Cost-effectiveness of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (500/50μg) in the treatment of COPD

Cost-Effectiveness of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol versus Salmeterol/Fluticasone in Elderly Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases in China

Background

Fixed dose dual bronchodilators such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) plus long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) are a new and important inhaled preparation for COPD treatment in China. Among these, umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VIL) is increasingly being used in China, especially among the elderly.

Purpose

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of maintenance treatment with UMEC/VIL compared with salmeterol/fluticasone (FSC) as one of the main therapeutic drugs for moderate to very severe COPD in China.

Methods

A Markov model was developed to estimate the costs and outcomes from a societal perspective in a 10-year time horizon. Patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD were treated with UMEC/VIL (62.5/25µg) or FSC (50/500ug). Data concerning clinical efficacy, costs, utilities, transition probability, exacerbation rate, and mortality were obtained from the published literature and official government datasets. The costs were presented in US dollars based on 2021 prices. The indicators of total costs, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and mortality were used as the model output. Costs and outcomes were discounted at a 5% annual rate. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated considering the threshold recommended by WHO. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the stability of results.

Results

Compared with FSC, treatment with UMEC/VIL could save $1947.18, with a gain of 0.12 life-years and 0.05 QALYs. Further, 28.0% patients treated with UMEC/VIL and 29.2% patients treated with FSC were predicted to die after 10 years. Incremental cost effectiveness analysis showed that UMEC/VIL was dominant to FSC. Sensitivity analyses confirmed that the results were robust.

Conclusion

UMEC/VIL is a cost-effective treatment option compared with FSC among patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD.

Cost-effectiveness of physical activity in the management of COPD patients in the UK

Background

While the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) guidelines advise exercise to reduce disease progression, little investment in promoting physical activity (PA) is made by health care authorities. The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of regular PA vs sedentary lifestyle in people with COPD in the UK.

Methods

Efficacy, quality of life, and economic evidence on the PA effects in COPD patients were retrieved from literature to serve as input for a Markov microsimulation model comparing a COPD population performing PA vs a COPD population with sedentary lifestyle. The GOLD classification defined the model health states. For the base case, the cost of PA was estimated at zero, a lifetime horizon was used, and costs and effects were discounted at 3.5%. Analyses were performed from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Uncertainty around inputs and assumptions were explored via scenario and sensitivity analyses, including a cost threshold analysis. Outcomes were cost/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost/year gained.

Results

Based on our model, the effects of PA in the UK COPD population would be lower mortality (−6%), fewer hospitalizations (−2%), gains in years (+0.82) and QALYs (+0.66), and total cost savings of £2,568. The cost/QALY and cost/year gained were dominant. PA was cost-saving at costs <£35/month and cost-effective at cost <£202/month. The main model drivers were age and PA impact on death and hospital-treated exacerbations.

Conclusion

Including PA in the management of COPD leads to long-term clinical benefits. If the NHS promotes only exercise via medical advice, this would lead to health care cost savings. If the NHS chose to fund PA, it would still likely be cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness of twice-daily indacaterol/glycopyrrolate inhalation powder for the treatment of moderate to severe COPD in the US

Background

Indacaterol 27.5 µg/glycopyrrolate 15.6 µg (IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg) inhalation powder, a twice-daily, fixed-dose combination of a long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and a long-acting antimuscarinic antagonist (LAMA), is indicated in the US for long-term maintenance treatment of airflow obstruction in patients with COPD. The safety and efficacy of IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg have been established, but cost-effectiveness is not yet known. This study compared the cost-effectiveness of IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg with other long-acting COPD maintenance therapies.

Methods

A Markov model was constructed from the US payer perspective. Health states were defined as mild (post-bronchodilator FEV₁ ≥80% of predicted), moderate (50% ≤FEV₁ <80% of predicted), severe (30% ≤FEV₁ <50% of predicted), and very severe (FEV₁ <30% of predicted) COPD. Patients entering the model transitioned through health states based on placebo-adjusted change from baseline in trough FEV₁ for each comparator at week 12. Comparators included other US Food and Drug Administration-approved LABA/LAMA fixed-dose combinations as well as commonly prescribed LAMA and LABA/inhaled corticosteroid agents. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the model assumptions and the overall robustness of the results.

Results

Using the model, IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg treatment for 12 weeks resulted in total costs of US $23,375 vs US $9,365 for placebo. Compared with placebo, IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 treatment resulted in the highest improvement in FEV₁ across all comparators and the lowest cost per decline in 100 mL FEV₁. IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg was also among the most cost-effective treatment option as measured by St George's Respiratory Questionnaire response rate, at US $3,518 per additional responder at 12 weeks compared with placebo. In addition, IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg had the lowest cost per severe exacerbation avoided vs placebo across all comparators (US $87,686).

Conclusion

This model, developed from the US payer perspective with a 5-year time horizon, found IND/GLY 27.5/15.6 µg to be a cost-effective treatment option for patients with moderate to severe COPD.

External Validation of Health Economic Decision Models for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): Report of the Third COPD Modeling Meeting

OBJECTIVES

To validate outcomes of presently available chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) cost-effectiveness models against results of two large COPD trials-the 3-year TOwards a Revolution in COPD Health (TORCH) trial and the 4-year Understanding Potential Long-term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT) trial.

METHODS

Participating COPD modeling groups simulated the outcomes for the placebo-treated groups of the TORCH and UPLIFT trials using baseline characteristics of the trial populations as input. Groups then simulated treatment effectiveness by using relative reductions in annual decline in lung function and exacerbation frequency observed in the most intensively treated group compared with placebo as input for the models. Main outcomes were (change in) total/severe exacerbations and mortality. Furthermore, the absolute differences in total exacerbations and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used to approximate the cost per exacerbation avoided and the cost per QALY gained.

