Economic assessment of initial maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
ABSTRACT To compare the effects of initial maintenance therapy with fluticasone 250 microgram plus salmeterol 50 microgram in a single inhaler versus other inhaled medications on exacerbation risks and treatment costs among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients.
A retrospective observational analysis was conducted by using medical/pharmacy claims from a large managed care database between January 2000 and February 2004. Patients age 40 years or older with a primary diagnosis of COPD (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification code 490, 491, 492, or 496), at least 18 months of continuous eligibility, and an index prescription for fluticasone/salmeterol combination, salmeterol alone, inhaled corticosteroid alone, ipratropium/albuterol combination, or ipratropium alone (reference) were identified.
Time to first COPD-related hospitalization or emergency department (ED) visit was estimated by using Cox proportional hazard models. All-cause and COPD-related treatment costs were estimated by using generalized linear models with a gamma distribution and log link. Multivariable regressions were used, controlling for age, sex, comorbidities, COPD subtype, preindex medications, and hospitalizations and ED visits.
Initial maintenance therapy with fluticasone/salmeterol combination was associated with a 31% to 56% lower risk of hospitalization or ED visit compared with ipratropium alone, adjusting for baseline characteristics and preindex resource utilization. Fluticasone/salmeterol combination therapy was related to lower medical costs, higher pharmacy costs, and almost similar total costs in all populations studied.
Fluticasone/salmeterol combination therapy was considered to be cost-effective compared with ipratropium alone because it achieved better clinical outcomes with similar or lower treatment costs.
- SourceAvailable from: Arjun Chatterjee[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This retrospective cohort study compared the risks of exacerbations and COPD-related healthcare costs between patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) initiating tiotropium (TIO) alone and patients initiating triple therapy with fluticasone-salmeterol combination (FSC) added to TIO. Managed-care enrollees who had an index event of ≥ 1 pharmacy claim for TIO during the study period (January 1, 2003-April 30, 2008) and met other eligibility criteria were categorized into one of two cohorts depending on their medication use. Patients in the TIO+FSC cohort had combination therapy with TIO and FSC, defined as having an FSC claim on the same date as the TIO claim. Patients in the TIO cohort had no such FSC use. The risks of COPD exacerbations and healthcare costs were compared between cohorts during 1 year of follow-up. The sample comprised 3333 patients (n = 852 TIO+FSC cohort, n = 2481 TIO cohort). Triple therapy with FSC added to TIO compared with TIO monotherapy was associated with significant reductions in the adjusted risks of moderate exacerbation (hazard ratio 0.772; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.641, 0.930) and any exacerbation (hazard ratio 0.763; 95% CI 0.646, 0.949) and a nonsignificant reduction in COPD-related adjusted monthly medical costs. Triple therapy with FSC added to TIO compared with TIO monotherapy was associated with significant reductions in the adjusted risks of moderate exacerbation and any exacerbation over a follow-up period of up to 1 year. These improvements were gained with triple therapy at roughly equal cost of that of TIO alone.Respiratory research 02/2012; 13:15. · 3.64 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: 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. 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. 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. 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. 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.PharmacoEconomics 04/2012; 30(4):271-302. · 2.86 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) imposes a significant and growing economic burden on the US health care system. A brief exploration of reviews on the therapeutic management of COPD reveals a range of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic options for reducing deleterious and costly exacerbations. Consensus is that both forms of therapy provide the greatest benefit to all patients. However, prescribing physicians must account for availability of resources and patients' ability to pay, as well as patient response and their likely persistence or adherence to recommended therapies. The ongoing challenge is to overcome barriers to comprehensive, real-world economic evaluations in order to establish the most cost-effective mix of therapies for every patient in the heterogeneous COPD population. Only then can evidence-based guidelines be translated into the most cost-effective delivery of care.Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research 12/2012; 12(6):725-31. · 1.67 Impact Factor