Cost-effectiveness study of pediatric atopic dermatitis in Asia: Atopiclair Vs. Regular emollient (AD-ATOP)

Mark B.Y. Tang, Kin Fon Leong, Liang Shiou Ou, Zakiudin Munasir, Pankaj R. Parekh, Soraya Azmi, Wilson H.H. Low, Adrian Goh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)


Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a highly prevalent, chronic relapsing condition in childhood with significant financial burden and impact on the quality of life of patients and caregivers. Proactive maintenance treatment with moisturizing agents is the mainstay AD therapy. Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a non-steroidal barrier cream (Atopiclair), compared to regular emollient in pediatric patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Methods: A Markov decision model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Atopiclair versus regular emollient in 12 Asia-Pacific countries, grouped by income categories based on gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Data was obtained from structured literature review, expert opinion, fee schedules, and findings from a 2012 survey of 12 Asia-Pacific countries. Analysis was performed a societal perspective. Results: In the base case analysis, Atopiclair was cost-effective against regular emollient, with USD786, USD499, and USD289 in cost savings per year for high, middle, and low-income countries, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that Atopiclair remained cost-effective versus regular emollient. Conclusions: Modelling analysis showed that Atopiclair is a cost-effective treatment compared to regular emollient for mild-to-moderate pediatric AD in the countries included in the study.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)169-175
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Drugs in Dermatology
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2015


Dive into the research topics of 'Cost-effectiveness study of pediatric atopic dermatitis in Asia: Atopiclair Vs. Regular emollient (AD-ATOP)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this