RESULT

Of the six participating models, three models reported higher total exacerbation rates than observed in the TORCH trial (1.13/patient-year) (models: 1.22-1.48). Four models reported higher rates than observed in the UPLIFT trial (0.85/patient-year) (models: 1.13-1.52). Two models reported higher mortality rates than in the TORCH trial (15.2%) (models: 20.0% and 30.6%) and the UPLIFT trial (16.3%) (models: 24.8% and 36.0%), whereas one model reported lower rates (9.8% and 12.1%, respectively). Simulation of treatment effectiveness showed that the absolute reduction in total exacerbations, the gain in QALYs, and the cost-effectiveness ratios did not differ from the trials, except for one model.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most of the participating COPD cost-effectiveness models reported higher total exacerbation rates than observed in the trials, estimates of the absolute treatment effect and cost-effectiveness ratios do not seem different from the trials in most models.

A Systematic Review of Health Economics Simulation Models of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

BACKGROUND

Many decision-analytic models with varying structures have been developed to inform resource allocation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

OBJECTIVES

To review COPD models for their adherence to the best practice modeling recommendations and their assumptions regarding important aspects of the natural history of COPD.

METHODS

A systematic search of English articles reporting on the development or application of a decision-analytic model in COPD was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and citations within reviewed articles. Studies were summarized and evaluated on the basis of their adherence to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. They were also evaluated for the underlying assumptions about disease progression, heterogeneity, comorbidity, and treatment effects.

RESULTS

Forty-nine models of COPD were included. Decision trees and Markov models were the most popular techniques (43 studies). Quality of reporting and adherence to the guidelines were generally high, especially in more recent publications. Disease progression was modeled through clinical staging in most studies. Although most studies (n = 43) had incorporated some aspects of COPD heterogeneity, only 8 reported the results across subgroups. Only 2 evaluations explicitly considered the impact of comorbidities. Treatment effect had been mostly modeled (20) as both reduction in exacerbation rate and improvement in lung function.

CONCLUSIONS

Many COPD models have been developed, generally with similar structural elements. COPD is highly heterogeneous, and comorbid conditions play an important role in its burden. These important aspects, however, have not been adequately addressed in most of the published models.

The cost-effectiveness of domiciliary non-invasive ventilation in patients with end-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic progressive lung disease characterised by non-reversible airflow obstruction. Exacerbations are a key cause of morbidity and mortality and place a considerable burden on health-care systems. While there is evidence that patients benefit from non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in hospital during an acute exacerbation, evidence supporting home use for more stable COPD patients is limited. In the U.K., domiciliary NIV is considered on health economic grounds in patients after three hospital admissions for acute hypercapnic respiratory failure.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of domiciliary NIV by systematic review and economic evaluation.

DATA SOURCES

Bibliographic databases, conference proceedings and ongoing trial registries up to September 2014.

METHODS

Standard systematic review methods were used for identifying relevant clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness studies assessing NIV compared with usual care or comparing different types of NIV. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane guidelines and relevant economic checklists. Results for primary effectiveness outcomes (mortality, hospitalisations, exacerbations and quality of life) were presented, where possible, in forest plots. A speculative Markov decision model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of domiciliary NIV with usual care from a UK perspective for post-hospital and more stable populations separately.

RESULTS

Thirty-one controlled effectiveness studies were identified, which report a variety of outcomes. For stable patients, a modest volume of evidence found no benefit from domiciliary NIV for survival and some non-significant beneficial trends for hospitalisations and quality of life. For post-hospital patients, no benefit from NIV could be shown in terms of survival (from randomised controlled trials) and findings for hospital admissions were inconsistent and based on limited evidence. No conclusions could be drawn regarding potential benefit from different types of NIV. No cost-effectiveness studies of domiciliary NIV were identified. Economic modelling suggested that NIV may be cost-effective in a stable population at a threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio £28,162), but this is associated with uncertainty. In the case of the post-hospital population, results for three separate base cases ranged from usual care dominating to NIV being cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of less than £10,000 per QALY gained. All estimates were sensitive to effectiveness estimates, length of benefit from NIV (currently unknown) and some costs. Modelling suggested that reductions in the rate of hospital admissions per patient per year of 24% and 15% in the stable and post-hospital populations, respectively, are required for NIV to be cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

Evidence on key clinical outcomes remains limited, particularly quality-of-life and long-term (> 2 years) effects. Economic modelling should be viewed as speculative because of uncertainty around effect estimates, baseline risks, length of benefit of NIV and limited quality-of-life/utility data.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-effectiveness of domiciliary NIV remains uncertain and the findings in this report are sensitive to emergent data. Further evidence is required to identify patients most likely to benefit from domiciliary NIV and to establish optimum time points for starting NIV and equipment settings.

FUTURE WORK RECOMMENDATIONS

The results from this report will need to be re-examined in the light of any new trial results, particularly in terms of reducing the uncertainty in the economic model. Any new randomised controlled trials should consider including a sham non-invasive ventilation arm and/or a higher- and lower-pressure arm. Individual participant data analyses may help to determine whether or not there are any patient characteristics or equipment settings that are predictive of a benefit of NIV and to establish optimum time points for starting (and potentially discounting) NIV.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012003286.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Do Model-Based Studies in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Measure Correct Values of Utility? A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive chronic disease that has considerable impact on utility-based health-related quality of life. Utility is a key input of many decision analytic models used for economic evaluations.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review COPD-related utilities and to compare these with alternative values used in decision models.

METHODS

The literature review comprised studies that generated utilities for COPD-related stages based on EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire surveys of patients and of decision models of COPD progression that have been used for economic evaluations. The utility values used in modeling studies and those from the meta-analysis of actual patient-level studies were compared and differences quantified.

RESULTS

Twenty decision modeling studies that used utility value as an input parameter were found. Within the same span of publication period, 13 studies involving patient-level utility data were identified and included in the meta-analysis. The estimated mean utility values ranged from 0.806 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.747-0.866) for stage I to 0.616 (95% CI 0.556-0.676) for stage IV. The utility scores for comparable stages in modeling studies were different (significant difference 0.045 [95% CI 0.041-0.052] for stage III). Modeling studies consistently used higher utility values than the average reported patient-level data.

