Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31908505›Full record

ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2019

North American cost analysis of brand name versus generic drugs for the treatment of glaucoma.

Monali S Malvankar-Mehta, Lucy Feng, Cindy Ml Hutnik

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Monali S Malvankar-MehtaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7875-7386
Lucy FengSchool of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo, Kitchener, Ontario N2G 2B2, Canada.
Cindy Ml HutnikDepartment of Ophthalmology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada.
Western University · CAUniversity of Waterloo · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccording to the World Health Organization, glaucoma is a leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. By 2020, 80 million people will be affected by glaucoma in the world, which represents a significant financial burden to society. Glaucoma medications alone make up 38-52% of the total direct cost. The purpose of this research is to conduct a cost-minimization analysis to evaluate brand-name medications versus generic medications for treating glaucoma patients.

methodsThe per-bottle cost (in Canadian dollars) of brand-name drugs for glaucoma was obtained from the wholesaler, McKesson Canada, and, for generic drugs, from the Ontario Drug Benefit (ODB) Formulary. Further, a wastage adjustment fee, a pharmacy mark-up, and an ODB dispensing fee ($CAD) was added to the cost of both brand and generic. Previously published frequencies of medication prescription were utilized to calculate the average annual cost for each class of brand and generic. For each medication class and for mono-, bi-, and tri-drug therapy, the cost differential between brands and generics over a six-year period was computed and analyzed from third-party payer perspective.

resultsIn descending order, the average annual government-funded health care system costs were: combination drugs such as Cosopt

conclusionBrand-name drugs are relatively more expensive than their generic counterparts, with variable cost differentials depending on drug class.

Indexed as

branded drugscost analysisgeneric drugsglaucomaopen-angle

Identifiers

PMID31908505
PMCPMC6924989
OpenAlexW2995955619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.