of moxifloxacin compared with nemonoxacin was $551,643, which was much greater than WTP; therefore, nemonoxacin was the most cost-effective option. Regarding patients with PTB who were misdiagnosed with CAP, taking nemonoxacin could save $290.76 and $205.51 when compared with moxifloxacin and levofloxacin and resulted in a gain of 2.83 QALDs. Our findings demonstrate that nemonoxacin is the more economical compared with moxifloxacin and levofloxacin, and non-fluoroquinolone antibiotics are cost-saving and utility-increasing compared to fluoroquinolones in the differential diagnosis of PTB, which can help healthcare system in making optimal policies and help clinicians in the medication of patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Mingye Zhao & Zhuoyuan Chi & Xingming Pan & Yue Yin & Wenxi Tang, 2022. "Economic Evaluation of Nemonoxacin, Moxifloxacin and Levofloxacin in the Treatment of Early Community-Acquired Pneumonia with Possible Pulmonary Tuberculosis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-14, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:8:p:4816-:d:794741
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4816/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4816/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:8:p:4816-:d:794741. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.