CONCLUSIONS

COPD decision analytic models are based on a limited range of utility values that are systematically different from average values estimated using a meta-analysis. A more systematic approach in the application of utility measures in economic evaluation is required to appropriately reflect current literature.

Meeting the challenge of COPD care delivery in the USA: a multiprovider perspective

The burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the USA continues to grow. Although progress has been made in the the development of diagnostics, therapeutics, and care guidelines, whether patients' quality of life is improved will ultimately depend on the actual implementation of care and an individual patient's access to that care. In this Commission, we summarise expert opinion from key stakeholders-patients, caregivers, and medical professionals, as well as representatives from health systems, insurance companies, and industry-to understand barriers to care delivery and propose potential solutions. Health care in the USA is delivered through a patchwork of provider networks, with a wide variation in access to care depending on a patient's insurance, geographical location, and socioeconomic status. Furthermore, Medicare's complicated coverage and reimbursement structure pose unique challenges for patients with chronic respiratory disease who might need access to several types of services. Throughout this Commission, recurring themes include poor guideline implementation among health-care providers and poor patient access to key treatments such as affordable maintenance drugs and pulmonary rehabilitation. Although much attention has recently been focused on the reduction of hospital readmissions for COPD exacerbations, health systems in the USA struggle to meet these goals, and methods to reduce readmissions have not been proven. There are no easy solutions, but engaging patients and innovative thinkers in the development of solutions is crucial. Financial incentives might be important in raising engagement of providers and health systems. Lowering co-pays for maintenance drugs could result in improved adherence and, ultimately, decreased overall health-care spending. Given the substantial geographical diversity, health systems will need to find their own solutions to improve care coordination and integration, until better data for interventions that are universally effective become available.

Economic evaluations of fluticasone-propionate/salmeterol combination therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review of published studies

This review identifies and evaluates the comprehensive reporting of peer-reviewed economic evaluations of the effectiveness of fluticasone-propionate/salmeterol combination (FSC) therapy for maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Economic evaluations were included if published in English since 2003. Evaluation categories included in the review were cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-consequence analyses. FSC is cost-effective in comparison to short-acting bronchodilators (SABDs). Cost and outcome differences between FSC and other long-acting therapies were modest. Studies exhibited large variations in populations, designs and environment, limiting the ability to draw conclusions. Many new maintenance treatments for COPD have been approved since 2010. Most have yet to be compared to older treatments like FSC. Evaluations are needed that consider costs and outcomes from a societal perspective (e.g., patients' ability to keep working) and evaluations that include subgroup analyses to investigate differential impacts according to clusters of patient characteristics.

Supported self-management for patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): an evidence synthesis and economic analysis

BACKGROUND

Self-management (SM) support for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is variable in its coverage, content, method and timing of delivery. There is insufficient evidence for which SM interventions are the most effective and cost-effective.

OBJECTIVES

To undertake (1) a systematic review of the evidence for the effectiveness of SM interventions commencing within 6 weeks of hospital discharge for an exacerbation for COPD (review 1); (2) a systematic review of the qualitative evidence about patient satisfaction, acceptance and barriers to SM interventions (review 2); (3) a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of SM support interventions within 6 weeks of hospital discharge for an exacerbation of COPD (review 3); (4) a cost-effectiveness analysis and economic model of post-exacerbation SM support compared with usual care (UC) (economic model); and (5) a wider systematic review of the evidence of the effectiveness of SM support, including interventions (such as pulmonary rehabilitation) in which there are significant components of SM, to identify which components are the most important in reducing exacerbations, hospital admissions/readmissions and improving quality of life (review 4).

METHODS

The following electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2012: MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Science Citation Index [Institute of Scientific Information (ISI)]. Subject-specific databases were also searched: PEDro physiotherapy evidence database, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials. Ongoing studies were sourced through the metaRegister of Current Controlled Trials, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number database, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. Specialist abstract and conference proceedings were sourced through ISI's Conference Proceedings Citation Index and British Library's Electronic Table of Contents (Zetoc). Hand-searching through European Respiratory Society, the American Thoracic Society and British Thoracic Society conference proceedings from 2010 to 2012 was also undertaken, and selected websites were also examined. Title, abstracts and full texts of potentially relevant studies were scanned by two independent reviewers. Primary studies were included if ≈90% of the population had COPD, the majority were of at least moderate severity and reported on any intervention that included a SM component or package. Accepted study designs and outcomes differed between the reviews. Risk of bias for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed using the Cochrane tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to combine studies where appropriate. A Markov model, taking a 30-year time horizon, compared a SM intervention immediately following a hospital admission for an acute exacerbation with UC. Incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years were calculated, with sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

From 13,355 abstracts, 10 RCTs were included for review 1, one study each for reviews 2 and 3, and 174 RCTs for review 4. Available studies were heterogeneous and many were of poor quality. Meta-analysis identified no evidence of benefit of post-discharge SM support on admissions [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 1.17], mortality (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.54) and most other health outcomes. A modest improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was identified but this was possibly biased due to high loss to follow-up. The economic model was speculative due to uncertainty in impact on readmissions. Compared with UC, post-discharge SM support (delivered within 6 weeks of discharge) was more costly and resulted in better outcomes (£683 cost difference and 0.0831 QALY gain). Studies assessing the effect of individual components were few but only exercise significantly improved HRQoL (3-month St George's Respiratory Questionnaire 4.87, 95% CI 3.96 to 5.79). Multicomponent interventions produced an improved HRQoL compared with UC (mean difference 6.50, 95% CI 3.62 to 9.39, at 3 months). Results were consistent with a potential reduction in admissions. Interventions with more enhanced care from health-care professionals improved HRQoL and reduced admissions at 1-year follow-up. Interventions that included supervised or unsupervised structured exercise resulted in significant and clinically important improvements in HRQoL up to 6 months.

