s-1743 has been researched along with levocetirizine* in 2 studies
2 other study(ies) available for s-1743 and levocetirizine
Article | Year |
---|---|
Assessing the chiral switch: approval and use of single-enantiomer drugs, 2001 to 2011.
A "chiral switch" occurs in the pharmaceutical market when a drug made up of 2 enantiomer forms is replaced with a purified single-enantiomer version, often in the context of a patent expiration. We studied the prevalence of chiral switching in the United States over the past decade, including trends in use of, and expenditures on, these products in Medicaid.. Retrospective analysis.. We used US Adopted Names prefixes (lev/levo/ar/es/dex/dextro) to identify all single-enantiomer drugs approved from 2001 to 2011. From publicly available US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval documents, we extracted the characteristics of the pivotal premarket trials for the single enantiomers. Specifically, we evaluated whether the single enantiomer was directly compared with the precursor racemic drug and whether there was evidence of superior efficacy. We used quarterly drug expenditure data from each state Medicaid program to chart trends in use of, and spending on, the single-enantiomer products and their racemic precursors during the study period.. From 2001 to 2011, the FDA approved 9 single-enantiomer products: dexlansoprazole, levoleucovorin, levocetirizine, armodafinil, arformoterol, eszopiclone, escitalopram, dexmethylphenidate, and esomeprazole. Of those 9 drugs, 3 had at least 1 pre-approval randomized trial that included the racemic precursor as a direct comparator, but there was no evidence of superiority of the single enantiomer over the racemic at comparable doses. Between 2001 and 2011, US Medicaid programs spent approximately $6.3 billion on these 9 single-enantiomer drugs.. Recently approved single-enantiomer drugs showed no evidence of superior efficacy over the older racemic precursors in the pivotal trials leading to their approval, and in a majority of cases, they were not directly compared. Topics: Antidotes; Azabicyclo Compounds; Benzhydryl Compounds; Bronchodilator Agents; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Cetirizine; Dexlansoprazole; Dexmethylphenidate Hydrochloride; Drug Approval; Drug Prescriptions; Drugs, Generic; Esomeprazole; Eszopiclone; Ethanolamines; Formoterol Fumarate; Histamine H1 Antagonists, Non-Sedating; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Levoleucovorin; Medicaid; Modafinil; Patents as Topic; Piperazines; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Retrospective Studies; Stereoisomerism; United States; United States Food and Drug Administration; Wakefulness-Promoting Agents | 2014 |
Patented drug extension strategies on healthcare spending: a cost-evaluation analysis.
Drug manufacturers have developed "evergreening" strategies to compete with generic medication after patent termination. These include marketing of slightly modified follow-on drugs. We aimed to estimate the financial impact of these drugs on overall healthcare costs and also to examine the impact of listing these drugs in hospital restrictive drug formularies (RDFs) on the healthcare system as a whole ("spillover effect").. We used hospital and community pharmacy invoice office data in the Swiss canton of Geneva to calculate utilisation of eight follow-on drugs in defined daily doses between 2000 and 2008. "Extra costs" were calculated for three different scenarios assuming replacement with the corresponding generic equivalent for prescriptions of (1) all brand (i.e., initially patented) drugs, (2) all follow-on drugs, or (3) brand and follow-on drugs. To examine the financial spillover effect we calculated a monthly follow-on drug market share in defined daily doses for medications prescribed by hospital physicians but dispensed in community pharmacies, in comparison to drugs prescribed by non-hospital physicians in the community. Estimated "extra costs" over the study period were €15.9 (95% CI 15.5; 16.2) million for scenario 1, €14.4 (95% CI 14.1; 14.7) million for scenario 2, and €30.3 (95% CI 29.8; 30.8) million for scenario 3. The impact of strictly switching all patients using proton-pump inhibitors to esomeprazole at admission resulted in a spillover "extra cost" of €330,300 (95% CI 276,100; 383,800), whereas strictly switching to generic cetirizine resulted in savings of €7,700 (95% CI 4,100; 11,100). Overall we estimated that the RDF resulted in "extra costs" of €503,600 (95% CI 444,500; 563,100).. Evergreening strategies have been successful in maintaining market share in Geneva, offsetting competition by generics and cost containment policies. Hospitals may be contributing to increased overall healthcare costs by listing follow-on drugs in their RDF. Therefore, healthcare providers and policy makers should be aware of the impact of evergreening strategies. Topics: Cetirizine; Costs and Cost Analysis; Esomeprazole; Female; Formularies, Hospital as Topic; Health Care Costs; Humans; Male; Marketing; Middle Aged; Nonprescription Drugs; Patents as Topic; Prescription Drugs; Residence Characteristics; Time Factors | 2013 |