Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 9, 2026
08:30
Glaucoma-inducing Procedure in an In Vivo Rat Model and Whole-mount Retina Preparation
Published on: March 12, 2016
An adherence based cost-consequence model comparing bimatoprost 0.01% to bimatoprost 0.03%.
William B Wong1, Vaishali D Patel, Jonathan W Kowalski
1Allergan Inc., Irvine, CA 92612-1599, USA. wong_william@allergan.com
Current Medical Research and Opinion
|July 20, 2013
Summary
Improved adherence with bimatoprost 0.01% may lead to better long-term economic and clinical outcomes in glaucoma patients compared to bimatoprost 0.03%. This suggests potential cost savings and improved patient health over time.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology
- Health Economics
- Pharmacoeconomics
Background:
- Glaucoma treatment requires long-term medication adherence for optimal outcomes.
- Bimatoprost 0.01% and 0.03% are used for glaucoma, with adherence impacting efficacy.
- Understanding cost-effectiveness of different adherence levels is crucial for healthcare payers.
Purpose of the Study:
- To estimate long-term direct medical costs and clinical consequences of improved adherence with bimatoprost 0.01% versus bimatoprost 0.03% in glaucoma treatment.
- To compare the economic and clinical impact of varying adherence rates for two bimatoprost concentrations.
Main Methods:
- A cost-consequence model was developed from a US healthcare payer perspective.
- The model incorporated three adherence levels and four glaucoma health states (mild to blindness).
- Clinical efficacy (IOP reduction) and adherence rates were derived from clinical trials and pharmacy claims data.
Main Results:
- Improved adherence with bimatoprost 0.01% showed slightly better clinical outcomes (less progression, blindness).
- While initially more costly, bimatoprost 0.01% became less expensive over a lifetime horizon, saving an estimated $3433.
- Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings, favoring bimatoprost 0.01%.
Conclusions:
- Greater medication adherence with bimatoprost 0.01% may lead to improved economic and patient outcomes compared to bimatoprost 0.03%.
- This modeling suggests bimatoprost 0.01% could be a more cost-effective option for glaucoma management with higher adherence.
Related Concept Videos
01:27Open Angle Glaucoma: Treatment
In open-angle glaucoma, the iridocorneal angle remains open, but the trabecular meshwork becomes stiff, slowing down the outflow of aqueous humor. This causes a buildup of aqueous humor in the anterior chamber, leading to a sudden increase in intraocular pressure. The treatment for open-angle glaucoma focuses on reducing the elevated intraocular pressure by either decreasing the secretion of aqueous humor or increasing its outflow.
Drugs such as carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, α2- and...
Drugs such as carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, α2- and...
01:23Ophthalmic Drug Delivery Systems
Ophthalmic drug delivery faces major limitations due to poor absorption across the corneal membrane. This process is primarily driven by diffusion and is influenced by two main factors: the physicochemical properties of the drug and tear drainage. Most ophthalmic drugs, such as pilocarpine, epinephrine, atropine, and local anesthetics, are weak bases. They are typically formulated at an acidic pH to enhance chemical stability. However, this leads to high ionization, reducing their ability to...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...