LIMITATIONS

This review was based on a comprehensive search strategy that should have identified most of the relevant studies. The main limitations result from the heterogeneity of studies available and widespread problems with their design and reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

There was little evidence of benefit of providing SM support to patients shortly after discharge from hospital, although effects observed were consistent with possible improvement in HRQoL and reduction in hospital admissions. It was not easy to tease out the most effective components of SM support packages, although interventions containing exercise seemed the most effective. Future work should include qualitative studies to explore barriers and facilitators to SM post exacerbation and novel approaches to affect behaviour change, tailored to the individual and their circumstances. Any new trials should be properly designed and conducted, with special attention to reducing loss to follow-up. Individual participant data meta-analysis may help to identify the most effective components of SM interventions.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42011001588.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Systematic review of models used in economic analyses in moderate-to-severe asthma and COPD

BACKGROUND

Respiratory diseases exert a substantial burden on society, with newer drugs increasingly adding to the burden. Economic models are often used, but seldom reviewed.

PURPOSE

To summarize economic models used in economic analyses of drugs treating moderate-to-severe/very severe asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

This study searched Medline and Embase from inception to the end of February 2015 for cost-effectiveness/utility analyses that examined at least one drug against placebo, another drug, or other standard therapy in asthma or COPD. Two reviewers independently searched and extracted data with differences adjudicated via consensus discussion. Data extracted included model used and its qualities, validation methods, treatments compared, disease severity, analytic perspective, time horizon, data collection (pro- or retrospective), input rates and sources, costs and sources, planned sensitivity analyses, criteria for cost-effectiveness, reported outcomes, and sponsor.

RESULTS

This study analyzed 53 articles; 14 (25%) on asthma and 39 (75%) COPD. Markov models were commonly used for both asthma and COPD-related economic evaluations. Relatively few studies validated their model. For asthma-related studies, 10 examined inhaled corticosteroids and nine studied omalizumab. Placebo or standard therapy was the comparison in 11 studies and active drugs in the remainder.

CONCLUSIONS

Few studies include validation of their models. Furthermore, controversy concerning some results was uncovered in this study, which needs to be avoided in the future.

Utilities for asthma and COPD according to category of severity: a comprehensive literature review

BACKGROUND

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are incurable diseases that impact quality-of-life.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize original research articles that measured or utilized preference-based utilities or disutilities according to disease severity.

METHODS

Medline and Embase were searched from inception until the end of November 2014. Two reviewers independently searched the literature with differences settled through discussion. Data extracted included utility scores as determined in original research categorized according to disease severity as well as disutilities associated with exacerbations or comorbidities. Data were tabulated and analyzed descriptively.

RESULTS

In total, 862 articles were identified, 790 were rejected, and 69 analyzed. There were 44 dealing with COPD and 25 with asthma. Average utilities determined by research were 0.828 ± 0.062, 0.765 ± 0.090, 0.711 ± 0.120, and 0.607 ± 0.120 for mild, moderate, severe, and very severe COPD, respectively. Utilities used in economic analyses were 0.866 ± 0.038, 0.770 ± 0.024, 0.739 ± 0.045, and 0.596 ± 0.075, respectively. Disutilities (annual) ranged from 0.002-0.378; major and minor exacerbations had respective disutilities of 0.287 and 0.108. For asthma patients, utilities were for 0.86 ± 0.32, 0.83 ± 0.065, and 0.74 ± 0.029, for mild, moderate, and severe disease, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilities have been summarized according to severity category of asthma and COPD. These values should be useful for researchers undertaking economic analyses of these diseases.

Economic evaluation of aclidinium bromide in the management of moderate to severe COPD: an analysis over 5 years

PURPOSE

Aclidinium bromide is a long-acting muscarinic antagonistic used in maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A model-based health economic study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of aclidinium 400 μg bid as an alternative to tiotropium 18 μg od for this indication in the US.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS IN THIS MODEL REFLECT THOSE IN THE ACLIDINIUM CLINICAL STUDIES: age >40 years, stable moderate-to-severe COPD, current or ex-smokers (>10 pack-years), post-salbutamol forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≥30% and <80% of predicted normal value, and FEV1/forced vital capacity <70%. The model consists of five main health states indicating severity of COPD and the level of utility, resource use, and costs. Treatment efficacy over 5 years was modeled using FEV1% predicted; a network meta-analysis comparing aclidinium and tiotropium was used to estimate disease progression during the first 24 weeks, and results from the UPLIFT trial were used for time points after 24 weeks. Quality of life was assessed using utility scores in US patients from the UPLIFT trial. Cost-effectiveness was assessed as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

Over 5 years, QALYs were 3.50 for aclidinium versus 3.49 for tiotropium; life years accumulated were 4.52 for both. In this economic model, aclidinium versus tiotropium showed marginally fewer exacerbations (3.364 versus 3.390, respectively) and mean total health care costs (US$126,274 versus US$128,591, respectively). In all scenario analyses performed (discount factors of 0% and 6% for benefits and costs; time horizon of 1 year; mapping St George's Respiratory Questionnaire to European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions; excluding pharmacy costs, COPD-related cost only; cost of exacerbations; including ACCORD II trial in the network meta-analysis), aclidinium was associated with lower costs and marginally greater QALYs versus tiotropium.

CONCLUSION

Aclidinium is potentially cost-effective compared with tiotropium for maintenance treatment of moderate-to-severe COPD.

Long-acting inhaled therapy (beta-agonists, anticholinergics and steroids) for COPD: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is aimed at relieving symptoms, improving quality of life and preventing or treating exacerbations.Treatment tends to begin with one inhaler, and additional therapies are introduced as necessary. For persistent or worsening symptoms, long-acting inhaled therapies taken once or twice daily are preferred over short-acting inhalers. Several Cochrane reviews have looked at the risks and benefits of specific long-acting inhaled therapies compared with placebo or other treatments. However for patients and clinicians, it is important to understand the merits of these treatments relative to each other, and whether a particular class of inhaled therapies is more beneficial than the others.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of treatment options for patients whose chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cannot be controlled by short-acting therapies alone. The review will not look at combination therapies usually considered later in the course of the disease.As part of this network meta-analysis, we will address the following issues.1. How does long-term efficacy compare between different pharmacological treatments for COPD?2. Are there limitations in the current evidence base that may compromise the conclusions drawn by this network meta-analysis? If so, what are the implications for future research?

