ArticlePharmacoEconomics2002
Cost effectiveness of esomeprazole compared with omeprazole in the acute treatment of patients with reflux oesophagitis in the UK.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficiency of potent gastric acid inhibition.Drugs · 2005Review
- The economic burden of supportive care of cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2004Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical studies have demonstrated that esomeprazole is superior to omeprazole for the acute treatment of reflux oesophagitis.
objectiveTo compare the cost effectiveness of esomeprazole 40mg once daily with omeprazole 20mg once daily in patients with reflux oesophagitis.
methodsPooled data were used from three 8-week clinical trials comparing the efficacy and safety of esomeprazole 40mg once daily and omeprazole 20mg once daily for the acute treatment of reflux oesophagitis. A simple decision analysis model, using UK direct medical costs, compared the cost effectiveness of the two treatments. Healing probabilities derived from the clinical studies using the Life Table method were used to estimate the effectiveness and cost of treating 100 patients with reflux oesophagitis. Patient management assumptions were based on a clinical management survey involving 25 UK physicians. PERSPECTIVE: UK National Health Service.
resultsAfter 4 weeks' therapy, the Life Table estimated the oesophageal healing rate to be 77.7% in esomeprazole 40mg once-daily recipients (n = 2446), compared with 67.6% in omeprazole 20mg once-daily recipients (n = 2431; p < 0.001). The corresponding values after 8 weeks' treatment were 93.4% and 86.2%, respectively (p < 0.001). The model predicted that when considering healing probabilities over 8 weeks, esomeprazole 40mg once daily produced total direct cost savings of pound1290 (14%) when compared with omeprazole 20mg once daily. When considering the cost of treating patients who had failed treatment (defined as patient not healed as assessed by endoscopy) after 8 weeks, the cost advantage for esomeprazole was even greater.
conclusionEsomeprazole 40mg once daily is cost effective compared with omeprazole 20mg once daily in the acute treatment of patients with reflux oesophagitis; esomeprazole provides greater effectiveness at a lower cost.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.