Comparative pharmacoeconomic analysis of the use of Bonviva® (ibandronat) to prevent fractures in postmenopausal osteoporosis

Abstract

Objective: to make a pharmacoeconomic analysis of the use of oral (a 150-mg tablet once a month) and injectable (a solution for intravenous bolus injection of 3 mg in 3 ml once every 3 months) ibandronate in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis (OP). Material and methods. The cost minimization method was used to calculate differences in the cost of using oral ibandronate, alendronate, and strontium ranelate in patients with postmenopausal OP for a year. The budgetary impact of administration of intravenous bisphosphonates (ibandronate and zoledronic acid) was analyzed in patients with OP in a hospital context. A model calculator based on the Microsoft Excel software was applied to estimate how the expenditures of a health care facility were changing when different shares of drugs (ibandronate and zoledronic acid) were used in purchase patterns. The cost of therapy with bisphosphonates (ibandronate and zoledronic acid), concomitant therapy (calcium and vitamin D), expendable materials, and therapy for adverse reactions (ARs) due to the use of bisphophonates was considered in terms of the incidence of these ARs. Results. Among the oral drugs, ibandronate is more economically sound than alendronate: the difference in annual treatment costs was 7090.02 and 7334.31 rubles per patient, respectively, in favor of ibandronate. The inpatient use of only intravenous ibandronate versus the real administration practice determined on the basis of the data of the Farmekspert Marketing Researches Center on purchases in the hospital segment (30% for ibandronate and 70% for zoledronic acid) considerably reduces the expenditures of a hospital, the saving will be 185416.06 rubles per year (if injections will be made in 20 patients). With 100% use of ibandronate, one can additionally provide 39 inpatients with bisphosphonate injections without additional expenditures.