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in existing Cochrane reviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). In addition, we ran a comprehensive citation search on the Cochrane Airways Group Register of trials (CAGR) and checked manufacturer websites and reference lists of other reviews. The most recent searches were conducted in September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group RCTs of at least 6 months' duration recruiting people with COPD. Studies were included if they compared any of the following treatments versus any other: long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs; formoterol, indacaterol, salmeterol); long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs; aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium); inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs; budesonide, fluticasone, mometasone); combination long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroid (LABA/ICS) (formoterol/budesonide, formoterol/mometasone, salmeterol/fluticasone); and placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a network meta-analysis using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for two efficacy outcomes: St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). We modelled the relative effectiveness of any two treatments as a function of each treatment relative to the reference treatment (placebo). We assumed that treatment effects were similar within treatment classes (LAMA, LABA, ICS, LABA/ICS). We present estimates of class effects, variability between treatments within each class and individual treatment effects compared with every other.To justify the analyses, we assessed the trials for clinical and methodological transitivity across comparisons. We tested the robustness of our analyses by performing sensitivity analyses for lack of blinding and by considering six- and 12-month data separately.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 71 RCTs randomly assigning 73,062 people with COPD to 184 treatment arms of interest. Trials were similar with regards to methodology, inclusion and exclusion criteria and key baseline characteristics. Participants were more often male, aged in their mid sixties, with FEV1 predicted normal between 40% and 50% and with substantial smoking histories (40+ pack-years). The risk of bias was generally low, although missing information made it hard to judge risk of selection bias and selective outcome reporting. Fixed effects were used for SGRQ analyses, and random effects for Trough FEV1 analyses, based on model fit statistics and deviance information criteria (DIC). SGRQ SGRQ data were available in 42 studies (n = 54,613). At six months, 39 pairwise comparisons were made between 18 treatments in 25 studies (n = 27,024). Combination LABA/ICS was the highest ranked intervention, with a mean improvement over placebo of -3.89 units at six months (95% credible interval (CrI) -4.70 to -2.97) and -3.60 at 12 months (95% CrI -4.63 to -2.34). LAMAs and LABAs were ranked second and third at six months, with mean differences of -2.63 (95% CrI -3.53 to -1.97) and -2.29 (95% CrI -3.18 to -1.53), respectively. Inhaled corticosteroids were ranked fourth (MD -2.00, 95% CrI -3.06 to -0.87). Class differences between LABA, LAMA and ICS were less prominent at 12 months. Indacaterol and aclidinium were ranked somewhat higher than other members of their classes, and formoterol 12 mcg, budesonide 400 mcg and formoterol/mometasone combination were ranked lower within their classes. There was considerable overlap in credible intervals and rankings for both classes and individual treatments. Trough FEV1 Trough FEV1 data were available in 46 studies (n = 47,409). At six months, 41 pairwise comparisons were made between 20 treatments in 31 studies (n = 29,271). As for SGRQ, combination LABA/ICS was the highest ranked class, with a mean improvement over placebo of 133.3 mL at six months (95% CrI 100.6 to 164.0) and slightly less at 12 months (mean difference (MD) 100, 95% CrI 55.5 to 140.1). LAMAs (MD 103.5, 95% CrI 81.8 to 124.9) and LABAs (MD 99.4, 95% CrI 72.0 to 127.8) showed roughly equivalent results at six months, and ICSs were the fourth ranked class (MD 65.4, 95% CrI 33.1 to 96.9). As with SGRQ, initial differences between classes were not so prominent at 12 months. Indacaterol and salmeterol/fluticasone were ranked slightly better than others in their class, and formoterol 12, aclidinium, budesonide and formoterol/budesonide combination were ranked lower within their classes. All credible intervals for individual rankings were wide.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis compares four different classes of long-acting inhalers for people with COPD who need more than short-acting bronchodilators. Quality of life and lung function were improved most on combination inhalers (LABA and ICS) and least on ICS alone at 6 and at 12 months. Overall LAMA and LABA inhalers had similar effects, particularly at 12 months. The network has demonstrated the benefit of ICS when added to LABA for these outcomes in participants who largely had an FEV1 that was less than 50% predicted, but the additional expense of combination inhalers and any potential for increased adverse events (which has been established by other reviews) require consideration. Our findings are in keeping with current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.

Cost-effectiveness of roflumilast as an add-on treatment to long-acting bronchodilators in the treatment of COPD associated with chronic bronchitis in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding a selective phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, roflumilast, to a long-acting bronchodilator therapy (LABA) for the treatment of patients with severe-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) associated with chronic bronchitis with a history of frequent exacerbations from the UK payer perspective.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to predict the lifetime cost and outcomes [exacerbations rates, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life years (QALY)] in patients treated with roflumilast, which showed a reduction in the exacerbation rates and lung function improvement in a pooled analysis from two clinical trials, M2-124 and M2-125. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of uncertainties on the cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

The addition of roflumilast to concomitant LABA reduced the number of exacerbations from 15.6 to 12.7 [2.9 (95 % CI 0.88-4.92) exacerbations avoided] and increased QALYs from 5.45 to 5.61 [0.16 (95 % CI 0.02-0.31) QALYs gained], at an incremental cost of £3,197 (95 % CI £2,135-£4,253). Cost in LABA alone and LABA + roflumilast were £16,161 and £19,358 respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in the base case were £19,505 (95 % CI £364-£38,646) per quality-adjusted life-year gained and 18,219 (95 % CI £12,697-£49,135) per life-year gained. Sensitivity analyses suggest that among the main determinants of cost-effectiveness are the reduction of exacerbations and the case fatality rate due to hospital-treated exacerbations. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that the probability of roflumilast being cost-effective is 82 % at willingness-to-pay £30,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of roflumilast to LABA in the treatment of patients with severe-to-very severe COPD reduces the rate of exacerbations and can be cost-effective in the UK setting.

Cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for COPD in ambulatory care: a review

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This article conducts a literature review about the cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in ambulatory care.

METHODS

Relevant economic evaluations were identified by searching Medline (PubMed) and the National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database. The search strategy focused on literature reviews and primary economic evaluations. Economic evaluations were included, which compared pharmacotherapy for COPD, chronic bronchitis or pulmonary emphysema with an alternative in terms of costs and health outcomes.

RESULTS

The majority of economic evaluations show that pharmacotherapy for COPD in ambulatory care is cost-effective. Cost-effectiveness derives from an improvement in lung function and a reduction in the number of exacerbations, which translates into cost savings from fewer hospitalizations. Pharmacotherapy also tends to be more cost-effective in patients with more severe COPD. When applying these results to a specific country or setting, the cost-effectiveness of pharmacotherapy will depend on the distribution of COPD severity among patients, the alternative with which pharmacotherapy is compared, the impact of pharmacotherapy on exacerbations, costs and treatment patterns of exacerbations, and price of pharmacotherapy. Economic evaluations tended to suffer from short-time horizons, restricted scope of included costs and use of various health outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a case to be made in favour of economic evaluations from the societal perspective that are based on a decision-analytic model to allow for extrapolation beyond the duration of clinical trials and that use generic health outcome measures such as quality-adjusted life years.

Modeling hard clinical end-point data in economic analyses

OBJECTIVE

The availability of hard clinical end-point data, such as that on cardiovascular (CV) events among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, is increasing, and as a result there is growing interest in using hard end-point data of this type in economic analyses. This study investigated published approaches for modeling hard end-points from clinical trials and evaluated their applicability in health economic models with different disease features.

METHODS

A review of cost-effectiveness models of interventions in clinically significant therapeutic areas (CV diseases, cancer, and chronic lower respiratory diseases) was conducted in PubMed and Embase using a defined search strategy. Only studies integrating hard end-point data from randomized clinical trials were considered. For each study included, clinical input characteristics and modeling approach were summarized and evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 33 articles (23 CV, eight cancer, two respiratory) were accepted for detailed analysis. Decision trees, Markov models, discrete event simulations, and hybrids were used. Event rates were incorporated either as constant rates, time-dependent risks, or risk equations based on patient characteristics. Risks dependent on time and/or patient characteristics were used where major event rates were >1%/year in models with fewer health states (<7). Models of infrequent events or with numerous health states generally preferred constant event rates.

LIMITATIONS

The detailed modeling information and terminology varied, sometimes requiring interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

Key considerations for cost-effectiveness models incorporating hard end-point data include the frequency and characteristics of the relevant clinical events and how the trial data is reported. When event risk is low, simplification of both the model structure and event rate modeling is recommended. When event risk is common, such as in high risk populations, more detailed modeling approaches, including individual simulations or explicitly time-dependent event rates, are more appropriate to accurately reflect the trial data.

New clinical insights into chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and their implications for pharmacoeconomic analyses

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide, but before the development of several new pharmacological treatments little could be done for COPD patients. Recognition that these new treatments could significantly improve the prognosis for COPD patients has radically changed clinical management guidelines from a palliative philosophy to an aggressive approach intended to reduce chronic symptoms, improve quality of life and prolong survival. These new treatments have also sparked interest in COPD cost-effectiveness research. Most COPD cost-effectiveness studies have been based on clinical trial populations, limited to direct medical costs, and used standard analysis methods such as Markov modelling, and they have usually found that newer therapies have favourable cost effectiveness. However, new insights into the clinical progression of COPD bring into question some of the assumptions underlying older analyses. In this review, we examine clinical factors unique to COPD and recent changes in clinical perspectives that have important implications for pharmacoeconomic analyses. The main parameters explored include (i) the high indirect medical costs for COPD and their relevance in assessing the societal benefits of new therapy; (ii) the importance of acute deteriorations in COPD, known as exacerbations, and approaches to modelling the cost benefit of exacerbation reduction; (iii) quality/utility instruments for COPD; (iv) the prevalence of co-morbid conditions and confounding between COPD and co-morbid disease utilization; (v) the limitations of Markov modelling; and (vi) the problem of outliers.

A lifetime Markov model for the economic evaluation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is currently the fourth leading cause of death worldwide. It has serious health effects and causes substantial costs for society.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present paper was to develop a state-of-the-art decision-analytic model of COPD whereby the cost effectiveness of interventions in Germany can be estimated. To demonstrate the applicability of the model, a smoking cessation programme was evaluated against usual care.

METHODS

A seven-stage Markov model (disease stages I to IV according to the GOLD [Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease] classification, states after lung-volume reduction surgery and lung transplantation, death) was developed to conduct a cost-utility analysis from the societal perspective over a time horizon of 10, 40 and 60 years. Patients entered the cohort model at the age of 45 with mild COPD. Exacerbations were classified into three levels: mild, moderate and severe. Estimation of stage-specific probabilities (for smokers and quitters), utilities and costs was based on German data where possible. Data on effectiveness of the intervention was retrieved from the literature. A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and effects. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to assess the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

The smoking cessation programme was the dominant strategy compared with usual care, and the intervention resulted in an increase in health effects of 0.54 QALYs and a cost reduction of &U20AC;1115 per patient (year 2007 prices) after 60 years. In the probabilistic analysis, the intervention dominated in about 95% of the simulations. Sensitivity analyses showed that uncertainty primarily originated from data on disease progression and treatment cost in the early stages of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The model developed allows the long-term cost effectiveness of interventions to be estimated, and has been adapted to Germany. The model suggests that the smoking cessation programme evaluated was more effective than usual care as well as being cost-saving. Most patients had mild or moderate COPD, stages for which parameter uncertainty was found to be high. This raises the need to improve data on the early stages of COPD.

