Purpose: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT), when continued for 3 years, is the only diseasemodifying treatment for AR and asthma. Adherence is a key to ensure effectiveness, and poor adherence is a contraindication for AIT. The objective of this study was to evaluate realworld adherence to AIT with subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) and sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) preparations in patients allergic to grass or tree pollen. The impact of AIT on the consumption of asthma and rhinitis medication was also analyzed. Patients and Methods: In this retrospective cohort analysis of a German longitudinal prescription database, the adherence of a grass and tree pollen allergoid was examined and compared to two sublingual AIT tablets/drops. Patients receiving grass or tree allergen-specific immunotherapy prescriptions were compared with non-AIT patients receiving symptomatic allergic rhinitis (AR) and asthma prescriptions. The study endpoints included therapy adherence, AR progression, and asthma progression. Multivariate regression analyses were used to estimate the effects of SCIT or SLIT, adjusting for variables related to demographics and prescriptions. Results: SCIT adherence was 60.1-61.8% at 2 years and 35.0-37.5% at 3 years for the two allergens. SLIT adherence was distinctly lower (29.5-36.5% and 9.6-18.2%, respectively). Adherence in children was higher compared to adolescents or adults. All products were highly efficacious at reducing symptomatic AR medication consumption. SCIT also reduced asthma medication use for both allergens, whereas for SLIT these results were significant only for grasses but not trees. Conclusion: Subcutaneous AIT in a real-world setting achieved significantly higher adherence rates compared to sublingual administration. SCIT reduced the use of rhinitis and asthma medication significantly for both allergens, while SLIT reduced the use of rhinitis medication for both allergens and the use of asthma medication for grasses only.
Medical care for stroke patients with AF is associated with higher costs compared with those without AF; this is explained mainly by confounding factors and driven essentially by a significant difference in acute hospitalization costs.
Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a frequent chronic disease that seriously affects patients' well-being and quality of life (QOL). 1 European data found an average prevalence of 23% throughout Europe, ranging from 17% in Italy to 29% in Belgium, with an average of 21% in Germany. 2 House dust mites sensitization is a high-risk factor in respiratory allergies, that is, allergic rhinitis and/or asthma. 3 Allergic rhinitis is strongly associated with asthma. 4,5
BackgroundIncremental cost-effectiveness
and cost-utility analyses [health economic evaluations (HEEs)] of vaccines are routinely considered in decision making on immunization in various industrialized countries. While guidelines advocating more standardization of such HEEs (mainly for curative drugs) exist, several immunization-specific aspects (e.g. indirect effects or discounting approach) are still a subject of debate within the scientific community.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to develop a consensus framework for HEEs of vaccines to support the development of national guidelines in Europe.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify prevailing issues related to HEEs of vaccines. Furthermore, European experts in the field of health economics and immunization decision making were nominated and asked to select relevant aspects for discussion. Based on this, a workshop was held with these experts. Aspects on ‘mathematical modelling’, ‘health economics’ and ‘decision making’ were debated in group-work sessions (GWS) to formulate recommendations and/or—if applicable—to state ‘pros’ and ‘contras’.ResultsA total of 13 different aspects were identified for modelling and HEE: model selection, time horizon of models, natural disease history, measures of vaccine-induced protection, duration of vaccine-induced protection, indirect effects apart from herd protection, target population, model calibration and validation, handling uncertainty, discounting, health-related quality of life, cost components, and perspectives. For decision making, there were four aspects regarding the purpose and the integration of HEEs of vaccines in decision making as well as the variation of parameters within uncertainty analyses and the reporting of results from HEEs. For each aspect, background information and an expert consensus were formulated.ConclusionsThere was consensus that when HEEs are used to prioritize healthcare funding, this should be done in a consistent way across all interventions, including vaccines. However, proper evaluation of vaccines implies using tools that are not commonly used for therapeutic drugs. Due to the complexity of and uncertainties around vaccination, transparency in the documentation of HEEs and during subsequent decision making is essential.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.