A COST VARIATION ANALYSIS OF ORAL AND TOPICAL ANTIFUNGAL AGENTS AVAILABLE FOR THE TREATMENT OF SUPERFICIAL FUNGAL INFECTIONS IN INDIA – AN INSIGHT TO THE RISING TREATMENT COST

pawan gupta; RAJANISH KUMAR SANKDIA; Shashi Marko; Lily Dubey

doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2022.v15i7.45467

Authors

pawan gupta Department of Dermatology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0402-390X
RAJANISH KUMAR SANKDIA Department of Pharmacology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6071-9875
Shashi Marko Department of Pharmacology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0111-4520
Lily Dubey Department of Pharmacology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0402-390X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2022.v15i7.45467

Keywords:

Cost variation analysis, antifungal agents, Superficial fungal infections, pharmacoeconomics

Abstract

Objective: This study objective was to evaluate the cost variation among systemic and topical antifungal drugs used for superficial fungal infection which is available in India.

Methods: This cross-sectional study assembled the cost of individual antifungal agents belonging to the same strength and dosage forms being manufactured by different pharmaceutical companies in India were documented in Indian Rupees (INR). The study tools were the latest edition January–April 2022 of Current Index of Medical Specialties and 1 mg online application. The study parameters were minimum and maximum cost, difference in maximum and minimum cost, and percentage cost variation.

Results: A total of 14 antifungal agents, including seven orals and seven topical, were analyzed. Fluconazole 50 mg tablet is manufactured by 67 companies and has the maximum cost variation of 2695.8%. This is followed by capsule itraconazole 100 mg (cost variation – 1900%) and is manufactured by largest number of companies, that is, 1039. Luliconazole 30 g cream has highest cost ratio of 13.75 and cost variation of 1275% which was manufactured by largest number of companies, that is, 211. There was a linear relationship seen in linear regression analysis between number of manufacturing companies and percentage cost variation (p=0.0204).

Conclusion: A rationale prescription should always consider the most economical treatment depending on the patient. Adequate information to medical practitioner about cost variation of drugs and strict actions and coordination of regulatory authorities will overcome the problem of huge cost variation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

pawan gupta, Department of Dermatology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India.

senior resident

RAJANISH KUMAR SANKDIA, Department of Pharmacology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmacology

Shashi Marko, Department of Pharmacology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Associate Professor, Department of pharmacology

Lily Dubey, Department of Pharmacology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmacology

References

Havlickova B, Czaika VA, Friedrich M. Epidemiological trends in skin mycoses worldwide. Mycoses 2008;51:2-15.

Buil JB, Meijer EF, Denning DW, Verweij PE, Meis JF. Burden of serious fungal infections in the Netherlands. Mycoses 2020;63:625-31.

Kelly BP. Superficial fungal infections. Pediatr Rev 2012;33:e22-37.

Das S, Goyal R, Bhattacharya SN. Laboratory‐based epidemiological study of superficial fungal infections. J Dermatol 2007;34:248-53.

Kurle DG, Bedrekar MS, Jadhav AY, Sarkate PV, Kanase HR. Pharmacoeconomic study of topical dermatological products available in Indian market. Saudi J Med Pharm Sci 2018;4:687-92.

Eaddy MT, Cook CL, O’ Day K, Burch SP, Cantrell CR. How patient cost-sharing trends affect adherence and outcomes: A literature review. P T 2012;37:45-55.

Das SC, Mandal M, Mandal SC. A critical study of availability and cost variation between different brands: Impact on access to medicines. Indian J Pharm Sci 2007;69:158-63.

Waldo DR. Outpatient prescription drug spending by the medicare population. Health Care Financ Rev 1989;9:83-9.

Bootman JL, Townsend RJ, McGhan WF. Principles of Pharmacoeconomics. 2nd ed. Cincinnati OH: Harvey Whitney Books Co; 1996.

YPGAPB V. Analysis of pricing of oral antiviral drug formulations available in Indian market. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol 2019;9:401-4.

Rao KS, Nundy M, Dua AS. National Commission on Macroeconomics and Health. Financing and Delivery of Health Care Services in India. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, Services in the Private Sector; 2005. p. 89-104.

Tiwari A, Reddy P, Goyal C, Cost analysis of antifungal drugs available in India: A pharmacoeconomic perspective. Indian J Pharm Pharmacol 2016;3:192-6.

Spoorthy HV, Padma L, Srividya BP. Analysis of cost of various topical and oral antifungal drugs for superficial fungal infections available in India. Int J Basic Clin Pharmacol 2021;10:1348-51.

Allan GM, Lexchin J, Wiebe N. Physician awareness of drug cost: A systematic review. PLoS Med 2007;4:e283.

Kesselheim AS, Misono AS, Lee JL, Stedman MR, Brookhart MA, Choudhry NK, et al. Clinical equivalence of generic and brand name drugs used in cardiovascular diseases. JAMA 2008;300:2514-26.

Tilyard MW, Dovey SM, Rosentstreich D. General practitioners’ views on generic medication and substitution. N Z Med J 1990;103:318-20.

Roy V, Gupta U, Agarwal AK. Cost of medicines and their affordability in private pharmacies in Delhi (India). Indian J Med Res 2012;136:827-35.

Oberoi SS, Oberoi A. Pharmacoeconomics guidelines: The need of hour for India. Int J Pharm Investig 2014;4:109-11.

Government of India. Drug Cost Control Order. India: Government of India; 2013. Available from: https://www.nppaindia.nic.in/DPCO2013. pdf [Last accessed on 2016 Dec 19].