Cost effectiveness of pharmacological maintenance treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review of the evidence and methodological issues

BACKGROUND

Over 200 million people have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) worldwide. The number of disease-year equivalents and deaths attributable to COPD are high. Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of the disease recommend an individualized step-up approach in which treatment is intensified when results are unsatisfactory.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to present a systematic review of the cost effectiveness of pharmacological maintenance treatment for COPD and to discuss the methodological strengths and weaknesses of the studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for economic evaluations of drug therapy in COPD was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Economic Evaluation Database of the UK NHS (NHS-EED) and the European Network of Health Economic Evaluation Databases (EURONHEED). Full economic evaluations presenting both costs and health outcomes were included.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies were included in the review. Of these, 16 were linked to a clinical trial, 14 used Markov models, eight were based on observational data and two used a different approach. The few studies on combining short-acting bronchodilators were consistent in finding net cost savings compared with monotherapy. Studies comparing inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with placebo or no maintenance treatment reported inconsistent results. Studies comparing fluticasone with salmeterol consistently found salmeterol to be more cost effective. The cost-effectiveness studies of tiotropium versus placebo, ipratropium or salmeterol pointed towards a reduction in total COPD-related healthcare costs for tiotropium in many but not all studies. All of these studies reported additional health benefits of tiotropium. The cost-effectiveness studies of the combination of inhaled long-acting β₂-agonists and ICS all report additional health benefits at an increase in total COPD-related costs in most studies. The cost-per-QALY estimates of this combination treatment vary widely and are very sensitive to the assumptions on mortality benefit and time horizon.

CONCLUSIONS

The currently available economic evaluations indicate differences in cost effectiveness between COPD maintenance therapies, but for a more meaningful comparison of results it is important to improve the consistency with respect to study methodology and choice of comparator.

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of tiotropium bromide in the long-term treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Italy

The randomized, double-blind trial UPLIFT(®) demonstrated in 5,993 patients with moderate to very severe COPD that 4 years of tiotropium bromide therapy were associated with improvements in lung function, exacerbations, quality of life, and mortality compared with placebo. The pharmacoeconomic evaluation was performed through a probabilistic, patient-level simulation Markov model. Routine COPD care (RC) was compared with the inclusion of tiotropium bromide on it. The analysis was conducted over a lifetime horizon, with 1 year cycles and a 3.5% annual discount rate. Patients were characterized by gender, age, height, smoking status, and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1). FEV1 time trend was modeled according to the annual decline recorded in UPLIFT®. Mortality derived from that of the general Italian population was adjusted by smoking status and FEV1. Health utilities derived from published Italian observational studies and were varied in time according to UPLIFT® data. Exacerbation rates were derived from a published Italian observational prospective study. The cost perspective was that of the Italian National Health Service. Healthcare resource consumption for RC and exacerbations derived from Italian observational studies were valued according to current price and tariffs. Simulated patients in the tiotropium arm gained an average (95% CI) 0.50 (-1.63 to 6.27) Life Years (LYs) and 0.42 (-0.25 to 3.05) Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). The incremental lifetime cost resulted €3,357 (-€10,669 to €29,820). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was €6,698/LY and €7,916/QALY. In the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC), tiotropium had a 90% probability of being cost-effective for a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of € 10,000/QALY.

Developing and applying a stochastic dynamic population model for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

OBJECTIVES

To develop a stochastic population model of disease progression in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that includes the effects of COPD exacerbations on health-related quality of life, costs, disease progression, and mortality and can be used to assess the effects of a wide range of interventions.

METHODS

The model is a multistate Markov model with time varying transition rates specified by age, sex, smoking status, COPD disease severity, and/or exacerbation type. The model simulates annual changes in COPD prevalence due to COPD incidence, exacerbations, disease progression (annual decline in the forced expiratory volume in 1 second as percentage of the predicted value), and mortality. The main outcome variables are quality-adjusted life years, total exacerbations, and COPD-related health care costs. Exacerbation-related input parameters were based on quantitative meta-analysis. All important model parameters are entered into the model as probability distributions. To illustrate the potential use of the model, costs and effects were calculated for 3-year implementation of three different COPD interventions, one pharmacologic, one on smoking cessation, and one on pulmonary rehabilitation using a time horizon of 10 years for reporting outcomes.

RESULTS

Compared with minimal treatment the cost/quality-adjusted life year was €8,300 for the pharmacologic intervention, €10,800 for the smoking cessation therapy, €8,700 for the combination of the pharmacologic intervention and the smoking cessation therapy, and €17,200 for the pulmonary rehabilitation program. The probability of the interventions to be cost-effective at a ceiling ratio of €20,000 varied from 58% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

The COPD model provides policy makers with information about the long-term costs and effects of interventions over the entire chain of care, from primary prevention to care for very severe COPD and includes uncertainty around the outcomes.

Cost-utility analysis of indacaterol in Germany: a once-daily maintenance bronchodilator for patients with COPD

INTRODUCTION

Indacaterol is a novel inhaled once-daily long-acting beta(2)-agonist (LABA) for the maintenance treatment of COPD that has been compared to existing inhaled monotherapies on a number of symptomatic endpoints in clinical studies. With constrained healthcare budgets, the objective of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of indacaterol 150 μg, the approved starting dose for maintenance therapy, from a German heath service perspective against the most widely used bronchodilator tiotropium, and the twice-daily LABA, salmeterol.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed with the following main health states: Mild, Moderate, Severe, and Very Severe COPD, based on pre-bronchodilator FEV(1) measures reported in the indacaterol clinical trials, and death. Each disease severity health state had two associated health states for severe or non-severe exacerbation. The model considered patients with moderate to severe COPD, with a mean age of 64 years. The base case time horizon was three years, with discounting set at 3% for costs and benefits. Selected clinical inputs and health state utilities were derived from indacaterol clinical trials, while costs were based on publicly available drug prices and tariffs or published sources. Inputs describing disease progression were based on published data on the rate of FEV(1) decline.

RESULTS

Point-estimates show that indacaterol 150 μg is dominant (lower total costs and better outcomes) against tiotropium and salmeterol. An alternative analysis comparing indacaterol 300 μg (maximum dose) against tiotropium, showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of approximately €28,300 per QALY.

CONCLUSION

Indacaterol is cost-effective compared to tiotropium and salmeterol.

Cost effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol added to tiotropium bromide versus placebo added to tiotropium bromide in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Australian, Canadian and Swedish healthcare perspectives

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive inflammatory lung disease associated with increasing morbidity and mortality and an economic burden that stretches beyond the patient to healthcare systems. Avoiding exacerbations and subsequent hospitalizations is an important clinical aim and can avoid significant costs associated with the disease. International guidelines recommend the addition of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) to a long-acting β₂-adrenoceptor agonist (LABA) for patients with severe to very severe COPD and a history of exacerbations.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate retrospectively over a 3-month period, the cost effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol added to tiotropium bromide (tiotropium) compared with placebo added to tiotropium in COPD patients eligible for ICS/LABA combination therapy, based on the CLIMB study (NCT00496470).

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis of data from the 12-week, randomized, double-blind CLIMB study of COPD patients (n = 659; eligible for ICS/LABA; aged ≥ 40 years) comparing budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort® Turbuhaler® 320/9 μg twice daily) added to tiotropium (18 μg daily) or placebo added to tiotropium was conducted. A severe exacerbation was defined as a requirement for systemic glucocorticosteroids and/or ED visit and/or hospitalization. The effectiveness variable used for this analysis was the number of severe exacerbations avoided. Direct costs (medications, hospitalizations, ED and GP visits) were calculated by applying year 2009 unit costs from Australia ($A), Canada ($Can) and Sweden (Swedish krona [SEK]) to the study's pooled resource use. One-way sensitivity analyses for each country's mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and sensitivity to overall exacerbations were conducted. Bootstrapping was performed to estimate the variation around resource use, exacerbations and each country's mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

The mean number of severe exacerbations per patient 3-month period was 0.11 in the budesonide/formoterol added to tiotropium arm and 0.29 in the placebo added to tiotropium arm--a 62% reduction in the rate of severe exacerbations. Treatment with budesonide/formoterol added to tiotropium costs less in Australia and Canada (-$A90 [-€58] and -$Can4.51 [-€3]) and only slightly more in Sweden (SEK444 [€43]), i.e. the savings associated with fewer exacerbations more than offset the additional budesonide/formoterol drug cost in Australia and Canada, and partially offset it in Sweden. In the Australian and Canadian perspectives, budesonide/formoterol added to tiotropium was a dominant treatment (fewer exacerbations at a lower cost) compared with placebo added to tiotropium. In Sweden, the estimated incremental cost per avoided exacerbation was SEK2502 (€244.40).

CONCLUSION

Budesonide/formoterol added to tiotropium was the dominant strategy compared with placebo added to tiotropium based on a 12-week study in COPD patients eligible for ICS/LABA combination therapy in Australia and Canada, and appears to be a cost-effective strategy in Sweden.

Cost-effectiveness of combination fluticasone propionate-salmeterol 250/50 microg versus salmeterol in severe COPD patients

Objective:

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of fluticasone propionate–salmeterol combination (FSC) compared to salmeterol for maintenance therapy in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Study design:

Pooled economic analysis.

Methods:

We performed an economic analysis of pooled data from two randomized clinical trials (combined N = 1554) that evaluated the effect of maintenance therapy with FSC (250/50 μg twice daily) or salmeterol (50 μg twice daily) on exacerbation rates in patients with severe COPD. We calculated exacerbation rates and applied standardized costs to exacerbation-related health care utilization reported in the trials (office, urgent care, and emergency department visits; hospitalizations; and oral corticosteroids and antibiotics) to determine cost differences between FSC and salmeterol treatment outcomes.

Results:

Annual rates of any exacerbation and moderate/severe exacerbation were lower in the FSC group than the salmeterol group (4.91 vs 5.78 and 1.32 vs 2.00 respectively, both P < 0.05). Total adjusted annual COPD related exacerbation and therapeutic costs were $4,842 (95% CI; $4,731–$4,952) in the FSC group and $5,066 (95% CI; $4,937–$5,195) in the salmeterol group.

Conclusions:

FSC combination therapy is associated with reduced risk of any exacerbation and moderate/severe exacerbation, and incurs lower annual COPD-related health care costs compared to treatment with salmeterol. This analysis demonstrates that FSC therapy may be advantageous from both a clinical and cost-benefit standpoint for patients with severe COPD.

A new method for examining the cost savings of reducing COPD exacerbations

BACKGROUND

Some treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can reduce exacerbations, and thus could have a favourable impact on overall healthcare costs.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a new method for assessing the potential cost savings of COPD controller medications based on the incidence of exacerbations and their related resource utilization in the general population.

METHODS

Patients with COPD (n = 1074) enrolled in a regional managed care system in the US were identified using administrative data and divided by their medication use into three groups (salbutamol, ipratropium and salmeterol). Exacerbations were captured using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition (ICD-9) and current procedural terminology (CPT) codes, then logistic regression models were created that described the risk of exacerbations for each comparator group and exacerbation type over a 6-month period. A Monte Carlo simulation was then applied 1000 times to provide the range of potential exacerbation reductions and cost consequences in response to a range of hypothetical examples of COPD controller medications.

RESULTS

Exacerbation events for each group could be modelled such that the events predicted by the Monte Carlo estimates were very close to the actual prevalences. The estimated cost per exacerbation avoided depended on the incidence of exacerbation in the various subpopulations, the assumed relative risk reduction, the projected daily cost for new therapy, and the costs of exacerbation treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

COPD exacerbation events can be accurately modelled from the healthcare utilization data of a defined cohort with sufficient accuracy for cost-effectiveness analysis. Treatments that reduce the risk or severity of exacerbations are likely to be cost effective among those patients who have frequent exacerbations and hospitalizations.